I am well award of the UV properties of polycarbonate. The assumption that you are making here, and perhaps missing a fundamental point, is that not all transparent lenses are made from polycarbonate.

Except that in all the examples we’ve seen, they are, and in the examples tested they are, and that nobody has yet given an example of cheap/fake/knockoff glasses that have offered anything less than acceptable UV protection, not to mention a lot of the cheap glasses sold under reputable brands 😉 will have originated from the same factories, like I said, worry yourself over other things as much as you want, but not UV as that’s pretty much been debunked.

Or do you think there are Chinese factories pushing out thousands upon thousands of mass produced dangerous lenses not made form polycarbonate and hoping to find a market for them?

It simply would not be in their interests as they wouldn’t be able to sell them domestically let alone OEM to overseas and would be the end of their business pretty quickly to the competition that were making polycarb lenses.

We can all make up our own minds on things given the evidence available to us and the legitimacy we give that evidence based on context and source and our ability to review and corroborate it.

You do seem to be very quick to dismiss ‘any old crap on the internet’ yet want us very much to agree with you.

You raise questions about the quality of a product, others offer information and example of a 1st hand test by a member fo this very community, yet still you dismiss it and pull the ‘I’m a scientist’ and ‘think of the children’ cards.

My job is science, I work at the highest levels.

whoopee for you, does that mean you work at altitude? or that you’re just very specialised in your field? is your field and experience relevant?

For all we know you are the foremost in the field of anti-fungal toothbrush treatments and in optimising bristle geometry!

FWIW I have a masters degree in Physics, I could bore you to tears all day about the magnetic properties of nano-scale patterned-media, but doesn’t mean sh1t all on this though as its entirely irrelevant to the discussion as this has very little to do with science, its about economics more than anything!

I guess you perform your own UV tests on every pair of glasses before making a purchase then? or do you trust in the manufacturers honesty and published specs (hehe , see what I did there)?

The over-riding theme from most of your posts is that you simply do not trust Chinese goods and that no amount of evidence or shared experiences will sway you.

which is fine, you are entitled to that opinion, but many on here would seem to disagree.

China != bad
Copy != bad

Some things will be poor quality, but not because they are copies, and not because they come from China, they will be poor because they are poor.

Anyway, since when has UV been such a problem? Before Raymond Ban invented the tinted monocle, did our ancestors die of horrific eyeball sunburn? I’ve looked at lots of paintings of old dead people, and I’ve never seen one with unsightly tan lines or pealing skin on their eyeballs…

Surely, wearing sunnies that don’t offer UV protection would be no worse than wearing no sunglasses at all? And I only wear sunglasses to keep bugs and crap out of my eyes and to look cool… 8)

So I couldn’t care less how much UV protection they offer, that’s not why I wear them…

Surely, wearing sunnies that don’t offer UV protection would be no worse than wearing no sunglasses at all?

er… not really no, wearing tinted sunnies with no UV protection would be bad as the tint would cause your pupil to allow more light in, more harmful UV light.

your pupil contracts in bright visible light to protect your eye, duping it with a tint into opening wider to allow more light in is a bad thing.

Clear glasses is another matter, obviously we mainly wear them for protection from debris and often in low light conditions, but they’re not tinted to the point where they trick your pupils into dilating.

Surely, wearing sunnies that don’t offer UV protection would be no worse than wearing no sunglasses at all?

oh dear

This is nonsense. A jawbone lens is no more curved, or held any more securely than in thousands of other designs of eyewear!

That’s your opinion. What about the other points which you have conveniently ignored?

Surely, wearing sunnies that don’t offer UV protection would be no worse than wearing no sunglasses at all?

I was rooting for you, Rocky-style, all the way, through all 9 pages, until this…. so close…. 😉

Sorry guys, every day’s a school day. Thank you for putting me straight on that. Thank God I got the genuine DX fake Oakley Dokleys! 8)

That’s your opinion.

It’s not. I’ve actually been in a proper sunglasses shop, and I’ve seen with my own eyes – albeit UV damaged eyes – row upon row of glasses, all with curved lenses!!

Where are ‘real’ Oakleys made?

They’re hand assembled by retired astronauts and Vietnam veterans in the United States of America…

It’s not. I’ve actually been in a proper sunglasses shop, and I’ve seen with my own eyes – albeit UV damaged eyes – row upon row of glasses, all with curved lenses!!

And you know for a fact that they all have interchangeable lenses, all with no/minimal distortion, held as securely as the Oakleys? Once again, just because something LOOKS the same at first glance, doesn’t mean it IS the same. Like the mistake you made with what you thought was a “replica” iMac. Also why not answer the other points I raised about your attitude to counterfeit goods/IP, etc?

er… not really no, wearing tinted sunnies with no UV protection would be bad as the tint would cause your pupil to allow more light in, more harmful UV light.

your pupil contracts in bright visible light to protect your eye, duping it with a tint into opening wider to allow more light in is a bad thing.

I’ve heard people say this – is there actually any evidence?

what, evidence that if you put something tinted that blocks the visible spectrum in front of your eye it will cause your pupil to dilate to compensate?

do you need any more evidence than looking in the mirror for that?

or did you mean specifically about the damage UV can cause to the eye with prolonged or high intensity exposure?

I’d like some evidence that wearing tinted glasses that aren’t UV protective causes damage – do you have some?

It says it here but without evidence, and it’s a website selling glasses

http://www.glasses4less.net/acatalog/Sunglasses_and_Tints.html#.UZ9rNpWHqCg%5B/quote%5D

Doesn’t mention it here – http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/uv-protection/AN00832 – it just says having UV protection is important.

Not really an issue for me as my DX Fakelys offer excellent UV protection. 🙂

And you know for a fact that they all have interchangeable lenses, all with no/minimal distortion, held as securely as the Oakleys?

I once got banned for telling someone that I thought they were a bit of an implement. So I’ll keep my thoughts to myself… 🙄

What, pray tell, are theses vital points you’re so desperate for me to clarify?

Don’t worry fella, it’s clearly too much for you 🙄

Buying fake kit is theft. No different to buying a stolen bike off some scroat.

Oh god not that old chestnut. 🙄

And what does it say about you that you wear fake Oakleys? You care more about what people think you can afford to buy than you do about the actual quality? Peasantry of the highest order.

Don’t worry fella, it’s clearly too much for you

Well, you clearly think you’ve somehow managed to win some self-perceived victory over my opinions with your rigorous cross examination, but I’m not really sure what you’ve been asking!

I’d be happy to clarify, if you’ll tell me what…

And what does it say about you that you wear fake Oakleys? You care more about what people think you can afford to buy than you do about the actual quality? Peasantry of the highest order.

😆

I bought them because everyone on here said they were pretty good sunglasses for not very much money – they were right. I really don’t care what people think – I only wear them for biking when I look far from cool anyway. TBH the glasses make me look like a total bellend but they work pretty well – certainly very good quality for the money.

It’s not a lost sale for Oakley as I would never dream of spending that much cash on sunglasses. If that’s ‘peasantry’ then so be it. It’s nothing like the same as buying a stolen bike though, however many times people say it.

I got my real Oakleys for nothing during the ‘have some free sunglasses ‘cos we’ve completely ballsed up our online ordering system and can’t sort it out’ fiasco a couple of years back.

So anyone who actually bought their DX’s is actually costing Oakley less than I did.

The last thing I worry about when riding is UV exposure to my eyes- do you worry about it while walking to the shops? It’s more of an issue boating, or climbing/snowsports, with the constant exposure and reflections etc but I can’t remember the last time I did a bike ride with a decent amount of UV exposure!

Oh- FWIW, I don’t own any fake oakleys because I’d never be seen in anything that looks like Oakleys, they’re horrendous. But I’d be happy to wear a less fugly pair of sunglasses made by the same people to the same standard. It’s just the Oakleyness that’s bringing them down.

Is that what he’s harping on about??? Jeebus. I’ve repeated this so many times that I’m getting really bored – he really should read the thread.

For a final time:

I have a real pair of Oakley Jawbones – I like the shape and they complement my handsome poker face making me look like a very stylish pro. ( 😉 ) However, I would only wear them for road biking, because I’m such a peasant and I don’t want them to get scratched on grit and tree branches, or left on the roof of my car after cold, wet night rides as I have done with countless pairs of Bolle safety glasses.

It’s similar to the bike, about which I was speaking when I started this thread. I’m such a peasant that, having spent six-and-a-half-thousand-pounds on a Cervelo R5 with the latest Dura Ace groupset, I’d rather not use it in the crash-frenzies that are Criterium Racing.

So I scratched around and found an old Ultegra groupset and wheels and built up a cheap and nasty – some might say peasant-like – Giant TCR carbon frame… But it’s a bit too small, so, being a peasant, I just thought I’d drop a measly 400 quid on a new frame. 🙄

Right, I’m off to eat some gruel.

It’s nothing like the same as buying a stolen bike though, however many times people say it.

Actually there’s a little thing called The Law which says it is.

Do you wear a fake Rolex and drive an old BMW with fake M3 badge? Classy that is.

What on earth is the relevance of that photo???

Actually there’s a little thing called The Law which says it is.

Funny that, I’m pretty sure that the act of buying fakes isn’t against the law. CAB is a bit wooly about “committing a crime if you buy fake goods abroad”, but I think that refers to the local law not UK. Selling fakes is illegal, but buying a frame from China for your own use isn’t AFAIK. Whereas steeling definately is.

Do you wear a fake Rolex and drive an old BMW with fake M3 badge? Classy that is.

The seats in my C-max 1.6 say ‘RS’ on the stiching. Not sure if this will harm any children or baby robins though.

Actually there’s a little thing called The Law which says it is.

The law says that buying ‘Okley’ sunglasses is exactly the same as buying a stolen bike? Can you point me to the specific law that says that please?

Do you wear a fake Rolex and drive an old BMW with fake M3 badge?

Nope. The Fakelys are the only copy item I own. So again, am I a valued customer of all the dozens (hundreds?) of genuine products I own, or am I a scummy, immoral, thieving toe rag for buying a cheap replica of some ludicrously expensive sunglasses that I would never dream of buying, that make me look like a tit? 🙂

amedias – Member
The over-riding theme from most of your posts is that you simply do not trust Chinese goods and that no amount of evidence or shared experiences will sway you.

Ooooh dear another one who cant read. 😯 Not at all is this the theme of my posts. if you too the time to read, and more importantly understand the words, you would see that the distrust is of counterfeit goods. If I would distrust all Chinese goods, i would have a pretty hard time buying anything eh? Einstein?

let me guess errmmmm london metropolitan university?

I’d like some evidence that wearing tinted glasses that aren’t UV protective causes damage – do you have some?

not easily to hand no.

If I have time later I might go digging to see if I can find some, I’ve read about some studies, cannot for the life of me remember where or when, and the logic of UV being cumulatively bad for skin and eyes (well documented and established) and the fact that when using tints pupils dilate to compensate suggests it is a legit concern but you’ve sown the seed of doubt now so I should do the proper thing and go investigate!

I’m enjoying this thread, I do love a good scrap/debate and there’s some quite strong opinions from both sides on a multitude of intertwined topics, good fun 🙂

If I have time later I might go digging to see if I can find some, I’ve read about some studies, cannot for the life of me remember where or when, and the logic of UV being cumulatively bad for skin and eyes (well documented and established) and the fact that when using tints pupils dilate to compensate suggests it is a legit concern but you’ve sown the seed of doubt now so I should do the proper thing and go investigate!

I’m not saying it’s not true, it makes logical sense I suppose – it’s just that I’ve only ever seen it written either on sites trying to sell you (expensive) sunglasses, or from what sounds like people repeating what they’ve heard on those sites. I’ve never seen a link to an actual study.

The cynic in me thinks that it’s probably not as much of a big deal as it’s often made out to be.

Ooooh dear another one who cant read. Not at all is this the theme of my posts. if you too the time to read, and more importantly understand the words, you would see that the distrust is of counterfeit goods. If I would distrust all Chinese goods, i would have a pretty hard time buying anything eh? Einstein?

Sorry If I misunderstood, you know how it is on t’internet, but that was the impression I was getting, now whether that’s a result of poor comprehension on my part or poor explanation on your part is open for debate 😉

I think I should also stress that I think there is a difference between ‘counterfeit’ and ‘copy’, maybe not legally, but one implies intent to deceive, where as the other merely to replicate.

Counterfeit to me suggests that the intention is to pass the object off as something it is not, to deceive, for financial gain at the expense of the purchaser and carries with it all the other concerns of questionable practices that somebody doing that would be involved in.

Copy suggests an attempt to replicate another design due to the positive aspects of the original design, and does not imply that the copy will necessarily be of inferior quality, or that the intention is to deceive.

let me guess errmmmm london metropolitan university?

not even close, and why bother trying to speculate like that, it was you that started the ‘My science stick is bigger…’ tangent, nobody else cares and it’s not relevant and detracts for the topic.

You could well be right grum, I’ve seen it mentioned on a BBC news snippet, and a couple of other sites not affiliated with the industry, but that doesn’t make it any more true!

Have the frames considered by the OP been tested and certified?

Here’s an article that says bike manufacturers pay $500 for a frame when buying in bulk…. So a frame retailing at £400 sounds too good to be true.

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/light-composite-bikes-made-in-china-slammed-by-uci-execs/011462

Have these frames been EU tested?
Is it legal to sell these frames in to Europe?
What if they fail whilst racing and you lose your teeth?

“He said Specialized had put the fake frames through its quality control protocols and they failed the fatigue and impact tests. In a couple of cases the aluminium head tube cups had debonded from the frame, which could have led to catastrophic steering failure while riding.

“It’s a matter of time before someone gets killed on one of these things,” he said. “You could count on the fingers of one hand the failures we had on carbon Tarmacs and recalled 12,000 bikes and gave people huge credits. The counterfeiters have no allegiance beyond getting past the sale moment, and that’s where it stops.””

Source… http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/fake-bike-kit-costing-industry-millions-a-year-37212/

You are also getting fake components turn up at the legit brands warranty office. Which suggests that people believe they are buying a legit brand product.

3 out of 5 failures in test?

I have a bit of an issue with fake anythings. My trade (electrical) is awash with fakes, whilst I can’t recall a death there certainly has been load of fires.
It amazes me the length the forgers go to to produce a looky likey and it’s packaging.
But the big problem is fakes getting into the main market. All’s well with a fake while it’s just sitting there, but come the day when you’re limbs/life depends on it, would you trust it?
Here’s a sample from my trade, inside of a circuit breaker.

This little baby just sits there keeping you safe, it looks passive but it isn’t.
Here’s a fake.

The modern equivalent of a 6″ nail between the terminals, when things go pear shaped your house is going to get very hot, but on the bright side you would have saved a few bob.
Don’t be part of this whole thing

wow…nine pages, might as well get my tuppence in.

There is no way on earth I would consider a ‘copy’ frame. As someone pointed out way back on page one if someone is happy to infinge the law then lets face it, they’re probably not to be trusted when it comes to rigourous testing of their product. Yes it might be safe, but do I want that lingering shred of doubt in the back of my mind at 40 miles an hour? I care far to much about my pretty face…

Don’t care in the slightest about the ‘morality’ of it if I’m honest. Yes I’m sure counterfeiting funds crime, harms genuine companies etc etc. But if I was to take a moral stance on everything I bought then I wouldn’t be able to buy much, least not from Apple, Amazon, Nike, Nestle, shell, Bp, RBS etc etc etc. Crooks the lot of them.

Back to sunnies, I bought some old stock oakleys, they were fake, wrong markings on the inside of the arm, and had failed a UV test at the local opticians.

The eBay tosser selling them insisted they were real and threatened me with legal action for pointing it out to him. So I would conclude people who deal in fakes are tossers, be it frames or sunnies.

An old girlfriend of mine went to Thailand for a while, and brought me back the best hat I’ve ever owned..

A cotton bucket hat, hand stitched, kinda beige and blue, but very natural, earthy tones..
Reversible, with the Nike logo on one side and Adidas the other..

I hope this goes some way to clearing up some of the issues raised in this thread..

I hope this goes some way to clearing up some of the issues raised in this thread..

How’s about “Cervelo” on one side and “Pinarello” on the other?

Back to those points made by Specialized. It’s nothing but PR drivel. Yes, they recalled thousands of Tarmacs, but what the hell were they doing letting so much dodgy product leave the factory?

I’d put my house on the fact that there was a “Ford Pinto-esque” meeting between company accountants, engineers and number crunchers before any recall was made!

And all these horror stories that their PR mill keeps churning out, where are all these people with broken teeth? Are Ribble, Planet X, Onix and all the other UK brands that sell generic “open mould” Chinese frames getting queues of gravel-rashed, toothless and irate customers bringing back frames with catastrophic failures?

No. And that one frame that consistently and regularly appears on forums due to catastrophic failures, is the Specialized Roubaix! I wouldn’t have one given!

Yunki… Do you mean a girlfriend who is old, or a previous girlfriend? Also how long was she there? Nice description of the hat though.