Are there any other Oakleys made in the X-metal frame material besides X-metal family?

[Oakley G]

In Dann's o-review video review of Scar, he describes the temple lugs as x-metal. I double-checked that with some other sources once upon a time and got a different answer, they weren't x-metal, but, even though the sources were trustworthy the statements couldn't be backed. So I consider that one an open question.

And of course Plates have no metal at all; I'm assuming that was a joke like the Frogskins...

The official description of the Scar (which can also be found in the 2001 Oakley Annual Report):
Fusing separate sculptural forms into a single unified piece, The Oakley Scar Sunglasses combine injection-molded durable X Metal with lightweight O Matter frame material. A mechanical cam achieves optimal positioning of the earstems, whether folded or open and changeable moisture-wicking Unobtainium nosebombs ensure a snug, secure fit.

There is only one part of the Scar that is metal.....

 

[Funky-Trixtar]

[QUOTE="There is only one part of the Scar that is metal.....[/QUOTE]

Which to bear in mind, is not that substantial and no doubt why it's not considered an X-Metal........which consist totally of the X-Metal compound....bits of X-Metal don't count.

 

[Oakley G]

[QUOTE="There is only one part of the Scar that is metal.....

Which to bear in mind, is not that substantial and no doubt why it's not considered an X-Metal........which consist totally of the X-Metal compound....bits of X-Metal don't count.[/QUOTE]

I agree. No one's saying it would be even come close to being classified as an X-metal. I think the idea is just to point out that X-metal has been used in parts of at least one non-metal frame.

 

[Funky-Trixtar]

Which to bear in mind, is not that substantial and no doubt why it's not considered an X-Metal........which consist totally of the X-Metal compound....bits of X-Metal don't count.

I agree. No one's saying it would be even come close to being classified as an X-metal. I think the idea is just to point out that X-metal has been used in parts of at least one non-metal frame.[/QUOTE]

Which I duly noted earlier!

 

[CarGuy]

There was no Titanium Hatchet.

There was but the "Titanium" part referred to the lenses not the frame construction.

 

[kronin323]

I don't think this thread implies that any of these other frames that contain the x-metal material should be considered x-metals; it's just merely asking what those frames are.

In our brief tongue-in-cheek banter earlier in this thread, the line Frank posted about x-metals only being the frames produced at the Nevada factory, that's a quote from a post Jim Jannard made elsewhere on this forum:

Questions For Jim Jannard!

.

 

[jdd32]

The WHY series have the design concepts of x-metal frames - they all have interchangeable t-shock system. To my knowledge only WHY3 are classified x-metals because at some stage it was marketed that way by Oakley before it got relegated to the 'wires' family. They're Ti alloy frames and one can counter argue WHY3 as not x-metal because some (perhaps all) were made in Japan and not in USA.

WHY8 were made of C5 alloy as pointed out earlier. WHY 1/2/4 were made of Ti IIRC; some have actual o-matter rims.

 

[Slojack]

Yes, there's at least a prescription frame or two made of x-metal.

Overlord RX is definitely XMETAL inspired and made out of Ti. Thought about getting a pair of these in the only available black frame and having someone on here blasting them to a more Ti look.

 

[supersharp]

O-Review

You will have to copy and paste, but this might help answer your question.

 

[joecool862]

Overlord RX is definitely XMETAL inspired and made out of Ti. Thought about getting a pair of these in the only available black frame and having someone on here blasting them to a more Ti look.

I like these! I think I just found my next Rx frame!