Check Out Our Shop
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: high quality Goggles ??

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    what
    Posts
    198

    high quality Goggles ??

    Skiing in low vis sucks, but it can suck even more with shitty goggles. I've always bought the cheapo econo goggles, and they work, but they usually fog, and always get scratched. So are the higher end goggles really worth it? do polorized goggles or any other fancy optic crap really make a huge differnce in visibility and depth perception on a flat light day?

    thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Conway, NH and Bristol, RI
    Posts
    117
    Oakley High Intensity Lenses or Smith Sensor Mirror Lens. The smiths are a much nicer lens with a better warranty in my opinion.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,953
    I ride with Quiksilver Q1s most of the time, rose something lens - never used the mirrors that came with. These were absurdly cheap, had a nice wooden finish (go great with my purple helmet, for realz), and fucking rock. No fog, comfy, med-large fit, and pretty nice lenses. Other than that, I have no problem recommending Smith Phenoms if your face is on the smaller side of medium.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    the edge of wuss cliff
    Posts
    17,076
    I tried that Smith sensor lens and didn't really notice any difference. On low-vis storm days I just use a combination of my regular dark Smiths and The Force. Aren't polarized lenses more for cutting sun glare? That's what it's used for in fishin' glasses.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    113
    oakley pink iridium is great in low light

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Jer View Post
    I tried that Smith sensor lens and didn't really notice any difference. On low-vis storm days I just use a combination of my regular dark Smiths and The Force. Aren't polarized lenses more for cutting sun glare? That's what it's used for in fishin' glasses.
    Polarized lenses help intensify contrasting shapes. I like polarized lenses, but they are usually too expensive to become an option, sadly.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    A Chamonix of the Mind
    Posts
    3,656
    Zeal Detonators. Worth the $$$$, fo sho. I was a cheap goggle guy for many years but only saw (no pun intended) the error of my ways a few years ago.

    Quality lenses make a huge difference. I still ski like shit but now I can see where I am going all the time.
    "Buy the Fucking Plane Tickets!"
    -- Jack Tackle

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SkiTalk.com
    Posts
    3,375
    Smith I/O...2 lenses inc. Sensor lens is the best low/flat light lens I ever use.
    Click. Point. Chute.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central VT
    Posts
    4,840
    my smith phenoms also never fog - the only goggle i've ever owned that doesnt fog

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,052
    Just watch tramdock or whiskeymilitia for some awesome deals on Oakleys. I just picked up some Wisdoms for my wife for $38!!!!! They're like $150 retail. They do make a huge difference. I have a pair for low light, and a pair for bright days.
    All I want is to be hardcore.

    www.tonystreks.com

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    take a guess
    Posts
    2,217
    another vote for smith sensor mirror lenses. excellent vision in flat light and snowy conditions.
    Magic Mountain Freeride Team...bringing your grom's game to the next level.

    The only ski you'll ever need...http://worthskis.com/skis/the-magic/

    "Errare Humanum Est"

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    miles from 11
    Posts
    118
    i would go with the smith over oakley but just my opinion because of the durability of the lenses and the depth perception

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    das heights
    Posts
    2,542
    Oakley HI blue/yellow or Ruby Clear.

    Smith is inferior overall, lenses and foam.

    Thread over.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    G-Spot
    Posts
    1,412
    Quote Originally Posted by pointedem View Post
    Oakley HI blue/yellow or Ruby Clear.

    Smith is inferior overall, lenses and foam.

    Thread over.


    2nd. The only big thing Smith has on Oakley is their attitude. I would rather talk to someone at Smith than Oakley any day about warranty issues etc. And price, but then, you get what you pay for.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eastside Til I Die
    Posts
    2,236
    Oakley HI Yellow kills it in storms.
    ((. The joy I get from skiing...
    .))
    ((. That's worth living for.
    .))

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    sfbay
    Posts
    2,179
    zeal PPX kill it!
    very much worth the $$ if you can afford it.

  17. #17
    Hugh Conway Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by pointedem View Post
    Smith is inferior overall, lenses and foam.
    The only thing you "get" when you pay more for Oakley product is a bunch of bullshit marketing. Smith > Oakley.

    Quote Originally Posted by arild View Post
    Polarized lenses help intensify contrasting shapes.
    that makes no sense

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    das heights
    Posts
    2,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Conway View Post
    The only thing you "get" when you pay more for Oakley product is a bunch of bullshit marketing. Smith > Oakley.

    Wrong. Google Oakley ballistics test.

    There is a reason US troops use Oakley eyewear.

  19. #19
    Hugh Conway Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by pointedem View Post
    Wrong. Google Oakley ballistics test.
    translation if you don't have Oakley balls bouncing on your chin = ANSI impact resistance.
    Quote Originally Posted by smithoptics.com
    What ANSI rating do Smith goggles have?
    Smith goggles exceed the ANSI Z87.1 standard.
    Again, back to pointedem swallowing marketing sperm like a good SLC resident, again.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,787
    To answer the OP, yes, it is worth it to spend a little more $$ on goggles. My Smiths are frustration free and help me see better than cheapo goggles. Oakleys are nice too. The pissing match between the two is pretty subjective.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Conway View Post
    that makes no sense
    Polarized lenses tend to increase contrast. What doesn't make sense?

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    170
    I have owned both smith and oakley's top end goggles. Both lenses are great. I prefer Smith's b/c of the foam. Oakley's tend to not hold its place after awhile and its more of a cloth material rather than a foam. I have smith's new i/o on order. Bring your helmet to a store and try the different models on and see what feels best.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    33,781
    Quote Originally Posted by crispy4505 View Post
    Bring your helmet to a store and try the different models on and see what feels best.

    probably the best info of the whole thread

    am I the only person jaded enough to think that PROBABLY the US gov bought oakley for the troops becausse someone got a kickback ?

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    8,429
    At least as important as the lens tint, IMO, is whether the lens is spherical or cylindrical. Most cheap goggles have cylindrical lenses, which distort your vision slightly. In good light it doesn't matter much, but in flat light that little bit of distortion becomes a much bigger problem. Spherical lenses don't distort and are worth the $$.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,710
    After a couple dozen days with them, I have to say that I love my Scott Alibis.



    I have historically had major fog problems with a variety of other googles (Smith cheepos, Electric, Oakley A-Frames), but the Alibis don't really fog at all. I don't know anything about optics, but the lens quality seems quite nice. They also seem to fit well with my Giro MX10 helmet.

    Also, I've seen these goggles come up on Tramdock for $40 a few times recently. Great price for great goggles.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    7,530

    One vote for photochromatic Bolle

    Used to ski with high end Oakley high intensity (2-3 seasons). Great in low vis, pow/fog days. But any sun and my eyes were hurtin. had to have two pairs and change out, pain in the XXX

    Last season switched to Bolle photochromatic. Durable lenses, great in low light and if sun comes out does not matter. Had great luck for two seasons. PM me and I can give you a code/link to get a pair for like around $50.

    Goin for my 100th post
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    8, 17, 13, 18, 16, 18, 20, 19, 16, 24, 32, 35

    2021/2022 (13/15)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •