2015 Oakley X-Metal Sunglasses

[raxx]

Crap no Ferrari yet

Damn you! Now I must change my avatar

 

[kronin323]

It is official now guys available thru oakley website.

Oakley X Metal Collection | Official Oakley Store

Interesting, though we've seen other marketing materials trying to call them x-metals, it doesn't on the website. They're listed under the "Iconic" category and the only reference to x-metals in their descs are:

"Madman™ has the bold attitude that made our X Metal® collection so coveted..."

"Inspired by the attitude of our famed X Metal® collection, Badman™ combines..."

Also, they haven't yet updated their Prizm page to include these.

No mention of replacement lenses yet.

Is it just me or are the o-matter colors on some of the frames different than what we've seen already?

EDIT - now they're listed under x-metals...

 

[MJLSr]

Is it just me or are the o-matter colors on some of the frames different than

The O-Matter components seem to be different from model to model, some are more smoke/grey than others, others more clear - either way its "50 shades of meh." IMO.

 

[Fun's Way]

Not everyone is 'fine' with that. There are some auto enthusiasts that have a strong bias for one generation or another. It does not mean any of them are wrong, it only means what it means - that Challenger, Taurus, or Camaro is defined by what they believe.

Take any one of those models - now close your eyes and think of it... What is the first image that comes to mind? That is likely your preference, for which you will have a bias. The vision and right to it is a wonderful thing!

The interesting thing to me when I compare those models is that all of the different generations of Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros had 4 wheels, an engine, and a metal frame of some sort - the manufacturers did not make part of the newer frame PLASTIC (sorry, O Matter, whatever - it is more a kin to plastic than any metal any day). We're not even talking carbon fiber here... we're talking O Matter and O-luminum.

That said if these were some sort of actual metal then I may be a bit more comfortable calling them "Metal", closer to "X-Metal". I can't be sure, but perhaps... Not to take anything away from my X-Metal belt, which is mostly leather with an X-Metal buckle, or my X-Metal t shirts that have no actual metal in them at all whatsoever - I have no problem with those being referred to as X-Metal.

Its all about CONTEXT.

There is a common sense difference between the X-Metal family of products, concepts, and ideas - and X-Metal sunglasses proper. When I hear about belts and shirts I expect ... belts and shirts, leather and cotton, maybe polyester and other fabrics. When I hear "X-Metal" [in the context of] sunglasses I expect, well, metal ... not plastic (again, O Matter, my bad).

Who here knew about the compromise in lenses when Oakley moved away from Z87.1 (which were OEM in X-Metal, BTW) to Z80.3... not even the internal Oakley employees were aware for the most part. If you go back to the car analogy would you have a problem with your genX Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros if they had a much thinner and weaker windshield - would you question the quality and the intentions of the manufacturer then? Would there be some reservations in grouping them together with previous generations of Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros that had full metal frames and significantly stronger windshields, glass, etc...??

The sad truth is the Badman and Madman are a culmination of years of Oakley/Luxottica cutting corners for cost savings and supply chain efficiencies - all of which to increase profits. Not that there is anything wrong with this - businesses should be in business to make money with few exceptions. That said, anyone who thinks the time and effort put into these are more than a fraction of what went into the original X-Metals has got to be kidding themselves.

If it sound like I am calling out Oakley and Luxottica here - you damn right!
I absolutely am!!

Is this like marketing a Jaguar with Ford parts?
Is it selling a fancy VW as a Lamborghini?
Is there anything wrong with either scenario above?
To some, perhaps...

I get the whole subjective thing here, and I don't necessarily disagree with those who seem to disagree with me. I respect their opinions, even when they are wrong (j/k). There are many newcomers who will not know or care about this debate and in a way I envy them. The reality is Oakley's marketing campaign to ride the coattails of a product they discontinued because they [and the parent company] could not make a significant profit... Only to bring that product back with less expensive lower quality materials at a significantly higher markup is a bad joke at best - anyone with an open mind should be able to see that.

I have spoken to dozen Oakley folks [people I have known for years and trust] and not a single one of them agrees with and/or clearly understands the X-Metal branding outside of a sales and marketing perspective. The company that pushes a product in that manner is a different company than the one that released the original X-Metals once upon a time. If that is their chosen direction good for them. I do not have to agree or follow...


Exactly - and I don't owe them anything - it works both ways.
They won't be getting much from me moving forward either - as a matter of fact they have not gotten much of anything 'new' from in recent years due to their persistent compromises in quality and design. The current product lines are mostly a joke in regards to quality and the marketing of dissimilar products too closely in the same family line is not something I had ever expected from Oakley once upon a time. Now I have very low expectations. I expect innovation with vision, not hybrid PR stunts at markups that protect the bottom line. <sigh>

I'm a little bit late for this Topic, but I counln't agree more !!!

Oakley/Luxottica only manage to bring back the "Shape" with some upgrade (or so what they say ), but they fell to revive the SPIRIT of the production line !

Above all ... they are no X-Metal to me !!!

 

[Mdgustaf]

This poor poor horse, hasn't it been beaten enough?

 

[Nortika]

This poor poor horse, hasn't it been beaten enough?

It moved!