• 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!

Oakley Flak 2.0 XL For Cycling - Issues...

Well, my optician finally got a hold of someone at Oakley and was told that these activity specific lens designs were no longer made. @Chris A Hardaway can you confirm this? I have talked to Oakley tech support on several occasions on other matters and have gotten different answers at different times.

If this is true, then where to go next? Would there be any benefit to just raising the segment height in the regular progressive design or would this cause other issues?

Thanks,
Steve
 
Well, I don't know who to believe... I just found this on Oakley's current website:


This would tend to make me believe that these designs are still available.
These do still exist. I can only imagine 1 or more of these 3 issues.

1) the color "tint" you selected doesn't come in cycling specific design. Ask them to try again in grey, grey polarized, prizm grey, prizm grey polarized, prizm road (red only), or perhaps the Tungsten/Prizm Tungsten array.... I know they don't do Deep Water in cycling (for example that's only available on fishing design).

2) they don't make cycling specific design in "Oakley true digital edge II" lenses. Which all RX above +2.00 sphere need (I think this is your problem).

3) you are being lied to. This is less than likely.

You could raise the seg height 2mm still. Unless they already have the seg height super high. If I had no other options I personally would raise my seg height 2mm to reduce unwanted double vision. I only worry because you mentioned you can't be "over plus even by 0.25". But on a bike you won't be over plus due to posture.
 
These do still exist. I can only imagine 1 or more of these 3 issues.
Here it is listed directly on the Oakley website:


1) the color "tint" you selected doesn't come in cycling specific design. Ask them to try again in grey, grey polarized, prizm grey, prizm grey polarized, prizm road (red only), or perhaps the Tungsten/Prizm Tungsten array.... I know they don't do Deep Water in cycling (for example that's only available on fishing design).
I don't think that it was a lens color issue. All I got was that the "lens design was no longer available". Optician speculating likely due to poor sales???

2) they don't make cycling specific design in "Oakley true digital edge II" lenses. Which all RX above +2.00 sphere need (I think this is your problem).
Based on the above web page it would appear that the sport specific lens design is a different product from the "True Digital II". Even so it says that the TDII will do a +4 and I am only at +2.75.

I did see another web site dated 2012 when they first announced the cycling lens design that it had a +2.0 limit but that might have been updated many times in a decade and is likely not relevant today.

3) you are being lied to. This is less than likely.
I suspect that my optician got a hold of someone at Oakley that doesn't know their own product line. How do you get around this one? Do opticians have a separate way into the system?

You could raise the seg height 2mm still. Unless they already have the seg height super high. If I had no other options I personally would raise my seg height 2mm to reduce unwanted double vision. I only worry because you mentioned you can't be "over plus even by 0.25". But on a bike you won't be over plus due to posture.
The seg height was not adjusted at all for cycling position so 2mm should be doable... if it comes to this.

Thanks,
Steve
 
Here it is listed directly on the Oakley website:



I don't think that it was a lens color issue. All I got was that the "lens design was no longer available". Optician speculating likely due to poor sales???


Based on the above web page it would appear that the sport specific lens design is a different product from the "True Digital II". Even so it says that the TDII will do a +4 and I am only at +2.75.

I did see another web site dated 2012 when they first announced the cycling lens design that it had a +2.0 limit but that might have been updated many times in a decade and is likely not relevant today.


I suspect that my optician got a hold of someone at Oakley that doesn't know their own product line. How do you get around this one? Do opticians have a separate way into the system?


The seg height was not adjusted at all for cycling position so 2mm should be doable... if it comes to this.

Thanks,
Steve
What color tint are you ordering? I can double check #1

I still think since they originally were only available up to +2.00 there's a chance that from +2.25 to +4.00 true digital edge ii isn't a "sport specific lens design". I just checked this #2... Not an option for to your RX. See photo. I can't believe it.

Remember 10 years ago Oakley at fully independent. Many things are more limited since Luxottica bought them. Not better.

My 1 day shipments now take 5-7... this is 1 year pre-covid. Once they moved from Foothill Ranch CA to McDonough GA... lab moved too, not in FHR anymore.

Bummer... try to raise the seg about 2mm for a mild improvement

1 photo +2.00 has cycling.
1 photo +2.75 no cycling.
20220120_185201.jpg

20220120_185125.jpg
 
What color tint are you ordering? I can double check #1

I still think since they originally were only available up to +2.00 there's a chance that from +2.25 to +4.00 true digital edge ii isn't a "sport specific lens design". I just checked this #2... Not an option for to your RX. See photo. I can't believe it.

Remember 10 years ago Oakley at fully independent. Many things are more limited since Luxottica bought them. Not better.

My 1 day shipments now take 5-7... this is 1 year pre-covid. Once they moved from Foothill Ranch CA to McDonough GA... lab moved too, not in FHR anymore.

Bummer... try to raise the seg about 2mm for a mild improvement

1 photo +2.00 has cycling.
1 photo +2.75 no cycling.
View attachment 932796
View attachment 932797
Well, at least that explains it! Prescription is too high. Don't know why my optician couldn't figure this out. So is Wiley X looking any better or should I just have the Oakley's redone with a 2mm seg height raise?

Based on all of this I think I see a Base 6 design in my future for the next go round... or start now with Wiley X and plan to reuse the frame. How does their progressive lens design compare to the Oakley TDII.

Thanks!
Steve
 
Well, at least that explains it! Prescription is too high. Don't know why my optician couldn't figure this out. So is Wiley X looking any better or should I just have the Oakley's redone with a 2mm seg height raise?

Based on all of this I think I see a Base 6 design in my future for the next go round... or start now with Wiley X and plan to reuse the frame. How does their progressive lens design compare to the Oakley TDII.

Thanks!
Steve
I wish I could be more help. A 6 base curve design in your RX will have better optics for sure. I sell wiley X too. I don't see any advantage to their lenses. Especially since they are all true safety glasses and end up thicker... i worry your lashes will touch the inside back of lens. I believe the have a road and cycling progressive at WX but I haven't sold or tried it. I prefer Oakley big time.

Good luck! But go for that redo w a higher seg. See if that helps some.
 
Hello,

Background:

I am 65 years old and do a lot of cycling and need cycling specific sunglasses. My eyes have solidified such that I have severe issues with a +0.25 "over plus" prescription. Don't ask. My current prescription is +2.75 with a +2.50 add with no appreciable astigmatism or prism. I am currently wearing CR-39 regular progressive glasses and flat top bifocal sunglasses for driving with no issues.

Oakley Flak 2.0:

So I went searching of cycling specific sunglasses and finally decided on the Flak 2.0 based on popularity (for eventual rubber spare parts availability) and good reviews. Based on this I ordered a pair from my local optician.

Optical Issues:

Shortly after receiving these sunglasses I noticed some very annoying optical issues as follows:

1. When on the bike you spend most of your time looking out of the top of your lenses due to the normal head down riding position. It doesn't help being old with a loss of flexibility.

When riding in this position I am noticing that the prescription does not appear to run all the way to the top of the lenses. My regular progressive lenses don't seem to have this issue nearly as bad. Is this a design or RX issue? Any suggestions on how to fix or improve this situation.

2. I have also noticed some rather severe orange and blue halos around objects. This gets noticeably worse as you move from the center of the lens to the top. My research indicates that this is called chromeric aberrations and is caused by the ABBE of the material. Unfortunately, Oakley only makes polycarbonate lenses which has the worst (lowest) ABBE value of any optical material.

Does anyone else make lenses for Oakley frames in either Trivex or CR-39 that would have a much higher ABBE value?

Other Thoughts:

I just learned that the Flak 2.0 XL is a base 8.75 curve which is more wrap than just about any other sunglasses out there. I am now wondering if my prescription should have been put in these glasses to begin with. Any thoughts?

Conversely would these issues significantly diminish with glasses with a base 8 or even base 6 curve. Any suggestions for alternate Oakley or other brand which may solve these issues?

Thanks,
Steve
Had same problem not with oakleys tho. I have like -4.75 and -3.25 plus astigmatism.
I found anything over a 5 base curve your vision is going to be distorted around the edges.
Inserts will give the best vision but you have 4 surfaces to get fogged or sweaty. I had Rudy project Horus that worked well but it’s a smaller lense and $$$$.
Good luck.
 
The Oakley's come with larger nose pads that will raise the segment height. I tried this experiment and didn't see any obvious issues so my optician ordered a re-do adding 4mm to the segment height. These made a very noticeable improvement and didn't really detract from intermediate distance vision as I would normally need more plus there anyway. This trick may not work with other prescriptions.

Just about everything conspires against you in this design - Polycarbonate (Low ABBE value), relatively high prescription, and the Base-8 lens curve. About the only know that is available to turn is the Base curve. I have yet to find any sport specific glasses that are available in CR-39 or Trivex with better optical properties.
 

Latest Posts

Back
Top