Here's the Era thread that Oak mentioned

http://o-review.com/forum_detail.php?ID=12280

I sort of have things broken into 5 or 10 year gaps (and a few of the 10 year ones could be bisected, but 8 eras gets a little unwieldy). As of the writing, we were still in a rocky position, and it's always hard to get an objective view of the era from you you are currently in, but I certainly see a transition period at this moment. Both from the fruition of the promised made in 2013, and some of the news I'd heard of the branding change that will be coming in the next few years. Like anything nothing will be clear cut, but I forsee 2013 and 2017 having very little in common.

For the sake of fun, if we did do 8 eras:

1975-1980: Grip Era
1980-1985: Goggle Inspired Era
1985-1990: Early Eyewear Era
1990-1995: Sport Eyewear Era
1995-2000: CAD Eyewear Era
2000-2005: Mad Science Era
2005-2010: Lifestyle Era
2010-2015: Frogs
2015-2020: Rebirth? - Dann

The more I think about it, the more I believe your assertion here is correct. This is more in-line with how auto enthusiasts would define eras of automobile manufacture - alligned more with technical ability and influence rather than based on style or design alone. I can see the degree of difficulty here when trying to factor in design influence as influence is more fluid across Oakley eras and harder to pin down. After I wrote my piece above I was thinking if it would be of benefit to consider Oakley's influence in the rest of the industry in each era much like autos or guitars in the same respect, and help gauge the eras that way. Not sure if that would help or hinder the search due to the bad blood within the eyewear industry.

Also, after reading up on some of the history threads that the inclusion of Luxottica may not be such a benchmark as it would seem at first. When thinking of Lux, I keep going back to when CBS bought out Fender and their influence was felt immediately and considered more of an impact to the brand then we might consider it to have been today. So far, Lux influence by comparison has been rather minimal, at least viewed from this side of the register (aside from price, of course). Also after reading about how the Oakley shoe line was moved overseas after only a few years of U.S. production, it may not be so far fetched to assume that, given a long enough timeline, JJ would have been forced to make peace with some overseas manufacturing, if not just in China, at some point.

Just a thought.