• 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!

M2 Lens Modified to Fit the M Frame


Oakley Expert
So now that the Oakley M2 is out, the original M Frame is being put out to pasture. :(

M Frame lenses direct from Oakley are now extremely limited.

Your options are clear and gray... and you better be a fan of the Strike style lens (which I am not).

Oh how I long for access to replacement lenses for my beloved M Frames. :rolleyes:

I do not want aftermarket lenses, and I get tired of scouring the B/S/T boards for used lenses that may be hit or miss on quality and authenticity.

After reading the thread that @Rustpot has on the Evolution of the M Frame, found here, I began wondering how / if M2 lenses could be modified to function in an M Frame.

If it worked it would be great, right ?!?!?

New, unmolested lenses for my M Frames... and better yet even in versions never available with my original M Frames (ie - Prizm)!

So I sent out a request for help to @Chris A Hardaway. :help:

He agreed to take a stab at it, so I ordered a test lens.

Now since this was a test and only a test I didn't want to risk a perfectly good OEM M2 lens which would cost me $50 plus shipping on the cheapest available, so I picked up a yellow Inew aftermarket lens from eBay for a measly $10.99... SHIPPED!

As soon as I received that lens it was packed up with a few M Frames, a few M Frame lenses, a little cash, and sent to @Chris A Hardaway for a little "massaging".

I have about half a dozen M Frames and about a dozen M Frame lenses in varying degrees of age and usage.

Some lenses fit tightly in some frames and some fit loosely.

And there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to how or why they fit like they do.

Old frame-new lens, new frame-old lens, old frame-old lens, new frame-new lens (sounds like Dr. Seuss :eek:).

I have some that fit tightly and some that fit loosely in any and all of the previous combinations.

The M2 lens that @Chris A Hardaway modified for me was named Goldilocks, partially because of her color, but more importantly because in manner of fit in the M Frame "it was just right". :cool-20:


These are pictures of the M2 lens and a M Frame Sweep lens stacked together before and after M2 lens modification.

Not much to look at, but the nosepiece attachment area is noticeably higher on the M2 lens (more about that later).


Viewed from above you can see the arc was longer on the M2 lens prior to modification.





These four different before and after sets show how the flanges on the lens were modified to interface with the M Frame.

Since the outcome of his lens modification was positive, I ordered a few M2 nosepieces from Oakley so I could verify fit on my head.

Unfortunately, that's also where this story becomes much less positive and starts to show the failure in using M2 lenses in our M Frames. :headbang:

When wearing the glasses, the bottom of the lens ever so slightly touches both right and left cheeks.

When talking or smiling it is VERY noticeable.

It is bothersome enough that I would never consider wearing them for any sort of use whatsoever.


It is a little hard to see in the picture, but if you look close enough you can see that the M2 lens curves back more towards the face as it approaches the bottom edge of the lens.


If you remember back when you started reading this novel, I mentioned the nosepiece attachment area on the lens.

The nosepiece sits higher on the M2 lens which makes the bottom of the lens sit lower on the face than the M Frame lens.

So ultimately the M2 lens in the M Frame curves back towards the face too much and sits too low on the face.


This is how the lens should fit (I had to use a clear lens because the Black Iridium blocked too much of the camera's flash).


But unfortunately it fits like this. :confused:

A long read for a negative result I know.

But I thought this failure had as much of a right to be documented as one of our achievements.

Shade Station Oakley Sunglasses
Register to Not see this ad

Is that pic of the Sweep lens on your face how you normally wear your frames? I generally have the frame right up on my face.

Sorry to hear it didn't work out for you. There IS the option of trimming the bottom of the M2 lens for a more aggressive scallop and cheek clearance.

And to your point of the lens riding lower - the M Frame is equivalent to the EV and XL variants in terms of lens height - the frame doesn't fit as flat, but the upper peripheral is still there. I'm not sure why they lowered the brow line for the Radar and why it took the XL and EV to get back to where the M Frame was. Even the Jawbreaker isn't as high as the almighty M.

Oh, and the M Frame does have prizm lens options now. The 3.0 has TR45 and TR22 prizm, and the Alpha (albeit imcompatible) has goggle lens colors like Prizm Rose and the contrast Prizm Black Iridium (BI has always been contrast for goggles I believe).

@schnitzeraffe thank you so much for the update! I would like to mention that tilting back toward cheeks of the lens is called pantoscopic tilt. The same frame on 100 different people will typically have 80+ different tilts. This measurement typically can go from negative angle (retroscopic tilt) to about 18° with the typical measurements being about 8°... I'd recommend if anyone else wanted to try this to make sure they have any combination of these things. A predominant nose bridge (to raise off cheeks), lower or flatter cheek bones, and /or lastly a near vertical 0° tilt to begin with on typical M Frames. This would mean you either had lower ears, or a much higher nose :)
Great post!

So the SI site does have a few more options than Oakley's page, but still no where near the number of lenses I'd like to see available.

And for Prizm options I was thinking more along the lines of Road and Trail, not TR22 and TR45.

Plus I'd be stuck with that goofy hole in the lens. :p

Even if I did want to order one of the few lenses they have available, according to their site, I don't even qualify as one of the privileged few that can register there.

Awesome job @Chris A Hardaway
And great insight @schnitzeraffe

I was never aware of the nose bridge height until now, and could explain some things regarding the M2's security on the face. I surely believe the frame is running looser than most sports frames, but I could imagine that the frame also just rested badly against my brow. Right before I parted with my M2, I bought a junker Sweep lens to play with, and I felt that fit a little better.

Guess for my personal benefit it's some food for thought for the upcoming Zero EV. Kinda worried that its reusing the M2 nosepiece, which means no AF piece (and I opt for it with every frame I have), but maybe that isn't the actual issue after all.

Last edited: