I’ve now used them for about 1K miles, including 12+ hours on the Davis Double Century. Photos from that event during different times of day below. My rides this spring with them have span from 50F to 90F. My takeaways:
TLDR: I’d buy them again.
They’ve been great. While the Davis Double Century ride was cooler (85F) than in most years, I still felt very hot in spurts during the climbs (close to 9K feet total). I didn’t feel distracted by the glasses despite reduced air flow. This might change as the weather gets warmer and I do more stressful (peak power) climbs. My helmet doesn’t have a good spot for holding the glasses, otherwise I’d take off my glasses during hot climbs.
I thought that the outer lenses picked up a lot of scratches but I learned these all came off with lens cleaner. I just applied some and the lenses look brand new again. I’m still using the original wraparound outer lens but the glasses come with multiple replacements of various tints. The glasses do pick up fingerprints / blemishes like crazy – I don’t know how expected this is for Oakleys or other premium cycling glasses.
Prescription vision has been great, no headaches or other issues. Again, these were $50 per pair (I bought two).
The only area of improvement I’d like is a stopper against the forehead – you can essentially put these glasses into your eyes – this sounds worse than the reality. The glasses don’t really move during riding, sometimes I’ll push them slightly up so they’re covering more of the vertical vision area.
On December 31st 2021, one year ago, our home narrowly escaped the worst fire in Colorado history. Above is a map of how close we were, surrounded on multiple sides. Six weeks later, we decided to move back to California to be close to family and also take advantage of reduced supply in the housing market. The latter part didn’t work out so well, but I consider myself fortunate nonetheless.
I’ve been searching for more affordable good prescription cycling glasses online for years. Unfortunately, there aren’t that many cycling glasses that support prescription lenses. Even for those that do, only a few places will actually make prescriptions. For glasses that have prescription inserts, I could never find a place that would only do the inserts; even if you found the sunglasses on sale, you couldn’t find a place to just provide the lens inserts.
The end result is that such glasses and lens combinations end up being well over $300. I’ve been against paying this because 1) it’s a lot of money 2) I didn’t know whether I would like the glasses. As far as I knew, there weren’t many places to try them for a ride. This was just too much risk for me, not even accounting for the fact that prescriptions change.
My past solution was to buy prescription sunglasses from Zenni Optical for under $70. Not amazing, not as “cool” looking as your typical wide frame full coverage cycling sunglasses, but they worked reasonably fine.
I got both variations with prescription lenses for under $100. That’s me above trying them out on a very light family ride over the weekend. They held up well in those non-stressing conditions. I’m not going to claim some amazing optical clarity that the likes of Oakley claim, but I have previously owned an expensive Oakley Juliet that I was never impressed by.
Two pairs for $100 – I have no regrets getting these so far as an experiment. Other notes:
It took about two weeks to get the glasses manufactured and delivered from China.
There is no customer support. Don’t even bother reaching out. Since I paid with a credit card that has purchase protection, I was ready to attempt a reversal if this had been a scam, but they came through.
You can basically get the glasses flush to your eye ball, there isn’t a bridge to prevent them from getting too close.
You get pretty good horizontal and vertical wrap-around coverage.
I have a 2018 Canyon Ultimate CF SLX Disc. When I recently acquired a new wheelset, I wanted to use my old Specialized CL 32 for gravel, but I couldn’t tell how wide I could go. The official Canyon spec is 30mm, not much for gravel.
It turns out the answer is 35MM. I used a 700x33c (33mm) Vittoria Terreno Dry, which expands to 35MM at 40 PSI. There’s still enough clearance that I’m not afraid of dirt and a little mud. For reference, the CL32 wheelset is 21mm internal, 27mm external.
If you’re curious if 35MM is wide enough for gravel, the answer for bike-handling weenies like me is probably no. BUT for Mathieu Van Der Poel, “the only obvious change from the usual race-spec is the low-profile Dura-Ace C36 carbon tubeless wheels shod with what appear to be Vittoria Terreno Dry tyres in an assumed 35 mm width (to match the available room in the Ultimate frame).” (MATHIEU VAN DER POEL IS RACING A ROAD BIKE AT GRAVEL WORLDS)
As part of a delusional attempt to buy myself faster on the bike, I made changes to my Canyon Ultimate CF SLX over the winter months. It took me almost a year, however to finally get my second tire in and have a chance to try everything out.
Let me start by saying that all these attempted gains are marginal, extremely marginal. 100G of weight savings is just .22 pounds, and yet I can’t help myself. Imagine trying to lose that weight off your body instead of buying it. People with this insanity are Weight Weenies, as popularized by the forum.
There are two types of changes, weight and aero. Reduced weight helps you ascend faster, particularly as you go above 6% gradients – the higher the gradient, the more reduced weight helps. Aero helps you with anything less than 6%.
The reality is I am unlikely to hold enough power for enough time to measure the difference any of these changes will make. I know this and I don’t need to brag to others about this gear, but I just like knowing for myself. I want to know I have a lighter rim, a more aero tire. But I want to know that I “achieved” all this at bargain prices too.
Internal Nipples (more aero, but harder to service)
Flyweight (lighter version of the rim, but less strong – more of an issue for 200lbs+ riders)
Pillar Wing aero spokes
The X-Flow rim shape itself is supposed to be Light Bicycle’s new innovation, their faster, stronger, stiffer design. It looks like a very subtle version of the Zipp and Princeton Carbonworks wheels. The 46.5MM depth is their deepest in this rim shape, but I am also concerned about crosswinds and so this seemed like a good balance of aero gain, crosswind vulnerability, and light weight, especially with the decisions around the nipples, spokes and tires.
Or so I tell myself.
The wheelset came in at 1,364G (+30G for tubeless tape). If you’re new to weight weenyism, 1500G is a good solid non-heavy wheelset, like a B- grade. 1400G is the B, 1300G is the A-, and 1200G is an A. I think there are wheelsets that might break 1100 G. The difference in 150G (.33 lbs) in weight between wheelsets can often be $500 and greater.
I got the Bitex Hubs because they were lighter, cheaper, and came in the oil slick color. It was the only hub that could be paired with the Pillar Wing aero spokes that also came in the oil slick color.
On the tires, I’ve already run Continental’s original excellent GP5000 tubeless tires on my Roval CL32 32MM depth wheelset before. But but but! I needed to maintain aero efficiency through the so-called 105% rule (you want the tire to be thinner than the rim by at least 5% in order to create a smooth airflow interface between tire and rim). But but but! The new GP5000S tires were lighter than the originals due to removing a layer of rubber originally intended to remove the need for sealant. But but but!
So now, instead of two 28MM GP5000s on 32MM depth wheels, I’ll be on 25MM GP5000S TR on the front, 30MM GP5000S TR on the back (wider tires on the back wheel are of much lesser concern because they receive the disrupted airflow from your body) with these deeper 46.5MM depth wheels. The Light Bicycle wheels are 28MM to 30MM in width.
Actual tire measurements when inflated to 80PSI (front) and 65PSI (rear) were 26.6MM for the 25MM tires and 31.1 for the 30MM tires, perfectly hitting 105% in the front.
The weight difference seems to be about 50G per tire, 100g total not accounting for the front tire difference (Going from 28MM down to to 25MM). My Roval wheelset is probably 1450-1500G. In total, maybe this is a savings of 200G.
Lighter and more aero!
If you haven’t noticed yet, there’s actually something really cool about the wheelset. It was a special gift from my wife, and this kickstarted the entire exercise of “what else should I consider changing?” The wheels are customized with a cycling graphic decal around the rim and with the names of my two sons. (The customization was about $180, everything was $1,237.14) Matching the aero spokes, the name and Light Bicycle logo stickers on the rim, and Bitex hubs are these Muc-Off Tubeless Presta Valves.
Water bottles are this bulging thing that disrupt airflow as it flows around your bicycle frame. Initially, I purchased the Elite Fly 950ml (33.4 oz) bottle with the idea of using a single bottle (and bottle cage) on the seat tube, removing the downtube bottle cage. The bottle is extremely light (thin). The rationale was using a single larger water bottle on the seat tube would create less aero disruption than two bottles on the down and seat tubes because a lot of the air that gets there has already been disrupted by your spinning legs. I like to carry a lot of water (just in case) so I needed the biggest bottle I could find.
I then saw these aero bottles based on an Elite design which is no longer being produced. Instead of bulging out of your frame, they’re basically inline with it, theoretically causing less turbulence. Together, they carry about 1000ml (35 oz) of liquid. I originally saw the bottles on Aliexpress but when I saw them sold on Amazon, I decided I didn’t want to wait a month for them to arrive from China.
There are two versions of these bottles. One uses a form fitting bottle cage. The other has magnets within a rail that holds the bottle. I got the latter as I saw some random comments that the cage didn’t hold the bottle tightly. I also liked the idea of magnets, though I did wonder about the weight difference….Overall, I decided that aero was going to be more important than weight.
This one was more straight-forward. I am shorter than most people at 167CM tall (5’6). I have long legs for my size (30″ inseam) but I still don’t have “long” legs. The length of a crank determines how high and low your legs go when pedaling. A longer crank means your knees get closer to your body as you pedal up – this can cause breathing discomfort as well as knee pain. Some people like longer cranks because they produce better leverage.
I just wanted shorter cranks in order to optimize my pedaling and make it easier to breath when hunched over in aero positions. I got a new bike fit right after the switch.
Previously, I had Ultegra R8000 170MM cranks. I have now switched to Shimano 105 FC-R7000 in 160MM. But isn’t 105 heavier than Ultegra you ask? Yes, the difference in these cranksets is a whopping 39.4g / .09 lbs! So not even worth thinking about. In addition, Ultegra cranksets don’t go as short as 160MM and retail for over 180% the cost of the 105’s. The 105 crankset blends in well the with rest of the Ultegra groupset too.
Much Ado About…
It took me almost a year to actually ride all these changes and I didn’t hold back through some test ride. I did Foxy’s Fall Century in Davis, CA, 100 miles and an easy day of 3100 ft of climbing.
I enjoyed the ride, but can I really tell the difference? No. Then again, it had been a year since I rode outdoors. I suppose this is what hobby is all about. Nothing but what’s in your mind.