• 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...

Steve_Sr

Oakley Beginner
10
53
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
 
You might not want a CR-39 lens because it's not shatter resistant. Trivex sounds cool, that's a @Chris A Hardaway question. I assume the lenses you got are Oakley Authentic Lenses?

You could try the plazma, I'm pretty sure your prescription could be accommodated if oakley uses an "edge" lens. That frame gives significantly more coverage at the top of the frame and sits very close to the face.

A jawbone/racing jacket is another good option, just more expensive
 
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
Hey Steve.

I'll just touch on a few key things. It is too bad that your RX is strong enough to see chromatic aberration. This is common in an RX about 3.00 diopter. I would recommend a couple things if these are sticky used as cycling glasses. Try raising the seg height at least 2 or 3 mm. That way you aren't looking so far from (so far above) the "MRP" major reference point of the design at high speed... this should eliminate about 20-50% of the chromatic aberration. That being said you should consider also changing the design to the "cycling progressive " Oakley makes. This will make the lenses still comfortable optically w a higher fitting height. Otherwise, the "+5.25" total power on the bottom of the lens will be "too distracting " and dominate a lot of your precious usable lens real estate. Lastly, they don't offer many colors in the cycling design... you might be stuck w prizm road, prizm black, prizm Tungsten, maybe polarized in black or Tungsten. But that's about it. Covid has limited availability in progressive cycling designed prizm road Jade and prizm road torch.

Be very specific with your Oakley optician that you want cycling design... and not fishing, golf, or standard OTD Oakley progressive designs. Not all of them even know those are options on top of lens color.

Trivex would have better optics, and Shamir (Google that) has great progressive designs for 8 base curve. BuT your RX will be WAY TOO THICK in that material... also 1.67 hi index would be slightly thinner but less impact resistant, and not much better on ABBE value "rating".

If you go w those materials, you'll need to pick a flatter 6 base curve frame. Offering less protection on the sides.

Back in the day I wouldn't have recommended anything above a +2.00 sphere power (add power irrelevant... whatever up to +3.00)... but since true digital edge came out several years ago your rx should be ok.

I hope that helps. And remember w your age related limited flexibility, and posture, we both know your eyes are higher in the lens.... so that's not the way they were measured at the optician Desk (well I bet). Easily raise that seg 3mm and change design. You'll be much happier. Add mentioned even if it's 30 to 50% better I bet you could love them w adaption for another week.

Trust me when I do your eyes aren't "bad" this is normal aging stuff, but glasses are limited by the physical world and our understanding of light and "mediums" like lens materials. Good luck!
 
Chris,

Thanks so much for your detailed help. Please see questions, comments below...

Hey Steve.

I'll just touch on a few key things. It is too bad that your RX is strong enough to see chromatic aberration. This is common in an RX about 3.00 diopter. I would recommend a couple things if these are sticky used as cycling glasses. Try raising the seg height at least 2 or 3 mm. That way you aren't looking so far from (so far above) the "MRP" major reference point of the design at high speed... this should eliminate about 20-50% of the chromatic aberration. That being said you should consider also changing the design to the "cycling progressive " Oakley makes. This will make the lenses still comfortable optically w a higher fitting height. Otherwise, the "+5.25" total power on the bottom of the lens will be "too distracting " and dominate a lot of your precious usable lens real estate.

So is the "Cycling Progressive" design the same as moving the segment height up or are these two separate "knobs" that can be turned to help fix these issues?

What specifically does the "cycling progressive" do to the lens design? Does it just effectively vertically "stretch" the center area of the lens?

I am reasonably certain that my optician has never run into this before. I have actually made several calls to Oakley's "supposed" tech support and gotten the equivalent of a blank stare or we've never heard about these issues before. I am wondering if my optician ran into the same stupidity.


Lastly, they don't offer many colors in the cycling design... you might be stuck w prizm road, prizm black, prizm Tungsten, maybe polarized in black or Tungsten. But that's about it. Covid has limited availability in progressive cycling designed prizm road Jade and prizm road torch.

Actually all that I am looking for is the standard gray sunglasses lens with no mirror and no polarization which interferes with viewing my cycling electronics. Do you know what this color lens is called in "Oakley speak"?


Be very specific with your Oakley optician that you want cycling design... and not fishing, golf, or standard OTD Oakley progressive designs. Not all of them even know those are options on top of lens color.
Will do but suspect that you are right.

Trivex would have better optics, and Shamir (Google that) has great progressive designs for 8 base curve. BuT your RX will be WAY TOO THICK in that material... also 1.67 hi index would be slightly thinner but less impact resistant, and not much better on ABBE value "rating".

If you go w those materials, you'll need to pick a flatter 6 base curve frame. Offering less protection on the sides.
I guess that I have gotten somewhat "spoiled" by the optical clarity of CR-39 so going to poly is a BIG step down.

I was hoping that these Flak 2.0 would last for many years and multiple prescriptions but this doesn't look to be the case. My prescription is only going to go up so likely won't fit in the Flak 2.0 design.

So how much of a difference is there between a standard base 8 and Oakley base 8.75 as far as prescription fit? do you know if Oakley makes any regular base 8 or base 6 frames that would be suitable for cycling?

After all, I survived for at least a decade with Bolle Parole with the RX insert which worked fairly well. The base glasses were probably base 6 or 8 but I think that the RX was probably base 4 as edge of the adapter hit the outside lenses.

My optician also suggested that I look at Wiley X. However, I have run into similar issues. They are once again poly only with a total +5 limit for base 8.
 
I'm so sorry I don't have time to address all your questions. I tried to answer everything I could in the first message.

Changing to a different brand on 8 base curve glasses isn't going to help in any way. Oakley is your best bet for these problems.

You can both move up the seg height. You'll also Need to get the cycling lens if you do so. Simply put it was especially designed for this sport. I'm not sure how exactly it's engineered. But Oakley spent s ton of $$$ to research and develop it. I'mnot an engineer so I don't really ask those questions. As if I'd fully understand anyway right?

Ya, I'd never get an rx insert like a bike parole personally. Not only are they ugly, but the field of view is tiny. Again my opinion. But hey this is the Oakley forum.

I sell wiley x in my store too. But I can't think of a frame that will sit high enough for cycling to be honest.

Lastly, the lens you want is called Grey. Or you can call it Non Polarized, Non prizm Grey. To make it clear to your optician. I imagine that comes in cycling design. But I'm not at work to Check now. Ps if they can't do that one just go w the mirror. Get black iridium. Good luck!
 
Chris,

Thanks again!

After some online digging I found this info that explains the Oakley activity specific lens designs:


95% of the other stuff that I waded through to find this only talked about the activity specific lens tints which I am sure confuses a lot of folks!

One final question... I think that you were saying (above) to add 2-3mm to the segment height even WITH the cycling specific lens design. Did I understand this correctly?

Thanks,
Steve
 
Chris,

Thanks again!

After some online digging I found this info that explains the Oakley activity specific lens designs:


95% of the other stuff that I waded through to find this only talked about the activity specific lens tints which I am sure confuses a lot of folks!

One final question... I think that you were saying (above) to add 2-3mm to the segment height even WITH the cycling specific lens design. Did I understand this correctly?

Thanks,
Steve
CORRECT! I agree, that it takes a little explaining. But once you know, you know ;) I hope all else is well!
 
Consider doing Both raise seg, and cycling specific design progressive. Especially if you swith to cycling, raising design will be critical due to posture on the bike :)
Got it! I just want to be fully prepared when talking to my optician. It is obvious that he doesn't have any experience with this and I wan to make sure that I lead him down the correct path.

Thanks!
Steve
 
Back
Top