Since I had my concussion I did something with my Oakley's and not they are not large enough and don't block the wind from getting in my eyes and making them water,

I still have one set of Contour sunglasses left and they work well but the lenses are getting pretty scratched and apparently Contour has gone out of business. I have managed to get a lot of cheap Chinese sunglasses but none of them fit my head properly to protect my eyes from the wind or else they are far too dark to ride in the sun to shadows around here.

I just bought a set of Bolle' so I will have to see how they work, I had a set of very large Chinese sunglasses that worked well for one ride but then the nose bridge connector broke. i have ordered another set of them

On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 14:02:18 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>Since I had my concussion I did something with my Oakley's and not they are not large enough and don't block the wind from getting in my eyes and making them water,

Safety glasses clip-on side shields are an easy and cheap add-on.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=safety+glasses+side+shields&tbm=isch>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

In article <0dhc3h91eetl60v4v4v8r7hfg9vbm47ldb@4ax.com>,
Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 14:02:18 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Since I had my concussion I did something with my Oakley's and not they
>are not large enough and don't block the wind from getting in my eyes
>and making them water,
>
>Safety glasses clip-on side shields are an easy and cheap add-on.
><https://www.google.com/search?q=safety+glasses+side+shields&tbm=isch>

I recently got a pair of these:

https://www.screwfix.com/p/bolle-overlight-clear-lens-overspecs-large/5604f

to wear over my prescription glasses. Haven't tried them out yet.
Far cheaper than a pair of Bolle cycling glasses, and I suspect
they're to the same optical standard.

Bolle, for example, seem to do a decent range of safety glasses.
All fairly inexpensive. So you could try several diffecrent pairs
and see what is best for you. For example, see:

https://www.screwfix.com/c/safety-workwear/safety-glasses/cat850392?brand=bolle&page_size=20&page_start=0
--
Dennis Davis <dennisdavis@fastmail.fm>

Dennis Davis wrote:
> Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 14:02:18 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich wrote:

>>> Since I had my concussion I did something with my Oakley's and not they
>> are not large enough and don't block the wind from getting in my eyes
>> and making them water,
>>
>> Safety glasses clip-on side shields are an easy and cheap add-on.
>> <https://www.google.com/search?q=safety+glasses+side+shields&tbm=isch>
>
> I recently got a pair of these:
>
> https://www.screwfix.com/p/bolle-overlight-clear-lens-overspecs-large/5604f
>
> to wear over my prescription glasses. Haven't tried them out yet.
> Far cheaper than a pair of Bolle cycling glasses, and I suspect
> they're to the same optical standard.

Try them on a bumpy road, they might or might not fit a nose
comfortably. In traffic, I'm not a fan of clear lenses without
antireflective coatings.

> Bolle, for example, seem to do a decent range of safety glasses.
> All fairly inexpensive. So you could try several different pairs
> and see what is best for you.

Their Twilight filter is the lightest I use in sunny daytime, but Tom
should be aware that Bolle's soft-PVC nose pieces are said to be
sensitive to sweat, or more likely, sunscreen lotion which he probably
uses in California.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 08:09:00 -0000 (UTC), Dennis Davis
<dennisdavis@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>In article <0dhc3h91eetl60v4v4v8r7hfg9vbm47ldb@4ax.com>,
>Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
>>On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 14:02:18 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Since I had my concussion I did something with my Oakley's and not they
>>are not large enough and don't block the wind from getting in my eyes
>>and making them water,
>>
>>Safety glasses clip-on side shields are an easy and cheap add-on.
>><https://www.google.com/search?q=safety+glasses+side+shields&tbm=isch>

>I recently got a pair of these:
>https://www.screwfix.com/p/bolle-overlight-clear-lens-overspecs-large/5604f
>to wear over my prescription glasses. Haven't tried them out yet.

I have a one of these that fit over my prescription glasses.
<https://www.amazon.com/NoCry-Over-Glasses-Safety-Glasses-Anti-Scratch/dp/B071RSM598>
They work but I have some reservations:
1. They don't quite fit over my plastic rim prescription glasses.
2. They fog badly due to insufficient ventilation.
3. The way they attach to the eyeglass temples irritates my ears.
4. The rubber temples are tearing after about 2 years of use.

They work well for operating power tools or chemistry experiments,
where I would need safety glasses, but would not expect to be wearing
them for hours. I've never seen anyone wearing something similar
while bicycling, which suggests that there are better solutions.

Tom's original problem was preventing the wind from blowing dust into
his eyes from the sides. Since he already has Oakley glasses, the
clip-on side shields should be adequate.

>Far cheaper than a pair of Bolle cycling glasses, and I suspect
>they're to the same optical standard.

Possibly. Eyeglass lenses can be CR-39 plastic, polycarbonate,
acetate, Tribrid, Trivex, glass, etc. The side shields need to be
flexible and are commonly made from TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane),
which is clear, but hardly optical quality:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoplastic_polyurethane#Table_of_properties>
<https://www.safetyglassesusa.com/b22.html>

>Bolle, for example, seem to do a decent range of safety glasses.
>All fairly inexpensive. So you could try several diffecrent pairs
>and see what is best for you. For example, see:
>
>https://www.screwfix.com/c/safety-workwear/safety-glasses/cat850392?brand=bolle&page_size=20&page_start=0

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 3/21/2022 12:21 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 08:09:00 -0000 (UTC), Dennis Davis
> <dennisdavis@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>> In article <0dhc3h91eetl60v4v4v8r7hfg9vbm47ldb@4ax.com>,
>> Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 14:02:18 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since I had my concussion I did something with my Oakley's and not they
>>> are not large enough and don't block the wind from getting in my eyes
>>> and making them water,
>>>
>>> Safety glasses clip-on side shields are an easy and cheap add-on.
>>> <https://www.google.com/search?q=safety+glasses+side+shields&tbm=isch>
>
>> I recently got a pair of these:
>> https://www.screwfix.com/p/bolle-overlight-clear-lens-overspecs-large/5604f
>> to wear over my prescription glasses. Haven't tried them out yet.
>
> I have a one of these that fit over my prescription glasses.
> <https://www.amazon.com/NoCry-Over-Glasses-Safety-Glasses-Anti-Scratch/dp/B071RSM598>
> They work but I have some reservations:
> 1. They don't quite fit over my plastic rim prescription glasses.
> 2. They fog badly due to insufficient ventilation.
> 3. The way they attach to the eyeglass temples irritates my ears.
> 4. The rubber temples are tearing after about 2 years of use.
>
> They work well for operating power tools or chemistry experiments,
> where I would need safety glasses, but would not expect to be wearing
> them for hours. I've never seen anyone wearing something similar
> while bicycling, which suggests that there are better solutions.
>
> Tom's original problem was preventing the wind from blowing dust into
> his eyes from the sides. Since he already has Oakley glasses, the
> clip-on side shields should be adequate.
>
>> Far cheaper than a pair of Bolle cycling glasses, and I suspect
>> they're to the same optical standard.
>
> Possibly. Eyeglass lenses can be CR-39 plastic, polycarbonate,
> acetate, Tribrid, Trivex, glass, etc. The side shields need to be
> flexible and are commonly made from TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane),
> which is clear, but hardly optical quality:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoplastic_polyurethane#Table_of_properties>
> <https://www.safetyglassesusa.com/b22.html>
>
>> Bolle, for example, seem to do a decent range of safety glasses.
>> All fairly inexpensive. So you could try several diffecrent pairs
>> and see what is best for you. For example, see:
>>
>> https://www.screwfix.com/c/safety-workwear/safety-glasses/cat850392?brand=bolle&page_size=20&page_start=0
>

I'm not advising anyone (I have imperfect but plenty
adequate bifocals) but here's an option, A guy who worked
for me had prescription Racquetball/Squash glasses he used
for race days. They were soft translucent frames with
no-break-ium lenses:
https://store.racquetworld.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/2/unique-rxspecs-eyeguards.jpg

Styling is either dorky (to tifosi girls) or intimidating
(to the guy next to you in a corner).

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:41:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>I'm not advising anyone (I have imperfect but plenty
>adequate bifocals) but here's an option, A guy who worked
>for me had prescription Racquetball/Squash glasses he used
>for race days. They were soft translucent frames with
>no-break-ium lenses:
>https://store.racquetworld.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/2/unique-rxspecs-eyeguards.jpg

Good idea, but doesn't solve Tom's problem. I'm not sure, but there
seems to be a rather large hole in both temples, which would admit the
dust that Tom is trying to keep out. However, the holes might be
useful for installing tiny rear-view mirrors.

Also, I'm a bit suspicious of the "soft" frames. I was curious as to
how accurately the lenses need to be positioned and how critical the
PD (pupillary distance) really needs to be. So, I cut an old pair of
glasses in half at the bridge and reconnected them with a "wet noodle"
made from plumbing solder. I soon discovered that the PD, bridge to
nose position, and various angles needed to be VERY close to the
original. If the "soft" frames contain some form of internal
stiffeners, it should work. If not, I predict problems.

>Styling is either dorky (to tifosi girls) or intimidating
>(to the guy next to you in a corner).

Style? This is a tech newsgroup, not a fashion forum. Proper techies
should be wearing something more functional:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=clear+welding+goggles&tbm=isch>
<https://www.google.com/search?q=antique+aviator+goggles&tbm=isch>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 3/21/2022 3:17 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:41:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm not advising anyone (I have imperfect but plenty
>> adequate bifocals) but here's an option, A guy who worked
>> for me had prescription Racquetball/Squash glasses he used
>> for race days. They were soft translucent frames with
>> no-break-ium lenses:
>> https://store.racquetworld.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/2/unique-rxspecs-eyeguards.jpg
>
> Good idea, but doesn't solve Tom's problem. I'm not sure, but there
> seems to be a rather large hole in both temples, which would admit the
> dust that Tom is trying to keep out. However, the holes might be
> useful for installing tiny rear-view mirrors.
>
> Also, I'm a bit suspicious of the "soft" frames. I was curious as to
> how accurately the lenses need to be positioned and how critical the
> PD (pupillary distance) really needs to be. So, I cut an old pair of
> glasses in half at the bridge and reconnected them with a "wet noodle"
> made from plumbing solder. I soon discovered that the PD, bridge to
> nose position, and various angles needed to be VERY close to the
> original. If the "soft" frames contain some form of internal
> stiffeners, it should work. If not, I predict problems.
>
>> Styling is either dorky (to tifosi girls) or intimidating
>> (to the guy next to you in a corner).
>
> Style? This is a tech newsgroup, not a fashion forum. Proper techies
> should be wearing something more functional:
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=clear+welding+goggles&tbm=isch>
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=antique+aviator+goggles&tbm=isch>
>
>
>

Yes, it's a different lens. There are various models of
'soft' frames with various large or small cutouts. I grabbed
a representative web image (can't remember model/brand if I
ever knew them)

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Monday, March 21, 2022 at 1:34:38 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 3/21/2022 3:17 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:41:05 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not advising anyone (I have imperfect but plenty
> >> adequate bifocals) but here's an option, A guy who worked
> >> for me had prescription Racquetball/Squash glasses he used
> >> for race days. They were soft translucent frames with
> >> no-break-ium lenses:
> >> https://store.racquetworld.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/2/unique-rxspecs-eyeguards.jpg
> >
> > Good idea, but doesn't solve Tom's problem. I'm not sure, but there
> > seems to be a rather large hole in both temples, which would admit the
> > dust that Tom is trying to keep out. However, the holes might be
> > useful for installing tiny rear-view mirrors.
> >
> > Also, I'm a bit suspicious of the "soft" frames. I was curious as to
> > how accurately the lenses need to be positioned and how critical the
> > PD (pupillary distance) really needs to be. So, I cut an old pair of
> > glasses in half at the bridge and reconnected them with a "wet noodle"
> > made from plumbing solder. I soon discovered that the PD, bridge to
> > nose position, and various angles needed to be VERY close to the
> > original. If the "soft" frames contain some form of internal
> > stiffeners, it should work. If not, I predict problems.
> >
> >> Styling is either dorky (to tifosi girls) or intimidating
> >> (to the guy next to you in a corner).
> >
> > Style? This is a tech newsgroup, not a fashion forum. Proper techies
> > should be wearing something more functional:
> > <https://www.google.com/search?q=clear+welding+goggles&tbm=isch>
> > <https://www.google.com/search?q=antique+aviator+goggles&tbm=isch>
> >
> >
> >
> Yes, it's a different lens. There are various models of
> 'soft' frames with various large or small cutouts. I grabbed
> a representative web image (can't remember model/brand if I
> ever knew them)

I discovered that a 2nd party (Chinese I suspect) is making replacement lenses for the Edge II though I will have to try them to see if they are large enough to cover enough of my face to prevent the airstream from making my eyes water.

On Tuesday, March 22, 2022 at 7:17:33 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Monday, March 21, 2022 at 1:34:38 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 3/21/2022 3:17 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:41:05 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'm not advising anyone (I have imperfect but plenty
> > >> adequate bifocals) but here's an option, A guy who worked
> > >> for me had prescription Racquetball/Squash glasses he used
> > >> for race days. They were soft translucent frames with
> > >> no-break-ium lenses:
> > >> https://store.racquetworld.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/2/unique-rxspecs-eyeguards.jpg
> > >
> > > Good idea, but doesn't solve Tom's problem. I'm not sure, but there
> > > seems to be a rather large hole in both temples, which would admit the
> > > dust that Tom is trying to keep out. However, the holes might be
> > > useful for installing tiny rear-view mirrors.
> > >
> > > Also, I'm a bit suspicious of the "soft" frames. I was curious as to
> > > how accurately the lenses need to be positioned and how critical the
> > > PD (pupillary distance) really needs to be. So, I cut an old pair of
> > > glasses in half at the bridge and reconnected them with a "wet noodle"
> > > made from plumbing solder. I soon discovered that the PD, bridge to
> > > nose position, and various angles needed to be VERY close to the
> > > original. If the "soft" frames contain some form of internal
> > > stiffeners, it should work. If not, I predict problems.
> > >
> > >> Styling is either dorky (to tifosi girls) or intimidating
> > >> (to the guy next to you in a corner).
> > >
> > > Style? This is a tech newsgroup, not a fashion forum. Proper techies
> > > should be wearing something more functional:
> > > <https://www.google.com/search?q=clear+welding+goggles&tbm=isch>
> > > <https://www.google.com/search?q=antique+aviator+goggles&tbm=isch>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Yes, it's a different lens. There are various models of
> > 'soft' frames with various large or small cutouts. I grabbed
> > a representative web image (can't remember model/brand if I
> > ever knew them)
> I discovered that a 2nd party (Chinese I suspect) is making replacement lenses for the Edge II though I will have to try them to see if they are large enough to cover enough of my face to prevent the airstream from making my eyes water.

I received my Bolle' Edge II sunglasses. They have a blue lens on them and although they were used, they are in 'like new' condition. They do not fit properly so that wind doesn't find its way around the glasses and into my eyes, like the Contour glasses. I did get some giant size Chinese glasses and I won't be able to test them tomorrow because its supposed to rain on and off all day. I have come to the conclusion that cheap Chinese sunglasses are the way to go. Sunglasses are pretty particular to the shape of your face and the fact that they are so cheap allows you endless experimentation. I have one set of Chinese sunglasses that fit perfectly but the lenses are too dark and it is very difficult to spot problems on the road when moving in and out of shadows.

On Monday, March 21, 2022 at 1:09:04 AM UTC-7, Dennis Davis wrote:
> In article <0dhc3h91eetl60v4v...@4ax.com>,
> Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> >On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 14:02:18 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> ><cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Since I had my concussion I did something with my Oakley's and not they
> >are not large enough and don't block the wind from getting in my eyes
> >and making them water,
> >
> >Safety glasses clip-on side shields are an easy and cheap add-on.
> ><https://www.google.com/search?q=safety+glasses+side+shields&tbm=isch>
> I recently got a pair of these:
>
> https://www.screwfix.com/p/bolle-overlight-clear-lens-overspecs-large/5604f
>
> to wear over my prescription glasses. Haven't tried them out yet.
> Far cheaper than a pair of Bolle cycling glasses, and I suspect
> they're to the same optical standard.
>
> Bolle, for example, seem to do a decent range of safety glasses.
> All fairly inexpensive. So you could try several diffecrent pairs
> and see what is best for you. For example, see:
>
> https://www.screwfix.com/c/safety-workwear/safety-glasses/cat850392?brand=bolle&page_size=20&page_start=0

The problem with Bolle safety glasses is that they are not designed to keep the wind out but to keep bits and pieces of hard materials from damaging your eyes. As soon as you say, Bolle cycling glasses add a magnitude in price from the face fitting rather than face protecting and tinted lenses,