Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12
Results 276 to 285 of 285
  1. #276
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    have they ever had a coupon that worked just for the lenses? Seems silly to have to buy a whole new pair of goggles to get lenses. I have 2 pair of goggles already, I just need a lens or two!
    I've never seen a coupon for just the lenses. It does seem stupid. Had a night of skiing in heavy, warm rain this weekend and my clear OMs held up great with no fogging.

  2. #277
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    5,591
    These work great, used them for a full season now.

    Only difference noticeable to me is my Smith I/O are lighter but I also hate that plastic strap clip on the Smiths.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  3. #278
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    105
    Yeah, I've ended up with 3 frames just to get the lenses. Earlier in the thread I think someone was trying the Zionor lenses and I'm not sure it they worked in the OM frame.
    I'm sure part of the low price is lack of QC and consistency, so I'm not surprised some people have had some problems. But I've been happy with my $20 "lottery tickets". The only issues have been self inflicted (eg. Tree branch strikes). The only Vis issue I had was one time we were actually getting frost/ice on the goggles (my OM and my family's Smiths). I used my ski pole grip to scrape it off so I could see (my glove wasn't harsh enough). Surprisingly, when they thawed, my lenses were not really scratched (non-mirored green). I was pleasantly suprised.
    My 11 year old thought they were cool and I was gonna give him a pair, but they were definitely way too wide for his face.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  4. #279
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    82
    first time long time blah blah... Got three pairs when the last discount code was valid. Was curious about all the UV protection hoopla so did some home tests with UV flashlight and a $20 bill: two out of three blocked the UV completely but with one google the security strip on the twenty was faintly visible.. took that goggle to an optometrist; he measured UV protection on a machine: 100% UV protection!

    will buy more google for SO and gifts when the new code comes out

  5. #280
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,178
    It's shocking, but ANSI and CE standards for UV protection apply to even the cheapest of eyewear. Spend more time worrying about the cancer-causing chemicals in the foam. Then ask how much of the money you spend at Smith goes to cleaning out all the cancer-causing chemicals from the finest foam available in China. You'll be so entertained.

  6. #281
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Sandy, Utah
    Posts
    11,734
    Quote Originally Posted by jono View Post
    It's shocking, but ANSI and CE standards for UV protection apply to even the cheapest of eyewear. Spend more time worrying about the cancer-causing chemicals in the foam. Then ask how much of the money you spend at Smith goes to cleaning out all the cancer-causing chemicals from the finest foam available in China. You'll be so entertained.
    You done cancer screens of Smith and Chinese knockoffs? Or are you just working for a brand name gogg manufacturer and trying to hate on the newcomber who's eating your lunch? That booth the cheap gogg makers had at OR says they are here to stay. Time for the big boys to start charging real world prices.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using TGR Forums mobile app
    http://www.firsttracksonline.com

    I wish i could be like SkiFishBum

  7. #282
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,178
    You may need to adjust your sarcasm detector there, Skidog. You get a Chinese model? I hear they're improving but the old made in USA ones run on coffee, which is a lot easier to remember than batteries. Maybe check the local 2nd hand if yours isn't serviceable. Good luck!

  8. #283
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    917
    Another negative thing I've noticed with these goggles versus my Smith's I/OX's and Optic Nerve googles. The frame sticks out further from your face, especially underneath your eyes. So they definitely reduce your peripheral vision where you need it the most (right out in front of you)
    TLDR; Ski faster. Quit breathing. Don't crash.

  9. #284
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    PRB
    Posts
    22,429
    I wish I had a reason to put on my goggles now.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin

  10. #285
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    the most beautiful place in the whole wide world
    Posts
    1,579
    just posting to report that my two sons and I are all a) able to see fine now b)have no cancerous legions on our faces and c)were able to see fine while skiing with the OM goggles for a season. YMMV but spending ~75$ for three apparently high quality goggles seems like a good way to go. If you enjoy setting fire to multiple $100 bills for Oakley, Anon whatever good on you.

Posting Permissions

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