Oakley EV ZERO

[Rustpot]

My pair shipped. I'm happy.

 

[Ventruck]

Debating it ..

View attachment 235789

u sly fox

 

[theDisruptive_One]

I haven't tried the evzero on yet and I know they were highly anticipated by the O community. I admit the originals were original but these new ones kinda just look like a frame less radar with different stems.

 

[Ventruck]

I haven't tried the evzero on yet and I know they were highly anticipated by the O community. I admit the originals were original but these new ones kinda just look like a frame less radar with different stems.

I see that as partially the point, but I see what you're getting at.

The "EV era" for Oakley has them trying to narrow down on their cuts in hopes of finding near-perfect ones. I personally find that the M2 was the first attempt, as it was implied that it mixed parts of previous M-Frame cuts to just exist with one offering, but that didn't work for everyone for several reasons. So that being said, it's no surprise the Zero EV is looking semi-redundant to the Radar EV (and Jawbreaker lens cut for that matter).

Introducing the Zero EV is going to set up questions to what is theoretically the best way about sport eyewear design. Assuming fit isn't an issue, making sense of where a Radar EV is more appropriate than a Jawbreaker is kinda hard. Same range of vision, yet the Jawbreaker is more friendly to handle. Only thing the EV has on it is a bit of a lighter weight and tighter hold, but it's not like the Jawbreaker is impractical on such accounts.

I'm currently stuck at making a functional case for the EV Zero. Both the Radar EV and Jawbreaker have wide enough range of vision. You'd have to be kidding me if you told me you had to look past where the frame/rims reside on a practical, regular basis. The Zero loses out on having a form of torsional support, hence what we're hearing is a relatively looser fit. Lack of a rim just introduces brow smudging and potentially poor ventilation, unless Oakley set out the lens a bit from the face. Not gonna lie, I'm also critical early on about how the arms don't have any inspiration from the other EV's, and the earsock design is presumably non-locking like current gen sport pairs.

All I could make out is that the Zero caters to whoever likes a lighter fit. Funnily enough I blindingly ordered a pair.

I guess the most cynical way of looking at Oakley's catalog is that they're just adding more things to sell, but personally I thought the Radar EV was given serious attention to detail to improve over its predecessors.

 

[max4321]

[QUOTE="Ventruck, post: 695522, member: 4873"' Assuming fit isn't an issue, making sense of where a Radar EV is more appropriate than a Jawbreaker is kinda hard. Same range of vision, yet the Jawbreaker is more friendly to handle.[/QUOTE]

tbh I think they're taking a lifestyle-style approach to the sport side of things, introducing lots of styles which basically do the same thing (think frogskin/holbrook/enduro/silver/etc) just to appeal to different peoples tastes. Although without any switchlock technology I'm slightly perplexed as to why they introduced the zero. The jawbreaker is rather garish and appeals to 'out there' people and cyclists, the radar ev was their most all sports option, and the M2XL was the budget option. Maybe they're going to kill off the M2 as I don't think it has been very successful.

 

[Krank]

I'm in Sacramento today. Had to do a West coast trip, and stopped by the Arden Fair Mall Of store. They still have nose bombs and frame kit unobtanium for R1s and the store manager was happy to hook me up again. I also nabbed a new pair of the EV.

So far I like this pair. It's a great fit for large heads like mine, and I'm enjoying their look on me. So far, they have not been smudged by my sweaty furrowed brow, and fit snug yet comfortable. If I shake my head vigorously they stay put. The manager at the O store gave me 30% off. Grand total was 122.00.

 

[Herbsley]

Another vigorous head-shaker.
I've ridden bicycles for more decades than I care to mention, and yet this new element of the sport has clearly passed me by.

 

[cyclerdoug]

Another vigorous head-shaker.
I've ridden bicycles for more decades than I care to mention, and yet this new element of the sport has clearly passed me by.

Herbs, You're missing it, but only slightly. If you put the glasses on and shake your head vigorously and they stay on...odds are that when you're all sweaty and hot and irritated and passing through an intersection and you catch a flash of color on your right and your brain screams "HE'S TURNING RIGHT INTO ME!!!" and you snap your head to the right to see if you're about to die or he saw you and stopped, your glasses stay on your face and don't slide or fly off.

This is when you're down in the drops and the big ring in the mid 20's (MPH). **** needs to stay where you put it!!

 

[max4321]

I was just chatting to an oakley rep and he confirmed that due to the way the frame is constructed there is no way of swapping out lenses which sucks

 

[Ventruck]

I was just chatting to an oakley rep and he confirmed that due to the way the frame is constructed there is no way of swapping out lenses which sucks

whoa...lame. I kinda had the intention to swap lenses down the road. I can understand it, though. It seems that a frameless design would either have a flimsy interface or have stress concentrations at the mounting points. A setup that has a solution to both would probably be patented. Then again that solution could've been the Tombstone's setup and they kept away from it to avoid total redundancy.

Eh, my order is expected Tuesday. I'm comfortable with +Red, but strong chance I'm gonna want to return it. Only redeeming factors in that case is I didn't really bend over to get it, and got it during F&F.