1/1
 
 
Title
Topic
Date
Start
End
Count
Comment
Oak
Twenty Fifty
Jan 12, 2019 7:56 PM
I probably asked this question in another thread, but I don’t remember where.

In most of my hobbies, the enthusiasts define the different ages of a hobby. The demarcation would be key events, release of certain products, paradigm shifts that define an era, etc. Usually they’re labelled as Golden, Silver, Bronze, Copper and modern age. I thought it’d be interesting if the OR discusses what we feel the different eras are.

A difficult decision is whether to define these ages from a historical perspective? How about of a collector’s perspective? Or internal? Mix of all?

My selections:

Golden Age: 1975 to 1984 – The start of the company with its first products, the grips, and includes the release of the first goggle in 1979. It goes until the intro of the Eyeshade.

Silver Age: 1984 to 1989 – The age starts at Oakley’s first eyewear, the Eyeshade, and ends just before the release of the Mumbos. Other project releases include classics such as the Blades/Razor Blades and MX goggles.

Bronze Age: 1989 to 1997 – I figure the release of the Mumbos kicks off this age. I don’t recall if the Mumbos actually started selling in 1989 or 1990. The official Oakley stance in their documents is 1990, but I remember JJ saying something about December 26, 1989. Anyway, I figure this age would start off with the intro of one of Oakley’s most enduring products (M Frame).

Some would say this age could have ended before the intro of the first Eye Jacket, since that is a huge paradigm shift in how Oakley designs, but of course the collector-friendly stance is if it ended just before the intro of the X-metals in late 1996 (but shipped to the dealers in 1997). The Sub Zeros and Zeros are in there, but I don’t think they are company-defining products to kick start an age.

Others would say this age doesn't start at the Mumbos but rather the Eye Jacket, and that the Mumbos would fit in the Silver Age. I would have a hard time denying that as well.

Titanium Age: 1997 to 2005. Starts at the release of the X-metals until the release of the Gascan. This to me is the most difficult age to define. Did it start at the release of the X-metals, which is a very collector-friendly answer? Did it actually start in 1999 with the new O Matter formula? Does it actually start at the Eye Jacket as I mused about above? The era has such incredible releases such as the OTT and introduces new product categories such as TB and Shoe One/O Shoe, but I don’t think any of those defined the era.

And when does it end? I figure it ended with the start of the GC since I saw the GC as the start of new era of design at Oakley.

Copper Age: 2005 to 2009. Another tough era to define. Not sure when this era starts. To me, the intro of the GC started the age since you can see a big shift in aesthetic design at Oakley. Eyewear coming out of the company became more streetwear/fashion-oriented (but of course with the usual Oakley twist). Oakley’s released that type of product before in the OO, Why Rx, Dartboard, etc. but none had design DNA successors like the GC did.

I wouldn’t argue if someone said the Copper Age started when Oakley was bought out by Lux in 2007. Sure, nothing really happened for 6 years or so afterwards since Oakley still had their independence, but it was a major event.

I also wouldn’t argue if someone told me we’re still in the Copper Age and there is no defining characteristic for a new era since 2005 or 2007 or 2009 (when the Elite was released).

Carbon Age: 2009 to present. Not sure if this age is required. The release of the Elite line is another collector-friendly answer, but I don’t know if that line is enough to define an era for Oakley, especially since it didn’t last all that long.
Dann
Dann Thombs
Jan 12, 2019 9:21 PM
I think I would agree with most of those, but I'll try to layout my own stance, then go back and re-read yours to see how close it is. I feel like I would divide them moer based on manufacturing and company structure than a collector mentality, although those would certainly in intertwined to a degree.

Golden Age: 1975-1983 Also maybe the Grip era since they're all about bikes with the addition of the early goggles. At this point, Oakley is still a startup with a small crew working out of a tiny warehouse.

Silver Age: 1984-1993 I'd include all of the early non-3D sculpted eyewear here. So the Frogs, Blade System, Mumbo (was December 1989 according to Lee), M Frame and the various Zeros. We still had a few things continue into 1994-1996, since the Eye Jacket design was a first entry and the entire lineup didn't change overnight.

Bronze Age: 1994-1998 A much shorter era than most of the others, but I feel it was a period of transition where they had to hammer out some consistency. We had the rise and fall of Frogskins vs Jackets, early X-Metal, the playing around with what logo goes on the temple, an older frame material, the move to HQ, and a naming scheme that eventually fell by the wayside (Jackets/Coats...Numerical names...etc).

Copper Age: 1999-2004 Another short era, but one that again played around with a lot of ideas. If we weren't going with metallic names, this would be the Mad Science era. First there was the universal overhaul of all the old models. The frame material became more robust, certain anti-counterfeit measures are added to the glasses, models are renamed to 2.0 or 'New'. In addition to updating the old models, designs became aggressive and imaginative. Some find this the 'sweet' spot if you're not holding the earlier eras in a level of personal nostalgia.

Carbon Age: 2005-2014 This might be the era that differs for me vs others, and no, I don't consider the Lux buyout in 2007 to be significant (at that time, mind you). Starting with the Square O, Stretchline and general shift to lifestyle, we get later additions of the Collectors Frogskins and many further models built on that base or the Gascan theme. This is also the point where I would be choosy about models, vs. not havign a problem owning anything they made at a given time as with pre-2005.

Modern Age: 2015+ 8 years after the Lux buyout, we start seeing things really take hold. I'm not as vocal as most since otherwise why would I still be continuing this site, but the company shakeup, removal of the Made in USA stamp, and the emphasis of periodic color themes vs new models, has been prevalent. There's still enough to keep me interested, but just enough.
O_taj1242
kouichi takahama
Jan 12, 2019 10:02 PM
Both opinions are wonderful.

I bought Eyeshade and Blades first when I was thirteen and bought OO-RX the most at the end.
I have stopped collecting for more than 10 years.
It was a wonderful era.
Oak
Twenty Fifty
Jan 12, 2019 10:17 PM
For me, what I call the Titanium Age (1997 to 2005) is my favourite period. Oakley’s “Renaissance”, for lack of a better term anyway. There was a lot of creativity during this period, and what was released during this period drives how we remember/perceive the brand today.
Dann
Dann Thombs
Jan 12, 2019 10:27 PM
I could certainly lump the late 90's and early 2000's into one group, and perhaps I should. Just that major revision in 1999 and 2000 was so sweeping, it creates a division between the two halves despite X-Metal being somewhat independent throughout the process.
 
 
1/1
 
 

O-Review Logo & Design
© 2004-2024 Atom Crown Design and DCJ Productions.
Product Images, Logos and Artwork © 1975-2024 Oakley Inc.
All personal photos © 2004-2024 by their owners...or Rick.