• 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!

cacatman

No one knows 'cacat' like cacatman!!
Staff member
Premium Member
Lifetime Member
Ya this is total mularky and a highly uneducated assumption.

Ita likely that there is NOT a pair for every serial of the highly produced runs. When a pair was forged and was not up to standards it was likely melted back down and turned into another pair. This would of been more common in the earlier pairs before the process was "perfected"
I alluded to that in my answer to his post. It's one post down.
 

Shade Station Oakley Sunglasses
Register to Not see this ad
T

"TRUMP"

Guest
I alluded to that in my answer to his post. It's one post down.

Which is reason enough to not post fairy tale made up uneducated guesses of serial totals.

The only ones we know are the 24kt juliet and 24kt x squared.

The others are fake news and shouldn't be promoted as having any substantial claim
 

cacatman

No one knows 'cacat' like cacatman!!
Staff member
Premium Member
Lifetime Member
Which is reason enough to not post fairy tale made up uneducated guesses of serial totals.

The only ones we know are the 24kt juliet and 24kt x squared.

The others are fake news and shouldn't be promoted as having any substantial claim
Shutting down discussion is not what this is about.

People can make up their own minds based on the discussion. I've just heard theories. The logical one (but the one that is not believed) is that they produced them in order of production. That would make the most sense to anyone wanting to create unique serials for items they produce. But I haven't seen any proof of either theory yet. So for the moment, it's going to stay and I'm not writing even more extensive disclaimers for my lists. I'll revise stuff if you give me something that would make me reasonably change my mind.
 

Last edited:
T

"TRUMP"

Guest
Shutting down discussion is not what this is about.

People can make up their own minds based on the discussion. I've just heard theories. The logical one (but the one that is not believed) is that they produced them in order of production. That would make the most sense to anyone wanting to create unique serials for items they produce. But I haven't seen any proof of either theory yet. So for the moment, it's going to stay and I'm not writing even more extensive disclaimers for my lists. I'll revise stuff if as I see fit.

Yes of course they were produced in sequence but early on in the process there were many flaws with the casting process and certain pairs with very very heaving casting marks and deformations were rumored to be melted back down and that serial was never assigned to a new pair because it would of been out of sequence and it helped them keep better records of what worked and what didnt work.

The assumed numbers would be close to accurate for how many pairs were ATTEMPTED to be produced....but not the actual number in existence.

Also, there are some R1's that have 2 serial numbers because one was printed over another.....explain that
 

cacatman

No one knows 'cacat' like cacatman!!
Staff member
Premium Member
Lifetime Member
Yes of course they were produced in sequence but early on in the process there were many flaws with the casting process and certain pairs with very very heaving casting marks and deformations were rumored to be melted back down and that serial was never assigned to a new pair because it would of been out of sequence and it helped them keep better records of what worked and what didnt work.

The assumed numbers would be close to accurate for how many pairs were ATTEMPTED to be produced....but not the actual number in existence.

Also, there are some R1's that have 2 serial numbers because one was printed over another.....explain that
@andr3 is talking about generalised figures. And I'm familiar with those cases you've mentioned. I'd like to see certified references of that information anyhow.

I have no proof, but common sense would tell you that the rarity of having 2 serial numbers exactly the same is hardly going to change the ballpark figures. And I'd daresay that even the numbers of "recycled" pairs aren't going to be numbered in the tens of thousands.

But, I'll keep an open mind if that proof ever does emerge. Until then, I'm going to not discount someone else's logic (while not commonly accepted, seems quite reasonable).
 

Oakley G

Oakley Expert
1,004
693
It’s fun to guess at things as fans. We’ll never know the exact number of serialed pairs. Oakley probably doesn’t even know since they really don’t keep records that exact.
 

Top