Jump to content

Looking for new fishing sunglasses...opinions


Mossyoakglock

Recommended Posts

Posted

I am looking to pick up another pair of Oakley's to use for fishing (and occasionally everyday wear). I mainly fish freshwater lakes at a depth of 20ft max. Water clarity differs but I would say it is mostly stained but can sometimes be moderately clear. I am looking for a lens that can be used in a variety of conditions (full sun, overcast, etc). Looking for something that can be good for sight fishing and being able to "see" in the water and identify structure, etc.

 

The only two lens options that are available in the frames I'm looking at is the Gold Iridium Polarized and Bronze Polarized. Of the two, which do you think would suit me best and be good in a variety of conditions. Unfortunately the fishing specific lenses that Oakley has are not available in the frames I'm looking at.

 

I've looked at Costa but don't really like they way they fit and I have always been an Oakley guy.

 

I will also fish saltwater/inshore down in Panama City occasionally so something that works well down there would be a plus.

Posted

My main issue with Oakley is that their lenses tend to be SUPER sensitive to scratching. I've taken to wearing $20 knock-offs from one of the box retailers and throwing them away after two years. It's a whole lot cheaper than $250 Oakleys with $65 replacement lenses every year.

 

I have a set of glasses that I bought about ten years ago direct from Oakley with their supposed fitted case. I had an extra set of lenses in the case with the glasses, and the case did not hold the lenses in place (foam on the bottom, but nothing on the top). The lenses came loose, knocked around in the case, and got all scratched up. Oakley admitted the case was a suboptimal design but wouldn't replace the lenses. "So sad, too bad."

Posted

Revant is a company that makes replacement lenses for Oakley's, and I have had good experiences with them.

 

I'll look into them, but typically all of the non-knock offs are made my Luxottica. They literally have a monopoly on the sunglass world as they make every single name brand out there.

Posted

 

I'll look into them, but typically all of the non-knock offs are made my Luxottica. They literally have a monopoly on the sunglass world as they make every single name brand out there.

Its not a knock off, its just a replacement lens pair. They claim since they can't uses oakley's patented process, they developed their own which is close enough that you cant tell.....or something like that...

 

https://www.revantoptics.com

 

You can find quite a few reviews around the net, well regarded.(uses to be called Visionary Lenses)

Posted

Revant is a company that makes replacement lenses for Oakley's, and I have had good experiences with them.

I actually ordered a few sets of lenses to swap out with my Oakley lenses for training purposes at work. Our sunglasses sometimes take a beating so I figured I would give them a try. They were terrible IMO. Lense clarity was horrible, the fit was horrible, and the lenses were spotty.

Tried them with Oakley Flak Jackets, Half Jacket 2.0, and a set of XL lenses for each. Only one set was acceptable, don't waste your money. Better off picking up a cheap pair of glasses at a chain store.

 

 

Sent from my crappy iPhone 6

using Tapatalk

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 2,096 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...