Lower ANSI Standards For Certain Pairs

[Batwolf]

I'm pretty sure all of the lenses fall under Z87.1 but due to some of the frames (origin, materials) they have to state Z80.3.

Maybe someone should call/email customer service for verification because I've noticed that even the warranty paperwork has said Z80.3 for awhile.

 

[nlgrav182]

I'm pretty sure all of the lenses fall under Z87.1 but due to some of the frames (origin, materials) they have to state Z80.3.

Maybe someone should call/email customer service for verification because I've noticed that even the warranty paperwork has said Z80.3 for awhile.

I'm going to call tomorrow to ask a few questions.

As I said above, Oakley mentions some lenses that do not meet all the standards for Z87.1, so they split it up for impact or optics.

 

[Batwolf]

I'm betting all of them fall under Z87.1 optically but might not meet that mark impact wise.

 

[qtrain23]

I'm betting all of them fall under Z87.1 optically but might not meet that mark impact wise.

Which really is the important part

 

[nlgrav182]

So if the Pit Boss II is only Z80.3 for optics and impact, that points me to a "Made in China" product. This explains the model update and the features on the glasses like the screws instead of polished rivets. Anyone see a pair and look for MADE IN USA markings?

EDIT: Recent pics show MADE IN USA. Happy for that, still bummed for Z80.3.

 

[OBlazer]

I'm pretty sure all of the lenses fall under Z87.1 but due to some of the frames (origin, materials) they have to state Z80.3.

Maybe someone should call/email customer service for verification because I've noticed that even the warranty paperwork has said Z80.3 for awhile.

This is an excellent point, but as noted in RustSpots quote of the Z87.1 testing protocol, then no longer distinguish by between protection quality of the lens and frame independently, only as a single entity.

I really dislike this reduction personally. It does not seem like it was properly communicated to the consumers either. There should be a uniformity across all product categories, where if they are planning on only meeting Z80.3 standards in C-5 frames, they should state that all the C-5 frames will now meet a reduced standard.

The PBII is what is really concerning. This is an elite level product that will be offering sub-traditional impact protection...

 

[Batwolf]

It's not considered Elite level as the Elite line no longer exists. Elite pricing? Sure, but it definitely doesn't match up to the standards set by it's predecessors.

And I am with you on Oakley not communicating that better, they just slipped this one under the cracks hoping no one would notice.

 

[Calgary Dreaming]

Personally, I'm indifferent to the change. The lower impact standards seem to be limited to the non-sport stuff, so it doesn't bother me. As long as the Z87.1 stays on the sports oriented stuff, I'm good.

 

[OBlazer]

Yeah sorry I wasn't clear, I wasn't making a claim that PBII was a part of the Elite line of Oakley product. I was trying to say based on the name and the price point, it is an upper echelon face shield by any companies standard and the impact protection (IMO) should represent that. My use of the word "elite" was confusing due to the product being discussed.

 

[z87.1]

Is there a list of what frame and/or lens is or is not z87.1?