• Take 30 seconds to register your free account to access deals, post topics, and view exclusive content!

    Register Today

    Join the largest Oakley Forum on the web!

Any Info On The Current State Of X-metal?

After reading about the X Metal process... the 7 million dollar initial investment in the plant (bunker style), 450,000 watt arc to melt the metal at over 4000F... if it's anything different than this... it's not X Metal and I can't see a company like Oakley that is so heavily weighted on Technology and Brand to call something X Metal, that which is not.
 
I love how you guys keep discussing this.

Look, X-Metal days are over. And if Oakley releases anything similar to them it won't be true X-Metal.

I'm getting tired of people complaining, they were discontinued almost 2 years ago now. What's done is done and complaining or reminiscing about the good old days won't change that.
 
After reading about the X Metal process... the 7 million dollar initial investment in the plant (bunker style), 450,000 watt arc to melt the metal at over 4000F... if it's anything different than this... it's not X Metal and I can't see a company like Oakley that is so heavily weighted on Technology and Brand to call something X Metal, that which is not.
Ummm, no. There's a difference between an alloy blend and where it's made.

X Metal alloy is X Metal alloy no matter if it's machined, cast, forged, or any variation therein. Just because it's not made at the Nevada plant using an arc-furnace doesn't mean it's not the same alloy. The reason one would use an arc-furnace is because using a traditional fired furnace you have to run it literally 24/7/365 or risk losing it. An arc furnace only requires minimal time at temperature and can run a wider range of volumes vs traditional furnaces that are either under sized or wasteful depending on production schedule.

Next thing you'll come back and tell me anything other than lost-wax casting isn't a true X Metal :rolleyes:

Yup, it'll be cheaper materials for sure and they'll charge stupendous prices for it.

This is part of what is getting me very upset right now with certain topics on the forum. Can you speak with ANY certainty that the material they're using is cheaper or that the price point they'll establish will be higher than the exiting X Metals? And cheaper in what way? Cheaper to produce? I would god damn hope so, the casting setup they had for X Metals is about 15 years behind current technology and produces inconsistent parts, a terrible finish that's very labor intensive, and uses expensive wax molds.
 
Ummm, no. There's a difference between an alloy blend and where it's made.

X Metal alloy is X Metal alloy no matter if it's machined, cast, forged, or any variation therein. Just because it's not made at the Nevada plant using an arc-furnace doesn't mean it's not the same alloy. The reason one would use an arc-furnace is because using a traditional fired furnace you have to run it literally 24/7/365 or risk losing it. An arc furnace only requires minimal time at temperature and can run a wider range of volumes vs traditional furnaces that are either under sized or wasteful depending on production schedule.

Next thing you'll come back and tell me anything other than lost-wax casting isn't a true X Metal :rolleyes:

Haha! No, I think I agree with you here! If Oakley has found, after 15 years, a better way of making X Metal and the alloy is indeed X Metal... well, then they should call it X Metal!
 
I love how you guys keep discussing this.

Look, X-Metal days are over. And if Oakley releases anything similar to them it won't be true X-Metal.

I'm getting tired of people complaining, they were discontinued almost 2 years ago now. What's done is done and complaining or reminiscing about the good old days won't change that.
Well, this is a "discussion forum" and the discussion happens to be about x-metals...which happen to be Oakleys. I don't see a problem. No one's flaming or slinging insults. It's all good.

Lighten up, Bats. Tired of the people complaining about the subject? Hey, I understand. Easiest solution is to stay out of the X-metal discussions section. Cos I guarantee you this won't be the last thread here on this subject.

You're making it sound as though we should only discuss subject matter which meets your approval. I know that's not what you meant, but it sorta comes across that way.
 
the X-metal line is and always will be Romeo 1's, Penny's and Juliets, End of story. I see the Half X, XX, Romeo 2's and X-Squared's as decent successors, but no where near the level of creativity and design standards as first set by those original 3.

you know it was Romeo, Mars, then juliet right? the XX came out before the Penny as well. But i'll agree with you to say the Romeo, Juliet and Penny distinguish the core of the Xmetal line pretty well, But i would include the Mars.

To me The Xmetal line tells a story, so I like all of em. The Romeo came out first and was CRAZY, then Jordan went all out and made those signature ROUND design Mars. Then they introduced the 'mainstream' pair - the Juliet. of course design a larger sized one for those with bigger heads - XX.

Then the penny came out with all new spring hinge technology, and suited the 'smaller head' sector. now with all bases covered they sat on it for awhile.. then debuted the Romeo2. Half rimmed, a first for the line, with those classic ellipse icons instead of a jet intake hole. And the name indicating a rebirth, although it flopped somewhat by not living up to the innovation of the first. It may have been technologically the most advanced (CNC milled frame, super light, half rim etc) but that flex coupler still plagued it, and being a half frame, was flimsiest of the lot.

Next the HalfX was sort of like an attempt at maximising the durability and practicality of the R2. Do away with flex couplers, and take away the fancy lens design to make it simpler, and also add a more sophisticated spring hinge. but this only made things 'worse', as all it was now was just a glorified HalfWire.

So their last hoorah.. The Xsquared. Back to the CORE of Xmetal.. an improved nosebridge to facilitate repairs, the classic jet intake icon, hammerstems, full rimmed. In some ways, this was the 'perfecting' of the Xmetal ideology. but its surgical precision and execution meant it lacked character somewhat... like Lamborghini making a BMW M3 clone as their last hoorah.

to me, each step of the way was cool. you can see the evolution of the designs, and also their thought processes if you line it up with the problems/issues they faced at the time. Simply put, these 8 represent a cool part of Oakley's history. now, please dont go mess it up by reviving it with some aluminium/palladium alloy or whatever they come up with. Start a new line, I say. Leave the Xmetal name to rest.
 
Well, this is a "discussion forum" and the discussion happens to be about x-metals...which happen to be Oakleys. I don't see a problem. No one's flaming or slinging insults. It's all good.

Lighten up, Bats. Tired of the people complaining about the subject? Hey, I understand. Easiest solution is to stay out of the X-metal discussions section. Cos I guarantee you this won't be the last thread here on this subject.

You're making it sound as though we should only discuss subject matter which meets your approval. I know that's not what you meant, but it sorta comes across that way.

How dare you discuss in a "discussion" forum!


Some of you are failing to grasp that Oakley is Lux now, which means anything that can generate mass sales may be executed. Am I saying that if ever X-metal comes back it may simply a marketing ploy. I know people who could care less about sunglasses but they know what Juliet's are.
 
Back
Top