Can /k/ recommend me some shooting glasses Incase my AK blows up.
>interchangeable lenses
>doesn't break the bank-under a 100$
Sawfly usually runs around 60-70$ and don't look horrid.
>>28302899
Had Oakley m-frames and probably 4-5 pairs of saw flys unopened. No clue why I didn't keep them. Guess I didn't think I get much into shooting in the civilian world.
UVEX lenses.
$15 for two pair.
Look operator as shit with 100% of your daily protection from UV-A and UV-B rays.
Also exceed military ballistic standards.
smith aegis
see them for $30-40 regularly for a two lens set
I got the echos because they have really thin arms so they fit under earpro easily without breaking seal
>>28302890
Smith optics aegis on botach via ebay 19.95.
>>28302890
get clear unshaded safety glasses, how you going to shoot on a dark day, and also dark safety glasses are harder to see through when fogged or with condensation/sweat from your brow.
Best all around I used them for riding and shooting just get some ops drops for dat aint fog
>>28302890
http://www.peosoldier.army.mil/equipment/eyewear/
I'd reccoment anything on that list anon. They're tested to a higher standard than your normal ANSI rating.
As for a specific pair. The Crossbow has a super slim frame that won't interfere with ear pro. Not sure how much they run in the US but you only have one pair of eyes anon.
>>28302890
Get a better ak and stop being a bitch, one of my svts shits unburnt powder in your face and likes to eject straight backwards but I dont wear eye pro cause I'm not a pussy faggot and I know how to close my eyes.
>>28305450
have fun getting your eyes blown out u faget one eyed willy
>>28302890
Used to use m-frames as everyday and shooting glasses, picked up some ESS CDIs a couple years ago for the more traditional look.
They are a smaller footprint where they don't come down far enough to my cheeks for my liking so my next pair will likely be the CDI Max for more coverage.
Find a set of those old GI goggles. They're pretty decent for the money, and you can swap lenses in case you go to an indoor range. Just make sure you're buying surplus and not "military style," usually meaning "worth absolutely nothing."
>>28302890
Anything you buy should be at least ANSI Z87.1 rated. You can get, that spec for as little as $10, comfort will cost a little bit more.
>>28302890
Any shooting glasses that are $60-$70 or more are pretty much equally as good and all depends on the design you prefer.
>>28306650
Too bad that's not true. There are a lot of glasses in that price range that are Z80 rated, which is a fashion eyeware rating that only offers enough protection that the lens won't shatter from a bee strike at 20mph.
Selling price in no way dictates ballistic protection. Unless it's clearly marked as Z87.1 or MIL-PRF-31013 rated, you shouldn't be using it for shooting
There are a lot of knock off sellers online and you should never buy from them.
>>28306709
You're right.
Correction : Any brand name glasses that go for $60-$100 are basically equally good. If a pair of glasses is sold as shooting glasses by a reputable company, they are going to be Z87.1 rated.A lot will have some gimmicks that makes them different such as correction lenses inserts, UV rating etc. It depends on what you actually need/want. I stand by ESS Crossbows myself. and after the impact rating i value antifogging the most.
>>28302890
You tempt me to order some $2 pairs of cheap safety glasses and then go to town testing how much force they can take.
>>28306709
This. A $20 set of Uvex Genesis or equivalent line is MIL rated. Past that point, you're paying for the brand name and style.
>>28302890
My advice OP? Buy the best glasses you can find with a lifetime warranty. Never pay for another set again.
>>28306990
It's really hard to do this properly, because some glasses will ride up under impact and deflect stuff into your face.
Just try putting on a pair of glasses and then poking yourself in the eye. You'll notice the glasses can move so much that a good portion of your lower eye can be exposed.
Glasses also kind of rely on the structural support of your skull, so you can't just put them on a table and hit them with a hammer.
So you'll basically have to make a full model of a head and test them on that.
>>28302890
If you're legitmately worried about your ak blowing up, glasses shouldn't even be a concern. You should get rid of your shit gun and buy something with good quality you feel confident with.
>>28307632
I'm just screwing around I have an sgl31. Even though still kinda worries me after 3k trouble free rounds. Thanks for the suggestions guys.
Not the OP, but what are the best options if I wear Rx glasses? Anyone here have any experience with inserts for ballistic glasses? I see from user reviews that there can be wearing at the far edges due to lend curve, but is that based on the Rx strength?
Pic+some film if you feel like tinting them
>>28307337
Jackson nemesis is better
>>28309514
They are cheaper, though they don't come with a MIL 31013 rating. So if you're ok with Z87.1, they're perfect.
Would I be a fag if I wore a pair of ESS Crossbows at work?
>>28302890
No really glasses are there to make you look cool, the real protect are goggles.
>>28314267
You're retarded. You're very unlikely to get debris and fragments coming in from around the edges of the glasses if you're wearing them properly, and that's the only place where goggles have the advantage. Do you wear an EOD suit to the range because it is the only thing to provide "real protect" from ricochets?
