Stock Lens Thickness

**Cindy K** · 09-10-2007, 10:50 PM

Jim, what do we Canadian opticians have to do to get Transitions to make a reasonable-thickness stock 1.5 sv finished lens??????? Can you bring this to the attention of the powers that be, that we here in the upper part of this continent would truly love to be able to call our wholesale labs and get stock lenses same day rather than a grind in two, and be able to offer Transitions as a somewhat reasonably priced option as would stock product allow.

**For-Life** · 09-11-2007, 06:35 AM

yes, the CT is quite thick. Is there a reason for that?

**gemstone** · 09-11-2007, 10:29 AM

The transitions process seems to make lenses soft and flimsy. What power rand and you having trouble with?

**For-Life** · 09-11-2007, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by gemstone

The transitions process seems to make lenses soft and flimsy. What power rand and you having trouble with?

Well this is the thing. Take a surfaced Transition Crizal lens and then compare it to a stock one. The stock one has a much greater CT thickness.

**MarcE** · 09-11-2007, 09:42 PM

Use the stock aspheric poly Trans V. Pass the cost on to the patients. They get a thinner, lighter, safer lens, that won't chip in a rimless. You make more $. Everyone wins. Nassua even supplies these w/ Alize.

I can't remember the last time I ordered a stock 1.5 Transitions. I think I average one pr. per year.

**Cindy K** · 09-12-2007, 01:04 AM

Originally Posted by For-Life

yes, the CT is quite thick. Is there a reason for that?

I've been told that stock Trans. are manufactured in only a few facilities worldwide and these labs, being that they make the product for the entire universe, produce these thick lenses to satisfy safety requirements wherever the product may be sold. Hmmmmm.......

Originally Posted by gemstone

The transitions process seems to make lenses soft and flimsy. What power rand and you having trouble with?

All ranges. Every single stock Trans SV we've used ended up looking bulletproof. I've measured them at very nearly 3mm ct! Don't think I've ever seen a plus power Trans stock, tho.

Originally Posted by MarcE

Use the stock aspheric poly Trans V. Pass the cost on to the patients. They get a thinner, lighter, safer lens, that won't chip in a rimless. You make more $. Everyone wins. Nassua even supplies these w/ Alize.

I can't remember the last time I ordered a stock 1.5 Transitions. I think I average one pr. per year.

I'm trying to make it MORE affordable for those who dont want to pay surfaced price! I'll have to check out th price of those asph. stock trans. poly Crizal (omg that almost sounds like ordering a coffee at Starbucks- singleshotdrydecafsoyholdtheflavour latte:D).

Hey, where's JIM? On holidays or something?

**gemstone** · 09-12-2007, 06:21 AM

Originally Posted by Cindy K

I've measured them at very nearly 3mm ct!

(omg that almost sounds like ordering a coffee at Starbucks- singleshotdrydecafsoyholdtheflavour latte:D).

3 MM! We sure need a response from the transition peeople on that.

I have NEVER seen a cup of coffee worth $5.

**JRS** · 09-12-2007, 08:17 AM

I think some consideration should be noted, that a "stock" lens has a given diameter and edge thickness (plus powers) that have little to do with a frame shape. For example, a 70mm +2.00 sphere with a 1.5mm edge has a center thickness to achieve diameter/edge.

A surfaced +2.00 sphere will be optimized for a center thickness to support a (for example a 1.5mm edge) on the final edged product. They may, or may not, end up having the same CT.

For those with some method of calculation, you can figure this out yourself. A "stock" lens is circular with zero decentration at a fixed diameter. A surfaced lens (when edged) typically has neither of the above.

Minus powers usually are reasonably equal between the surfaced and stock lens results - except when it comes to AR coated stock lenses. Those can show several tenths difference in CT.

**Cindy K** · 09-12-2007, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by JRS

Minus powers usually are reasonably equal between the surfaced and stock lens results - except when it comes to AR coated stock lenses. Those can show several tenths difference in CT.

Not in the Transitions we get stock!

**Jim Schafer** · 09-12-2007, 09:21 PM

Hi Cindy,
I am sorry I could not access the Optiboard quicker, I am out of the office and the internet provider was not co-operationg in letting me access the Optiboard to answer your questions.

It is true that some of the skus in our 1.50 FSV range have heavier CT's. You are also correct that this is a global product, it was beefed up to pass CE impact tests when used with certain AR platforms in Europe. I know in the US, something like 60% of all Transitions lenses are AR lenses. In Europe it is a higher percentage. The folks behind the troublesome AR platforms in Europe had the pull to influence the design.

This is a point of frustration for us here in North America. I believe this topic was brought up more than once here on the Optiboard.

This product was launched in 2002. I reported complaints and was told that the problem is duly noted and being evaluated.

I wish I could tell you help was on the way.

Thank you for your input, I forwarded this link to product development, the appropriate sales orgs in Transitions and our lens manufacturing partners that offer stock FSV.

best regards,
Jim

**Cindy K** · 09-12-2007, 10:01 PM

Thanx, Jim, no prob with your delayed response. We knew you'd show up sooner or later!

Too bad the manufacturers aren't making a product geared to our needs here. I just refuse to use the stock Transitions. We dispense alot of Transitions, and a decent CT in a stock product would increase our use of them.