1/1
 
 
Title
Topic
Date
Start
End
Count
Comment
Teknical
Rob Harris
May 5, 2011 12:12 AM
Are these Square Wires 2.0? Thanks for help with identification. It's a great show, by the way (Califonication).





Sorry about starting a new thread for this one. The threads get hard for me to follow when they become very long.
Thanks!
DisturbedEarth
Nik Gutscher
May 5, 2011 12:42 AM
Why.
Stew
Stew Robinson
May 5, 2011 1:56 AM
I don't know what they are, but I'm sure they're not square wire 2.0
x-metalman
Jamey Bishop
May 5, 2011 2:00 AM
Nik's right.
Camo_monster
The Twakkie
May 5, 2011 2:46 AM
Maybe nanowire?
o-static
marcel rijsdijk
May 5, 2011 2:47 AM
why 8.0 or 8.1 8.2 something like that !
Oak
Twenty Fifty
May 5, 2011 3:17 AM
Has it been confirmed those glasses are Oakley? Maybe it's just the angle or the lower resolution, but it doesn't look like one to me.

If it is Oakley, the closest thing would likely be the Nanowire 4.0 or something similar, though there is more curvature on it than what's apparent from the one in the pic. In fact,most of the glasses Oakley has put out with similar styling would have a higher base curve than what appears in the pic. But like I said, could be the angle of the pic.
Ian
Ian Morris
May 5, 2011 5:47 AM
I'd guess a Why 8.2 Black/Amber Black Iridium Polarized.
Teknical
Rob Harris
May 6, 2011 2:50 AM
Sorry Netflix isn't higher resolution on my iPad. Thanks for your help, guys. I think it's a nanowire. Looks like those aren't sold anymore. I've learned the hard way not to buy out of production glasses because when they break, they don't always have spare parts.
monster_beetle
Jules Neefjes
May 6, 2011 11:04 AM
I am actually almost sure, that if it's an O that i surely isn't a Nanowire. They are more aerodynamic, I'd also go for a why 8.2
jimmyateworld
j s
May 7, 2011 7:14 AM

If its an O, I'm pretty sure it's Why 8.2.

The earstems look a bit too thick and where the earstem attaches to the lens also seems to thick to be the 8.2

Hmmmm
BullyVW
David Lee
May 7, 2011 8:34 AM
Those are Why's...but the Nano will give you a similar look.

And come on...no one felt like responding to Nik with the words "Because he wants to know!"
Oak
Twenty Fifty
May 7, 2011 9:35 AM
I think it's a full frame pair, not rimless. You can barely see them frame and lens separation on the right portion. At least that's what it looks like.

And the more I look at them, the more I'm convinced they aren't Oakley. The temple/hinge is too "blocky" and extends too far to be something out of Oakley's design language.
x-metalman
Jamey Bishop
May 7, 2011 6:23 PM
I'm starting to lean in that direction too, and because of the same reasoning.
DisturbedEarth
Nik Gutscher
May 8, 2011 8:49 AM
If they are O - then they are Why. Tough to say if they are O.

They aren't O. I have that pair and the nose piece is all wrong in that pic. The O pair connecting bar is higher on the lens and a different color.

Definitely not O. My guess would be an Oliver Peoples as most are in these shows.
Teknical
Rob Harris
May 19, 2011 3:10 AM
They had a frame. Why doesn't.
DisturbedEarth
Nik Gutscher
May 19, 2011 5:46 AM
I don't remember Nano even having an Ice or blue anyway.
Bpowell
Brandon Powell
May 19, 2011 7:10 AM
That's no O. A quick google search and about 10 min of investigation turn up that they are a discontinued IZOD sunglass.
 
 
1/1
 
 

O-Review Logo & Design
© 2004-2020 Atom Crown Design and DCJ Productions.
Product Images, Logos and Artwork © 1975-2020 Oakley Inc.
All personal photos © 2004-2020 by their owners...or Rick.