[airtechchallenge1]

10 year old oakleys are probably great. In fact I have a pair of Arnet (before they got sued and had to change the name to arnette) Catfish from 1996. The quality of the 1996 Catfish is 10000X better then the current catfishes. Oakley and Arnette get by on name not quality kinda like the dreaded N who make complete trash that people eat up. I'm telling you, go to a store, feel some Oakleys and then feel some Kaenons, the difference in construction quality is huge. Don't get me wrong though, after Kaenon catches on, they'll start making shit too.

When will people realize Oakley (much like Nike) is a marketing juggernaut? Oakley isn’t about real performance, they are about mass marketing and distribution- that’s Oakley’s business model.

And some of the Kaenon designs are great, I don't know what you're talking about. I lovemy Beacons, they're very similar to the design of the Catfish that have always been so popular.

[Shellshock]

Wow, you're really caught up on them aren't you?!? That must be because either
(a) Steven Rosenberg is your Dad.
(b) When you were a kid a man wearing Oakleys touched you up

[MJF]

Perfomance?? Sunglasses??

Am I missing something here?

Unless you need sunglasses for professional / medical reasons then the thought process on buying them should be

1 - Do they suit me?
2 - Do they keep the sun out as much as I need to?
3 - Can I afford them?

[ez-1]

MJF' got a point. Sometimes you can just forget the 2 and 3 if 1 is perfection and by that I mean do they really look good on you / make you look good.

[Old Gregg]

I've been wearing oakleys for years I don't think the quality has change much if at all