Flak 2.0 XL or Half Jacket 2.0XL??

[Stormboy55]

As a newbie, I have read and found that the Flak 2.0 is the top seller over the half Jack. They look pretty darn close in styling so what am I missing here? Why is the Flak more popular. Thank you, Jerry

 

Register to Not see this ad

[VirusSixZero]

It's kind of related to their legacies. The Half Jacket was the first design of its type from Oakley, I believe. The Flak Jacket was a design to add more customized colour options, and thicker stems for a more showy look.

Flak 2.0 keeps the wide stems and widens the fit of the frames at the temples a bit, at least for me. Half Jacket 2.0 is kind of a redundant product in my opinion. It doesn't have as sleek a profile as the original Half Jacket, and it's not wide-ish like Flak 1 or 2. It's kind of a half measure, and personally I just don't care for the aesthetic of HJ2.0

It could also be a timing thing. Oakley is constantly releasing very similar products, and typically the lenses are not compatible. FJ2.0 came out first and if you bought a couple of interchangeable lenses, the idea of restarting with a new frame may be less appealing than just buying more lenses for FJ2.0

Flak is one of the most widely supported and stocked lines Oakley has ever produced as well. Every season Oakley outs out a few frames that test for viability and most fizzle out. Flak endures, and Flak 1.0 has even come back here and there (I prefer FJ1.0 between the two). At the end of the day, pick the frame that fits you best, and you like the style of. If you're actually looking to buy a few lenses to swap in and out, consider longevity and availability of lenses. I LOVE how Flak Draft fits on me, but it's a year old and already getting hard to find. I just bought more FJ2.0 instead.

 

[OldSchoolHybrid]

I prefer the flak 2.0 over the half 2.0 due to coverage. The half 2.0 is comfortable to wear but doesn't seem to sweep back on the sides as much and that means more sunlight comes through. It was a big disappointment for me because I really liked the appearance of them. The flak 2.0 is very comfortable and provides excellent all around coverage.

 

[SpliceD]

This is my order of preference:

Flak Jacket 1.0 > Half Jacket 1.0 > Flak Jacket 2.0 > Half Jacket 2.0

I'm probably going to get some flak for this (pun intended), but if we're strictly comparing Flak 2 vs HJ 2, I think the FJ2 is more masculine (sharp, bold lines) and the HJ2 is more feminine (curvy and thick).

Oakley.com still sells the Flak Jacket XLJ (1.0), but if you really wanted that frame, they can be easily found here for much cheaper. Accessory lenses and sock kits are still sold on oakley.com as well.

https://www.oakley.com/en-us/search?text=flak+jacket

I think the success of the Flak 1.0 was due to the popularity of them among athletes (along with the M-frame and later on the Radar). Flak 2.0 just carries on top of that legacy. HJ never really had that notoriety.

 

[Zax]

Just buy one of each, and you won’t have that problem 😁

I too prefer the Flak Jacket original frame over the rest. Flak Jacket > Half Jacket > Flak 2.0 > Half Jacket 2.0

I do like that the Flak 2.0s work as a sporty and casual frame. One of the reasons I opted for RX in the Flak 2.0. I also use the original Flak Jacket as safety glasses.

I do have at least one of each frame though

 

[VirusSixZero]

I'm probably going to get some flak for this (pun intended), but if we're strictly comparing Flak 2 vs HJ 2, I think the FJ2 is more masculine (sharp, bold lines) and the HJ2 is more feminine (curvy and thick).

I always saw the Half Jacket as a two-lens frame inspired by the original M Frame. The little 'wings' on the temples for the logo are a similar aesthetic. The stems were originally fairly minimalist in those designs.

The Half Jacket 2.0 seems to keep the sleek, organic, and streamlined stylings of HJ, but seems to be a hybrid, more inspired by Flak Jacket 1.0 and Half Jacket 1.0

Personally, I wouldn't use masculine/feminine for FJ vs HJ, but I do see your point about HJ being more focused on organic curves. I'd argue that FJ 2.0 is not really a successor to the organic stylings of FJ 1.0, it is more its own thing. FJ 2.0 has sleek lines that seem inspired by a chassis or airframe, whereas HJ (1 and 2), and FJ 1.0 used a more organic aesthetic to have sleek lines that seemed inspired by sea life like whales or dolphins.

 

[Mike.vanderkoon]

When they first came out with the Flak Jacket, they already had the half jacket out which had the "wings" on it. At that point they were much more different. I instantly loved the Flak since they did not have the the "wings."

I prefer the flak jacket the most -->flak 2.0 --> Half Jacket 2.0. I probably hold a grudge for those wings on the half jacket 1.0.

If you want the more modern lenses DWP, maritime, etc get the Flak 2.0. But try and get the Flak Jacket at one point. It is a great model.

 

[ShortChangeHero]

This is my order of preference:

Flak Jacket 1.0 > Half Jacket 1.0 > Flak Jacket 2.0 > Half Jacket 2.0

I'm probably going to get some flak for this (pun intended), but if we're strictly comparing Flak 2 vs HJ 2, I think the FJ2 is more masculine (sharp, bold lines) and the HJ2 is more feminine (curvy and thick).

Oakley.com still sells the Flak Jacket XLJ (1.0), but if you really wanted that frame, they can be easily found here for much cheaper. Accessory lenses and sock kits are still sold on oakley.com as well.

https://www.oakley.com/en-us/search?text=flak+jacket

I think the success of the Flak 1.0 was due to the popularity of them among athletes (along with the M-frame and later on the Radar). Flak 2.0 just carries on top of that legacy. HJ never really had that notoriety.

I totally agree, FJ2 is more masculine. It goes opposite for the 1.0 in my opinion.