# Oakley Prescription Glasses (not sunnies)



## jampott

Any opticians on the forum? Anyone know where is good to buy?

I saw some lush frames in Vision Express at the weekend whilst having my eyes tested. It took ages to find my last set of frames, so wasn't really expecting to see something I liked (and that fitted properly) quite so quickly, this time around...

My prescription hasn't changed greatly, but I would like a new pair of glasses, and the rimless Oakley frames I found were lovely, but the cost in Vision Express didn't meet my expectations...

Anyone help?


----------



## dee

a couple of guys in the office have previously got them on-line from the U.S. one cant remmeber the site - the other is on vacation... might be worth a search - I remember they used to bulk order contacts from there too - saved over 50% from memory


----------



## genocidalduck

Hev is a optician! Or works for one :?  she will now kill me for not remembering what she actually does!


----------



## jampott

Ta guys...

I know someone else on here is, and they were going to quote me (ages ago!) for some prescription Oakley sunnies. Ended up getting those from the USA in the end, as the currency makes them so much cheaper. For sunglasses this is cool, but I'd want to be sure I was dealing with a proper optical specialist for prescription lenses, and would need to be able to send them back if there was a problem, so unless the price difference was immense (enough to take a punt on it) I'd prefer to buy from the UK in this instance - but VE wanted Â£195 for the frames alone, and something like Â£141 for lenses...


----------



## dee

jampott said:


> Ta guys...
> 
> Â£195 for the frames alone, and something like Â£141 for lenses...


   

you could always sue Whitehouse and H&E I dont hink they had health warnings on the covers back then :lol:


----------



## jdn

jampott said:


> some lush frames in Vision Express at the weekend whilst having my eyes tested.


That turn of phrase sounds like you should be writing reviews for these sorts of publications.










:wink:


----------



## Carlos

I just bought some from www.sportsspectacles.co.uk

I did a bit of hunting and they appeared cheapest. Quicker than quoted delivery, can't fault them.

Think mine were Â£284 (Straightjacket with Iridium polarised lenses). You can get a clear lens IIRC.


----------



## Hev

genocidalduck said:


> Hev is a optician! Or works for one :?  she will now kill me for not remembering what she actually does!


yup, that's me  !!!

jampott, any idea which ones they were? Personally I do not have an account with Oakley, they wanted to dictate exactly which stock I held, had to carry a certain stock value (laughable amount) and had to say "how high" when they said jump! Sorry, there are plenty other manufacturers out there who do not have their heads up their own .......

On the other hand, my friend is an account holder :wink: . Oakley tend to have retail prices that everyone has to follow (or you loose the account), so the chances are that the cost is reasonably accurate.

With rimless spectacles, evrybody thinks they should be quite cheap since its only three bits of metal, WRONG :? . First of all, the metal of the frames is usually titanium - expensive frame material. Secondly, as you can imagine, the lenses hold everything together. When the lab are manufacturing the lenses, they have to drill the lenses. This is quite risky 'cos one false move results in the lenses being scrapped. With this in mind, the labs charge a fortune to glaze rimless because they are represent a higher risk. Hence they are more expensive.

As for lenses, well that depends on your prescription. There are different grades of plastic that are used in spectacle lenses. Think back to your school days, physics to be exact. Remember refractive index? Every spectacle lens has a refractive index, the higher the index, the thinner the lenses are. Basic plastic lenses have an index of 1.49 and the thinnest plastic lens has a value of 1.74. Usually, the higher your prescription, the more worth while it is to go for the higher index materials. Bog standard plastic lenses are fine for the majority but the material is a bit brittle. Therefore it is usual for rimless spectacles to be dispensed with higher index materials (unfortunaltely more expensive) - since the higher index materials tend to flex when put under strain, a standard index lens does not flex much before it cracks.

The long and the short of it........ 
1) if you're gonna go for rimless, be prepared to splash the cash to get something that is going to last
2) shop around, you are entitled to take your prescription anywhere
3) ideally go to an optician to have spectacles made up, avoid the net - any problems and you've got someone to go to who is qualified to make adjustments for you
4) oakley are not the only ones who make that style of frame

Hope I haven't bored you :wink:

Hev x


----------



## genocidalduck

[smiley=zzz.gif] Huh erm No didnt bore me at all hun  :-*


----------



## jampott

Thanks Hev,

I looked at Oakley frames last time I bought glasses. I have Oakley Why 3 Lens 3 sunnies and love them. My current specs are rimless and are similar in style to the Oakley ones, but slightly plainer...

They've lasted very well, considering they are on all the time, and despite being "rimless" (with all the problems associated) they've been easily the best glasses I've ever had. But I'm starting to notice some tiny stress cracks around the screw holes, and they're just a bit tired etc, so I'm already thinking about changing them, even tho my prescription hasn't changed that wildly. I'm astigmatic, but not with a huge prescription, so I'm certain to be within the range...

The ones I saw in VE were labelled "OakOpt RX Soft 20447625" on the tag, and "Titanium 1" on the lens. Presumably these are Oakley RX, perhaps Soft Thread (?) and Lens style "1".

I just love the way Oakley glasses fit. I don't like behind the ear styles, and if I'm changing, and Â£340 *is* the cheapest price, I'll probably raid my piggy bank and buy them... but I had hoped to be able to shave something off that price...


----------



## silkman

OK Hev, another one for you.

In one of my visits to an optician (though a long time ago), I saw a pair of designer sunglasses priced at xxx.

It so happened that the exact same frame was at the next shelf for spectacles. The specs frame was more expensive (I think about 20%-25% more) than the sunglasses. 

Before you say it, I did check, and it was exactly the same frame (same numbers on the frame arm)

Why is that? Is it another great rip-off?


----------



## saint

Hev,

I need an eye test [smiley=dizzy2.gif] sitting here and staring at monitors allday is making me go 8) .


----------



## Hev

*Jampott*
Leave it with me, I'll see what I can find out about your specs (re costings etc).

*Silkman*
Ah well, hmmmm. I can only speak from personal experience of course..... 
As you have probably noticed, many opticians run special offers for free or reduced cost designer prescription sunnies. It is usually the multiples who offer this promotion since they buy in bulk and can afford to sell volume at a lower price. The independant cannot compete with this mentality. Many of the big manufacturers realise that the success of their product relies largely with independant opticians and therefore find ways to help the independant.

One way to do this, is to set up special promotions with limited choice of frames alongside a lab. In this instance, the lab agree to glaze the frame as sunnies at a reduced cost. Result: 1. supplier happy 'cos increased sales of their product (high volume/low price), 2. lab happy 'cos they are getting a guaranteed income from glazing, 3. optician happy 'cos they can now compete with the multiples with regard to designer sunspec promotions, 4. patient happy 'cos they get designer sunnies at a fab price! I have a very LARGE account with a supplier who produces a very large proportion of designer names and this is certainly the set up. BUT, I am supplied with the normal frame direct from the supplier at full cost :? , hence the higher price normally.

However, I cheat to get the best deal for my patients (shhhhhhh). If a frame is in the sunnies promotion, I will order the specs direct from the lab and ask them to not to put the tint on, hence supplied at the cheaper cost - and before someone points out a profit opportunity, I charge the patient the smaller price. Everybody happy, I've sold a pair of spex, patient happy 'cos they get designer spex at fab price  . Unfortunately not everybody is as honest as me! I want the best deal for my patients, I'd rather someone came back after 2 years 'cos they were happy this time (alternative, go elsewhere - not good for my mortgage :? ).

*Saint*
Told you before, Dunfermline is not THAT far away!!! :wink:

Hev x


----------



## QuackingPlums

Hi Hev!

Mind if I pick your opthalmic knowledge? :lol:

I have a pair of Oakley glasses - normal looking ones, not anything like their usual shades ranges, but I was looking in Vision Express in Canary Wharf at the weekend to get myself a new pair of glasses with photochromic lenses but was told that my prescription makes them really difficult to make! Is this rubbish? I had my eye on a pair of Bugatti rimless or IC! Berlin tintanium frames, however I was told that the photochromic lenses in my prescription would just shatter every time I put them on... naturally I was dubious about this but I couldn't see why they didn't want my money? :?

I already have a ridiculous pair of Oakleys with the mirror lenses that I wear with my contacts, but sometimes I just want shades without looking like I've just come off a beach, and without the hassle of putting in my contacts.


----------



## Hev

QuackingPlums said:


> Hi Hev!
> 
> Mind if I pick your opthalmic knowledge? :lol:
> 
> I have a pair of Oakley glasses - normal looking ones, not anything like their usual shades ranges, but I was looking in Vision Express in Canary Wharf at the weekend to get myself a new pair of glasses with photochromic lenses but was told that my prescription makes them really difficult to make! Is this rubbish? I had my eye on a pair of Bugatti rimless or IC! Berlin tintanium frames, however *I was told that the photochromic lenses in my prescription would just shatter every time I put them on*... naturally I was dubious about this but I couldn't see why they didn't want my money? :?
> 
> I already have a ridiculous pair of Oakleys with the mirror lenses that I wear with my contacts, but sometimes I just want shades without looking like I've just come off a beach, and without the hassle of putting in my contacts.


hmmm, not sure about this shatter business, sounds like someone doesn't know their frame materials! Can you get me a note of your prescription? Everytime you get your eyes tested, you should be issued with a prescription. Transition lenses are manufactured in materials suitable for rimless so I think they may be talking cack on the shatter front - although once I know your prescription I will be able to pass judgement better.

As for transitions, what do you want them for? If you want them for out in the street then fine, they will change from light to dark and vice versa BUT, if you want them for driving, forget it. They are rotten in the car. UV from the sun causes the lens to change from light to dark but your windscreen cuts out the majority of the aforementioned UV - result, not very dark lenses on a very bright day. There is enough UV coming through the windscreen to keep the lenses changed so if you got into the car on a bright sunny day, they would be dark and stay that way. For driving, stay with normal sunnies. I know it ends up more expensive, but its worth the extra cash. Oh, by the way, transitions work better in colder climates ie this country (ok Scotland!), Scandanavia etc. In warmer climates they do not go very dark and they are also slow to change - no good if ya go on holiday to somewhere tropical :? .

Hev x


----------



## QuackingPlums

I think he mean my lenses would be brittle, rather than the frames. I guess, reading from above, he was referring to having to drill thru the lenses for the rimless ones, but surely if they manage to drill thru without breaking, then they should be fine? Even with the super-thin IC! Berlin frames, I've been told my prescription is too extreme - not sure what he meant by that.

Anyway, here it is:

Right:
2.25 Sph, 2.5 Cyl, 10 Ax

Left:
2.0 Sph, 2.0 Cyl, 160 Ax

I have a "BC" value too for my contacts, tho I don't think that's needed for glasses?

Many thanks for your advice!


----------



## Hev

QuackingPlums said:


> I think he mean my lenses would be brittle, rather than the frames. I guess, reading from above, he was referring to having to drill thru the lenses for the rimless ones, but surely if they manage to drill thru without breaking, then they should be fine? Even with the super-thin IC! Berlin frames, I've been told my prescription is too extreme - not sure what he meant by that.
> 
> Anyway, here it is:
> 
> Right:
> 2.25 Sph, 2.5 Cyl, 10 Ax
> 
> Left:
> 2.0 Sph, 2.0 Cyl, 160 Ax
> 
> I have a "BC" value too for my contacts, tho I don't think that's needed for glasses?
> 
> Many thanks for your advice!


Do the numbers have positive or negative signs beside them? Even still, your prescription is straightforward. No reason why you cannot have the rimless. If you go for clear (not transition) lenses, you would get a fantastic job with either 1.6 or 1.67 plastic. The higher index makes the plastic more flexible (see earlier post in this thread) but also the higher index will result in your lenses being thinner. It is not the manufacturer of rimless frame that would cause the lens to shatter but the lens material itself. Normal plastic lenses (1.49) would be ok, but they could crack relatively easily and would be quite thick. If you really want transitions, some manufactures will do a 1.6 and 1.67 materials so it wold still be ok. Transitions is not a tint that is appplied to a lens, it is a compound integrated into the lens material itself. Thereofre, you cannot add transitions to a lens at a later date.

Rimless spectacles that are not dedicated sunnies can look odd with transitions. The idea of rimless is to make it look as if you are not wearing anything, but to have two coloured lenses floating in front of your eyes, hmmm not my cup of tea (also they look darker in photographs - don't wear in wedding photos). My advice, rimless frame (Silhouette's are fantastic - lightweight, no screws, v. comfortable), 1.67 asheric lenses (thin and flat, good vision), multi anti-reflection coating (cuts down glare from car headlights, overhead lights, people look at your eyes and not the reflection of the lights in the lenses - only drawback, you tend to have to clean them more often, use microfibre cloth (tee hee, I use the same microfibre cloth from work for cleaning lenses on my car when I polish).

Hev x


----------



## QuackingPlums

Many thanks Hev! You've been a great help!

I think I'll go for the IC! Berlin ones then - they're super-thin foil-like titanium, screwless (just some clever clip mechanism on the hinge) and incredibly light. 1.67 Transitions lenses sound the best bet.
I used to have some Silhouettes so I fancy something different.

I already have some glass-lensed skull-grip Oakleys for "normal" wear, and the new ones are just for days when the sun decides to come out for a few hours, but not enough to justify the effort of contacts + full shades. Definitely won't be for driving.

My prescription is -ve for contacts but +ve for glasses - I'm short-sighted, so does that sound right or have they missed a +/- somewhere?


----------



## Hev

QuackingPlums said:


> Many thanks Hev! You've been a great help!
> 
> I think I'll go for the IC! Berlin ones then - they're super-thin foil-like titanium, screwless (just some clever clip mechanism on the hinge) and incredibly light. 1.67 Transitions lenses sound the best bet.
> I used to have some Silhouettes so I fancy something different.
> 
> I already have some glass-lensed skull-grip Oakleys for "normal" wear, and the new ones are just for days when the sun decides to come out for a few hours, but not enough to justify the effort of contacts + full shades. Definitely won't be for driving.
> 
> My prescription is -ve for contacts but +ve for glasses - I'm short-sighted, so does that sound right or have they missed a +/- somewhere?


Glad I could help - I'll send my fee directly will I? 8)

Sounds as if you have missed a - somewhere, don't worry about it though. Usually I write my +/- above the numbers. If you go back to VE, it will be interesting to see what they say. Most multiples are only allowed to order from certain manufacturers, if they tell you that it is not possible to get the 1.67 transitions, go elsewhere. If you can't find the frame anywhere else, buy it as a frame only and take it to another optician. Seiko make a very good 1.67 transition (just to name one supplier). These lenses come automatically with an anti-reflection coating and a 2 year manufacturing fault guarantee.

Hev x


----------



## Toshiba

jampott said:


> Ta guys...
> 
> I know someone else on here is, and they were going to quote me (ages ago!) for some prescription Oakley sunnies. Ended up getting those from the USA in the end, as the currency makes them so much cheaper. For sunglasses this is cool, but I'd want to be sure I was dealing with a proper optical specialist for prescription lenses, and would need to be able to send them back if there was a problem, so unless the price difference was immense (enough to take a punt on it) I'd prefer to buy from the UK in this instance - but VE wanted Â£195 for the frames alone, and something like Â£141 for lenses...


I got some of these about 6weeks ago. Think it was Â£205 for the frames (bottom part is frameless in kinda a dark gold colour) and the lenses cost Â£141. V.Express had an offer on - if you purchased a pair of glass you got upto Â£150 off the frames on a second pair. (still ended up costing over Â£500 for both pairs). They are good though.


----------



## garvin

Having been visually challenged (OK, so without my spex on I qualify for a white stick and a dog) for most of my life I have read this thread with great interest.

I used to wear photochromic lenses up until the amount of material required for my lenses made the spex too heavy. I then changed to high refractive index plastic lenses (when they first came out and were extrortionately expensive) which initially did not come in a photochromic variety and which I have had ever since.

In reading this thread am I right in thinking that 'transision' lenses can now be had in the high refractive index plastic? I'd really like to get a pair ............... perhaps even with Oakley frames and, thankfully, the price of the high refractive index plastic has reduced significantly over the years


----------



## QuackingPlums

I normally get glass lenses as the plastic ones tend to be a bit thick round the edges with my prescription (tho Hev now says I'm not that extreme, so I've no idea why it always takes 6weeks for my lenses to get delivered no matter where I go :? ) - but the new frames I just got with Transitions 1.67 cost about the same as my Oakleys with thin glass - the Ic! Berlin frames were fractionally cheaper than the Oakleys, which were over Â£200. Dunno if that answers your question...


----------



## Hev

garvin said:


> In reading this thread am I right in thinking that 'transision' lenses can now be had in the high refractive index plastic? I'd really like to get a pair ............... perhaps even with Oakley frames and, thankfully, the price of the high refractive index plastic has reduced significantly over the years


yup, you can get transitions in 1.67 plastic 

Hev x


----------



## Hev

QuackingPlums said:


> I normally get glass lenses as the plastic ones tend to be a bit thick round the edges with my prescription (tho Hev now says I'm not that extreme,


all depends on the size of your frame. The bigger the frame you have, the thicker the lenses end up being. Also, with rimless the thickness of the lenses tends to be more obvious since the lens edge is exposed.



QuackingPlums said:


> so I've no idea why it always takes 6weeks for my lenses to get delivered no matter where I go :? )


most of the premuin lenses come from either Japan or Germany, hence the delay (manufacture, coating, customs etc)- I usually quote around 4-5 weeks 

Hev x


----------



## garvin

Hev said:


> garvin said:
> 
> 
> 
> In reading this thread am I right in thinking that 'transision' lenses can now be had in the high refractive index plastic? I'd really like to get a pair ............... perhaps even with Oakley frames and, thankfully, the price of the high refractive index plastic has reduced significantly over the years
> 
> 
> 
> yup, you can get transitions in 1.67 plastic
> 
> Hev x
Click to expand...

Great, thanks for that Hev. So there's good news and bad news ........

The good news is I can go back to photochromic, err, sorry, transition lenses [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

The bad news is ................. now where's my piggy bank :wink:


----------



## jampott

In case anyone cares, I found out the frames I liked.

Oakley Soft Spike in Pewter with Lens 1.

Not entirely dissimilar to my current unbranded specs, but a lighter feel and snugger fit combined with (I hope, for the money!) better quality lenses!

VE still quoting Â£195 for the frame, Â£141 for the lenses.

I'm guessing (from looking at the web) the retail for these frames is nearer Â£150 online, with the same price for lenses. I'd be reasonably happy to pay that


----------

