# premium goggles - worth the $$?



## kaborkian (Feb 1, 2010)

Smith io is what I use, LOVE them.


----------



## steveycheesey (Dec 9, 2013)

I'm also very interested in knowing the answer to this! I'm looking into getting some goggles and want to make sure that I can find the best deal on some good goggles. I don't know what all the features are that I should be looking for so any info along with this answer would be great!


----------



## cav0011 (Jan 4, 2009)

There is no right answer to this question. I would say they are worth it to me, however for people who don't have fogging issues it is less important. Also lenses for different conditions are big for me


----------



## steveycheesey (Dec 9, 2013)

cav0011 said:


> There is no right answer to this question. I would say they are worth it to me, however for people who don't have fogging issues it is less important. Also lenses for different conditions are big for me


So would someone need to get different goggles for different conditions if that became an issue or are there goggles that allow changing out of lenses so that all you'd have to do is just buy a different color lens?


----------



## kaborkian (Feb 1, 2010)

steveycheesey said:


> So would someone need to get different goggles for different conditions if that became an issue or are there goggles that allow changing out of lenses so that all you'd have to do is just buy a different color lens?


Most higher end goggles have interchangeable lenses.

The smith io that I wear actually come with 2 different lenses: a dark mirror for bright days and a light pink lens for overcast days. They sell about 40 different shades and colors for this specific frame. Takes about 30 seconds to swap one out.


----------



## DToay34 (Oct 30, 2013)

It all depends on what you want. I think the three goggles you listed would be better than other goggles, but I have friends who would disagree with me on that. I'm thinking about getting some smith i/o. I have some Oakley splice goggles with an iridium lens so they work well in bright conditions. They get a little dark sometimes, which is why I may get some goggles that work better in low light conditions. I don't expect vision to be too much different, I just want a lens that performs better in low light. Like I said though, it all depends and what you want out of your goggles.


----------



## steveycheesey (Dec 9, 2013)

kaborkian said:


> Most higher end goggles have interchangeable lenses.
> 
> The smith io that I wear actually come with 2 different lenses: a dark mirror for bright days and a light pink lens for overcast days. They sell about 40 different shades and colors for this specific frame. Takes about 30 seconds to swap one out.


Hmmm. Alright, I'm looking at some smith i/o goggles right now that are the 2014 model and they're $175 which isn't too pricey for me if they would save me the trouble of having to buy other goggles. Does that sound like a good deal to you, or average?


----------



## twall (Dec 20, 2013)

DToay34 said:


> It all depends on what you want. I think the three goggles you listed would be better than other goggles, but I have friends who would disagree with me on that. I'm thinking about getting some smith i/o. I have some Oakley splice goggles with an iridium lens so they work well in bright conditions. They get a little dark sometimes, which is why I may get some goggles that work better in low light conditions. I don't expect vision to be too much different, I just want a lens that performs better in low light. Like I said though, it all depends and what you want out of your goggles.


is that most of whats different? lens options?


----------



## ARSENALFAN (Apr 16, 2012)

I have the M2s. Definately the best goggles I have owned. I love the field of vision and clarity. They have fogged up a couple times - likely due to not being tight enough. It is nice to go into the bar, pop out the magnetic lens and let the air get to them right away. They clear real fast.:thumbsup:


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

1 fit, 2 vision and 3 lens for conditions that you ride in...for me smith io with blue sensor...low light


----------



## ICary (Aug 2, 2013)

For me Oakley Airbreak was the choice. I definitely needed an easy change lens so that brought me to the Airbreak, IO, and M2. Personally I had issues with the IO changing it to my standards. Took that out. I also didn't like that I didn't get a case with the IO. So it was Airbreak vs M2 tried both on really liked both just felt a little risky to me with the magnets in the M2 personally. Plus the Airbreak just fit my helmet better.


----------



## Deacon (Mar 2, 2013)

I just waited for sales and bought two pairs of EG2s for about $45 each, one for bluebird, one for overcast/night. The second pair was cheaper than just buying lenses. And, I love them. I don't know if I'd love them for $150-$100, but for $50 I love em.


----------



## DToay34 (Oct 30, 2013)

twall said:


> is that most of whats different? lens options?


Lens options, size, and a few small other details are the main difference between most goggles. Do a little research and you should be able to figure out which goggle is right for you. Like I said before, it all depends on what you're looking for. You're not going to be disappointed any of the three choices you are looking at.


----------



## kaborkian (Feb 1, 2010)

Someone mentioned fit...I tried on a lot lf goggles before settling on the smith io. Did it with and without helmet as well. Some pinch my nose. Some are too narrow. Some are too wide. Some are gaper. For me at least, the io fit well, lens is easy to change, easier to carry a lens than carry a whole extra pair of goggles.


----------



## twall (Dec 20, 2013)

thanks everyone!

this all helps me tons! anyone running a bern helmet with either the m1/m2 or i/o?


----------



## andrewdod (Mar 24, 2013)

Personally i wear cheapos... i always wanted a pair of expensive goggles, but i cant see how spending more than 80 dollars on goggles will benefit me. I slam so much and have seen my cheapos fly off my head i'd probably freak if my expensive ones flew off or got smashed like that when i slam... Right now i got a pair of Spy Targa 2's that i picked up for 40 bucks new 2 years ago, and theyre scratched to hell, but dont fog. Bottom line is i dont want to sweat scratching them or cracking them. They work fine for me, as long as they don't fog up, keep the wind and snow out of my eyes, and i can see where im going its all good.


----------



## Krug (Mar 27, 2010)

I am looking at buying the new Zeal goggles with the lens that changes with light so that all you need is one lens. You might check these out before you pull the trigger. I like the idea of having minimal gear when riding...one lens and done.

Zeal automatic...
Zeal Optics Slate Automatic Goggles 2014

Andy


----------



## steveycheesey (Dec 9, 2013)

Krug said:


> I am looking at buying the new Zeal goggles with the lens that changes with light so that all you need is one lens. You might check these out before you pull the trigger. I like the idea of having minimal gear when riding...one lens and done.
> 
> Zeal automatic...
> Zeal Optics Slate Automatic Goggles 2014
> ...


Those seem pretty dang sweet! And I mean with a 1% discount who wouldn't want to snag a pair; ultimate bargain shopping;D I'm honestly considering them though. Minimal is optimal.


----------



## Krug (Mar 27, 2010)

steveycheesey said:


> Those seem pretty dang sweet! And I mean with a 1% discount who wouldn't want to snag a pair; ultimate bargain shopping;D I'm honestly considering them though. Minimal is optimal.


 I didn't even notice that...damn, if I can save 99 cents I might as well go ahead and order them tonight! Seriously wish someone would buy these and throw a review up to see if they are worth it. Overall Zeal seems like they make a solid goggle.


----------



## a4h Saint (Jan 24, 2013)

The Deacon said:


> I just waited for sales and bought two pairs of EG2s for about $45 each, one for bluebird, one for overcast/night. The second pair was cheaper than just buying lenses. And, I love them. I don't know if I'd love them for $150-$100, but for $50 I love em.


^this. Are the higher end goggles worth it? Yes, but not for retail. There are plenty of people who will pay retail. Just buy them on sale or off those people. I got I/o's w/ an extra lens for $60 off this forum. Try on a bunch of them and see which ones fit you then be patient. I own well over $1,000 of gear that I barely paid $500 for. 

Places like gearscan.com are great as well.


----------



## snowklinger (Aug 30, 2011)

*gogs have a shelf life directly related to days ridden. they get trashed.*

also there are alot of lesser known brands making great gogs at significantly lower prices. The top of this list for me is Optic Nerve, but there are others. The Boreas is almost always on sale at theclymb, a soft, frameless quick change gog fits helms good.










FWIW every lense regardless of brand comes from like 2 different factories in china.

Native is another cool lesser known brand.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Factory of origin doesn't mean everything. A lot of companies farm out the labor to overseas factories, but maintain control of the production process, tolerances, quality control, etc. I love the fit and FOV of my VZ Fishbowls, but the optical quality is honestly dog shit compared to my Smiths.

For the money, Natives are pretty damn tough to beat. Always been a big fan of their sunglasses. I'm sporting Kaenons now, but that's just because I had Amazon bucks to spend. I like them better than Natives, but dollar for dollar, I'd buy Natives. You can easily buy two pairs, if not three of Natives for what Kaenons cost.


----------



## snowklinger (Aug 30, 2011)

I guess my point is that the little guy can go to the same factory as the big guy and get high end lenses for his product, while the big fashion designer has the same opportunity to go into said factory and purchase the lowest end for their expensive couture brand. 

Don't be convinced that you have to spend high dollar for decent optics, or that money guarantees them.

Good thing we agree and I just like to spray.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Yep, definitely true. VZ does not use lenses of high optical quality, that's for sure. Very fog resistant, I'll give them that, but the visual clarity is noticeably different between them and my Smiths. It almost seems like the anti-fog coating is uneven on the VZs or something.


----------



## hardasacatshead (Aug 21, 2013)

I'm using M2s and I can't fault them. They're not cheap but you get two lenses, they don't fog, they fit me perfectly, are comfy as hell, great optics and huge field of view. 

It's not worth it to everyone of course but if you ride a lot it's nice to have the piece of mind that your gear will perform well day after day - one less thing to have to think/worry about while on the hill.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

The M2s will almost certainly be my next goggles. I'm gonna wait until the late season 50% off sales hit then hopefully grab a pair. If they're not available, I'll probably go with Spy Dooms or Smith IOs.


----------



## knoxious (Feb 16, 2012)

Adidas Yodai ftw! I have the pink tinged lenses that I find are great in all but the lowest of light conditions... i then have a 2nd pair of Smiths with yellow lenses that I bring out.


----------



## ridinbend (Aug 2, 2012)

Worth it? YES. But you can find them discounted if you look hard enough.


----------



## scotty100 (Apr 3, 2012)

twall said:


> getting back into riding after a 10+ year absence.
> 
> feeling like a noob with all of the tech change.
> 
> ...


Oakley and Smith have the best rep for optical lens quality. Giro is also good in that area. Don,t know about Anon but probably ok.

The 3 models you are considering are all good. They are expensive because they offer a fast and easy lens change system and come with 2 lenses - one of which is always for low light conditions. 

Your alternative is to buy another cheaper model from whatever brand which only comes with the lens in the goggle and either wear it for all conditions or buy another separate lens for whatever model you bought. Will still probably work out cheaper than your first option but will be more fiddly to change the lens.

Then of course you could buy 2 separate goggles with different lenses for different conditions and not bother changing lenses at all - just change goggles. Can work out cheaper than your first option. Again, stick the 3 brands you mentioned and you should be ok.

Finally, buy a helmet first then base your goggle decision on how well the goggles fit with your helmet. Smith goggles always match smith helmets perfectly for example. That may not be the case with other combos.


----------



## Krug (Mar 27, 2010)

snowklinger said:


> also there are alot of lesser known brands making great gogs at significantly lower prices. The top of this list for me is Optic Nerve, but there are others. The Boreas is almost always on sale at theclymb, a soft, frameless quick change gog fits helms good.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have these Optic Nerves myself and love them...great fit and easy to swap lenses out.

Andy


----------



## racer357 (Feb 3, 2011)

I have multiple pairs of Oakley goggles. they are all great for not fogging and optical clarity.

I bought a pair of gyro goggles at the resort once for night conditions. The optical clarity on them is awful. I ended up being able to see better through Oakley's pink iridum in the dark than I could through the giro high vis yellow.

I would stay away from giro, the lens was like looking through water spots.


----------



## Conrad Hart (Feb 12, 2013)

I had both lenses on my Oakley Splices go out on me in a single day (moisture in the lens) which was frustrating so I picked up a pair of the new Spy Doom goggles for this season. I used them Tuesday for the first time and they were awesome. Love how easy the lenses swap and the clarity and comfort were top notch.


----------



## scotty100 (Apr 3, 2012)

racer357 said:


> I bought a pair of gyro goggles at the resort once for night conditions. The optical clarity on them is awful. I ended up being able to see better through Oakley's pink iridum in the dark than I could through the giro high vis yellow.
> 
> I would stay away from giro, the lens was like looking through water spots.


Surprised to hear that...Giro's spherical lenses are made by Carl Zeiss...one of the best, if not the best, optics companies in the business.


----------



## Jibfreak (Jul 16, 2009)

IMO no they aren't worth it. I've had smith io and now eg2's and I can still confidently say I like my Airblaster airpill goggles and vonzipper fubars more.

Most goggles can swap lenses fairly easily. The main thing for me is having multiple lenses to cover bright conditions and overcast conditions. With premium goggles a new lens can cost anywhere from 40-100, my fubars cost $15-25 at full retail.


----------



## racer357 (Feb 3, 2011)

scotty100 said:


> Surprised to hear that...Giro's spherical lenses are made by Carl Zeiss...one of the best, if not the best, optics companies in the business.


I expected better as well. A better way to describe it, if you have ever looked through automotive window tint through a polarized lens. That is what it was like. especially after the sun went down.


----------



## speedjason (May 2, 2013)

oh wow, you guys actually spend that much for goggles? I have Bolle's for like $40, they are decent.
maybe I should try the expensive ones. maybe they will give me unicorn vision.


----------



## Madbob14 (Feb 28, 2013)

I have a pair of Asian fit Smith I/O. I take care of them like a baby.

I'm so afraid to scratch them / smear the anti fog coating.


----------



## hardasacatshead (Aug 21, 2013)

speedjason said:


> oh wow, you guys actually spend that much for goggles? I have Bolle's for like $40, they are decent.
> maybe I should try the expensive ones. maybe they will give me unicorn vision.


I have the same argument with a lot of photographers over support gear/tripods. I use a Really Right Stuff carbon fibre tripod and ballhead combo that costs around $1,600. It's light as hell, dampens vibrations way better than anything else, is super fast to set up if I need to get a quick shot, will support ANY camera/lens combo I put on it and I know it will work consistently every single time I use it, whether I'm shooting portraits in a studio or hiking 20km into the bush to find a shot. 

A number of times I've had photographers (mostly amateurs) tell me it's ridiculous how much I payed for it and that their $40 no-name aluminium tripod can do the same thing... and I agree. Their $40 tripod could hold up my pro body and 500mm lens, but it would do a poor job of it and they'd forever be trying to minimise vibrations, holding it in place by hand to stop it toppling over in any sort of wind and have infinite troubles composing a shot. 

Professional and serious photographers know the differences and understand that at some point you actually get what you pay for. The quality of your ancillary equipment plays a huge role in your ability to effectively locate, compose and take a good photo at a professional level. 

Similarly, your $40 Bolles or many other cheap goggles (not all, don't over react) might get the job done but there are plenty out there that will get the job done better. 

Like I said before, with my M2s I forget I'm even wearing them. Optical quality and contrast is spot on, they're comfy and never fog up. That to me is worth the extra cost. I'd rather concentrate on my riding rather than trying to see through shit goggles. 

For those that don't ride often then the cheap ones might suffice but for those of us who are out there a lot they just don't cut the mustard. 

/end rant. :thumbsup:


----------



## cocolulu (Jan 21, 2011)

hardasacatshead said:


> I have the same argument with a lot of photographers over support gear/tripods. I use a Really Right Stuff carbon fibre tripod and ballhead combo that costs around $1,600. It's light as hell, dampens vibrations way better than anything else, is super fast to set up if I need to get a quick shot, will support ANY camera/lens combo I put on it and I know it will work consistently every single time I use it, whether I'm shooting portraits in a studio or hiking 20km into the bush to find a shot.


I first spent $70 on a tripod, and while it held the camera steady, it was a pain in the ass to use. I finally did some research and put around $500-600 into a tripod setup, and it was so much better. It holds my camera as steady as a rock. I seriously think with tripods, the old adage "a poor man pays twice," is true.

to the OP:

Goggles, are important, but I don't think it is quite as severe as tripods. I think as long as its spherical, and has those 2 layers, I'd be fine with it. But I do think a good set of goggles with interchangeable lenses makes a difference. On a bright sunny day, dark lenses help a lot, but once the sun sets behind the mountain, I can't see the terrain texture and depth at all, and lighter lenses helps. So it's cool to either have a goggle that makes it easy to swap lenses, or just have a 2nd goggle with a different tint.


----------



## speedjason (May 2, 2013)

hardasacatshead said:


> I have the same argument with a lot of photographers over support gear/tripods. I use a Really Right Stuff carbon fibre tripod and ballhead combo that costs around $1,600. It's light as hell, dampens vibrations way better than anything else, is super fast to set up if I need to get a quick shot, will support ANY camera/lens combo I put on it and I know it will work consistently every single time I use it, whether I'm shooting portraits in a studio or hiking 20km into the bush to find a shot.
> 
> A number of times I've had photographers (mostly amateurs) tell me it's ridiculous how much I payed for it and that their $40 no-name aluminium tripod can do the same thing... and I agree. Their $40 tripod could hold up my pro body and 500mm lens, but it would do a poor job of it and they'd forever be trying to minimise vibrations, holding it in place by hand to stop it toppling over in any sort of wind and have infinite troubles composing a shot.
> 
> ...


I am not saying cheap ones are as good as the expensive ones. however I kinda not seeing myself paying $200 for goggles. probably $100 range.


----------



## timmytard (Mar 19, 2009)

You guys are the worst shoppers anywhere 

Or maybe you wipe your ass with money, I don't know.

I have about 15 pair, give er take. I don't have any magnetic lensed ones or ones with phones, cameras & porn channels built in

But...The most I'll pay for goggles is $5.99 & for that much, they better come with a fuckin' bag.:icon_scratch:

Goggles get wrecked, it's inevitable. 

You guys ever heard of Value Village? HaHa hilarious eh?
That's the only place I buy soft goods. Goggles, jackets, pants, gloves even got a brand new pair of Merino socks for $.99:eusa_clap:

I've pulled a 2nd year Terje deck & more than a handful of other sweet deck out of there too.

2 nights ago I traded a pair of 2013 Burton SLX's (2 sizes to big) cost $17.50
Together with a brand new pair of Burton pants ($20)for a Brand new pair of Salomon Malamutes in my size.
Total cost $37.50+tax

Not everything there is used either, I have a brand new Ride jacket & a diff pair of Burton pants in my closet, both with the original tags still on them. $20 each

Right in between the dozen or so other mint jackets & pants.:thumbsup: 

Got a brand new pair of 32 Team Two's yesterday. Way too small for me, but $9.99 for a brand new pair. How could you not buy them?:dunno:
As well as pair of brand new looking Volcom pants ($5.99)& a 1998 Burton Balance 156 $14.99.

I'll take a pic of my closet, I'm positive the prices I paid are still on a few of them.


TT


----------



## Deacon (Mar 2, 2013)

timmytard said:


> You guys are the worst shoppers anywhere
> 
> Or maybe you wipe your ass with money, I don't know.
> 
> ...


Nope, never heard of Value Village, and I'm pretty the commute would negate the value.


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

hardasacatshead said:


> I have the same argument with a lot of photographers over support gear/tripods. I use a Really Right Stuff carbon fibre tripod and ballhead combo that costs around $1,600. It's light as hell, dampens vibrations way better than anything else, is super fast to set up if I need to get a quick shot, will support ANY camera/lens combo I put on it and I know it will work consistently every single time I use it, whether I'm shooting portraits in a studio or hiking 20km into the bush to find a shot.
> 
> A number of times I've had photographers (mostly amateurs) tell me it's ridiculous how much I payed for it and that their $40 no-name aluminium tripod can do the same thing... and I agree. Their $40 tripod could hold up my pro body and 500mm lens, but it would do a poor job of it and they'd forever be trying to minimise vibrations, holding it in place by hand to stop it toppling over in any sort of wind and have infinite troubles composing a shot.
> 
> ...


At the same time a good photographer will take better photos with a Canon EF85mm 1.8 and crop body than an amateur with a 5d3 and 135mm 2.0.

The question: Are more expensive products better? Usually.
2nd Question: Are they worth the extra expense? That all depends on the individual.


----------



## hardasacatshead (Aug 21, 2013)

jdang307 said:


> At the same time a good photographer will take better photos with a Canon EF85mm 1.8 and crop body than an amateur with a 5d3 and 135mm 2.0.


That's not the point of I was making. Even so, a good photographer will take a better photo with a 5D3 and 135mm 2.0 than he/she would with a xxxD and 85mm 1.8. 

There's a point where hardware makes a difference and that same old argument made by people who either don't commit/don't want to spend the cash on good gear become moot.


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

hardasacatshead said:


> That's not the point of I was making. Even so, a good photographer will take a better photo with a 5D3 and 135mm 2.0 than he/she would with a xxxD and 85mm 1.8.
> 
> There's a point where hardware makes a difference and that same old argument made by people who either don't commit/don't want to spend the cash on good gear become moot.


Yes a slightly better photo. The question is, is the extra $1,500 worth it? That's my point. Only that photographer will decide whether it is worth the extra expense or not. I guarantee you the difference between good Canon lenses and L lenses are not enough for most to spot with the naked eye. The sharpness and colors can both be modified in post.

The build quality and the speed/accuracy of the AF system are where the bulk of the advantage lies. So then, it is up to the photographer to decide whether it is worth it.

Cruising groomers? $10 googles are fine. Dropping down AK lines where visibility is the difference between a great run or a broken neck? Yeah $200 doesn't sound too bad.


----------



## kvw (Apr 2, 2013)

I have about 10 pairs of goggles, no thanks to steep & cheap and whiskey militia, ranging from some that have a msrp of $180 down to and msrp of only $35, and you wanna know what my best pair of goggles are? The ones that I bought for $15 called: "VonZipper Fubar". By best, I mean visibility, antifog, comfort, you know, everything but style (kinda old school looking).

Funny how things work out. :dunno:


----------



## Zedekias (Oct 31, 2013)

If anyone wears glasses and have had trouble with fogging, get the turbo fan series from smith. 

They work so well I will always have a pair.


----------



## steveycheesey (Dec 9, 2013)

timmytard said:


> You guys are the worst shoppers anywhere
> 
> Or maybe you wipe your ass with money, I don't know.
> 
> ...


Is there any way you'd be willing to sell some stuff that you'd grab there and ship it? I live out in Florida at the moment and will be heading up to Michigan for a month then will be moving to Washington by the end of next year hopefully and would like to stock up on some necessities.


----------

