Thought on Ray Ban vs. Randolph Engineering for a classic aviator? Quality difference?
Thought on Ray Ban vs. Randolph Engineering for a classic aviator? Quality difference?
Love Randolph Engineering frames and lenses, but then again I am a professional shooter in my off hours. Quality well above the rest and lens color options second to none.Originally Posted by skirk1975
Randolph Engineering supplies frames to the military, consistently year after year. They are that good.
Rayban is NOTHING like they used to be. Since the buyout about 15 years ago, their focus has been on trash styles and zero quality. The B&L days of yore are long gone. We're looking into Randolph too. As an added bonus, Randolph is made here at home, which is a question we're seeing from patients with an increasing frequency.
Where can we get the Randolph's? I love them!
Give them a look up and a phone call:
http://www.randolphusa.com/
Thanks! Already emailed them!
This shouldn't even be a serious question. Rayban frames do not resemble the brand as it was.
If you get the chance, look at a Rayban frame from 20+ years ago - I bet it's in fantastic condition. Try that with a Rayban you might buy this week, it'll be junk. Well, MORE junk, anyway ;)
I don't deal with any manufacturers that sells to consumers directly.
They're welcome to open a retail business but I'm not going to be their showroom.
I don't deal with any manufacturers that sells to consumers directly.
They're welcome to open a retail business but I'm not going to be their showroom.
Customer Login We at Randolph understand your concerns about the security of online transactions. Therefore, our site is equipped with the most advanced Secure Socket Layer (SSL) technology available to ensure the privacy of any information you submit through this site.
First Time Customers
Returning Customers If you are new to our Online Store:
Click here to enter your contact information.
Or cancel and return to shopping.If you are a returning customer, please log in to our Online Store.
E-Mail Address: Password: Did you forget your password? Click here
i think I am very quality focussed, yet I often disagree with some broad-brush statements regarding RB quality. Sure, some SKUs need work. Others, however, especially the nylon models and the newer metals are quite excellent.
And my clients agree. Just yesterday I straightened out for the FIFTH time a RB aviator that a long time client's 2-YO twin boys wrecked yet again.
Still keeps on ticking. Not so sure so much Lux bashing isn't about older quality issues. Lux is putting out a new, global quality initiative, and I do see the results.
B
Yeah, you're right about certain models. I think the problem I have is consistency.
If I'm honest though, Barry, the Aviator isn't necessarily a great example of what RayBan are making now - they've had a long time to get that particular model 'right'. I've never had issues with that or the Wayfarer, but from my experience some newer ones (especially acetates) don't meeet expectation.
Interesting to get your take on it, yours is an opinion I like to hear.
And B&L did such a good job at selling ray ban that they were about to disappear forever. While they might have had a decent product, no sales ability. You can slag off lux all day, but currently ray ban is back and on top again. And tell me one thing made better today than 30 years ago. Quality is not important anymore.
Part of what shot B&L Ray Bans in the foot was their pricing structure to ECP's. I could go down to a local sporting goods store and buy Wayfarer's cheaper than I could buy them as a distributor!
I recently rx'd a pair that was purchased from us in 1985. Still had the original price on it. They're built like a tank. Glass is almost a mm thicker than the new ones too I noticed.
I can not wait to get back to the Uk and get my grandfathers wayfarers out of the garage and have new Rox put in them. And yes, built like tank, last forever, never sold correctly by last owners....
Be careful with the super old acetates though - they DO get brittle. I've made a habit of slightly undersizing the lens to make sure there isn't too much pressure on the aging frame.
Actually, I was planning on soaking them in water for a bit to re hydrate, but if anyone has any other ideas.....
Should be ok if they were in the UK. Probably didn't see to much UV exposure. :)
ha ha. Mostly wore them when I was visiting Crete and Portugal, so HA! Tons of UV baby!!!.... er........ yeah, but the last 4 years have been in a box in a garage. More concerned about general drying out.
how dare you! ;)
On a completely unnecessary side note, while Ray-Ban sunglasses were obviously developed originally by Bausch & Lomb, the sunglasses initially offered by Randolph Engineering were developed originally by American Optical (in particular, the AO Skymaster). I believe that Randolph bought the rights to the AO sunglass line.
Best regards,
Darryl
Darryl J. Meister, ABOM
you are right Darryl, and they came in two sizes 52 and 57, but what really made them standout was the bayonet temples. I also believe if I remember right, that there was something about AO losing the military contract, and awarding it to Randolph. From a personal observation in dealing with hundreds and hundreds of both of them, I would hesitate to say one was better then the other.
I prefer a vegetable oil, olive oil works well in lieu of soaking the frame in water. I condition all of my acetates as well as my patients frames with oil.
Correct. I believe that this was in the mid sixties (please excuse the lack of better info but I suffer from CRS disease.) Randolph had been supplying a lot of tooling and findings for AO so it was a natural .
As a Marine Aviator I wore them for twelve years and still have a couple of pairs hidden away in my archives (junk pile.) Never had a problem with them despite some heavy use.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks