screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 ok i just tried my now 90% complete Nam impression kit on, and, for a laugh, put my Aviator style sunglasses on with the kit........... I MUST HAVE AIRSOFT SAFE AVIATORS NOW !!!!!!! it looked the absolute *fruitcage* tits. anybody know where i can get a pair made up for airsoft, or even just the lenses ? Link to post Share on other sites
TMC Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 ok i just tried my now 90% complete Nam impression kit on, and, for a laugh, put my Aviator style sunglasses on with the kit........... I MUST HAVE AIRSOFT SAFE AVIATORS NOW !!!!!!! it looked the absolute *fruitcage* tits. anybody know where i can get a pair made up for airsoft, or even just the lenses ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Do aviators cover the sides and top areas? As in, do they offer the sameish coverage as say, Guarder glasses or ESS ICE 2.4s? Link to post Share on other sites
doc_newstead Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Yeah, I would have said the same. It's ok having ballistic lenses, but aviator sunnies don't really wrap around the face the same way. You'd need those little wings that go along the arms to protect the side of your face, and then you'd just look like a lab assistant, albeit, one ready to kick Charlies *albatross*. Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 oh *beep* yeah, i forgot to say about that. i realise i would have to get some of those, but thats not a problem - the welding shop where my bruv works is full of the things. i dotn think it would look MAJORLY lab assistant. can get some nice see through or black ones (maybe tiger stripe pain them lol), but beairng in mind i will have proper aviators on, i dont think lab technicians where those lol. Link to post Share on other sites
doc_newstead Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Well custom lenses I don't know about, but I'm sure it's not impossible. I always thought the newer Guarder glasses looked like aviators; I was put off buying them because of the numerous Magnum P.I conotations they would hold Aviators are style pretty popular by all accounts, so it's no impossible to imagine that somewhere over the pond, there is a pair sold with improved lenses. They might no look so retro though. Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Doc, care to add a link to said Magnum P.I glasses ? Link to post Share on other sites
doc_newstead Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 They're the new Gaurder ones, C3's. They don't look like aviators, but they have two separate lenses though, which I don't like. Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 aahh right. *goes to google* edit - hhmm, very un-aviatory. oh well. Link to post Share on other sites
Ledpocket Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 http://www.dlawlesshardware.com/boavsaglgrti.html http://www.websoft-solutions.net/shooting_...ing_p/225ag.htm http://www.bioexpress.com/index.html?wscde...550560000560150 A few US links to get you started...just google "aviator safety glasses" Link to post Share on other sites
doc_newstead Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Mmm, sexy. Here's a few more Google links: http://www.labwear.com/products.asp?Catego...=MENS_LAB_COATS http://www.sciencestuff.com/ctgy/L-b Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 WHY COULDN'T I FIND THAT STUFF !!111!11 i googled ballistic sunglasses, ballistic lenses, shotting lenses, shooting sunglasses, ballistic aviators, the list is endless. oh well cheers guys, i'll have a look now. edit - i think somebody *doc* is taking the ######. the ones in the first link Led posted look best. anyway to find out if they are strong enough for airsoft without buying them and shooting them ? like a rating or something ? they actually look VEY much like the issued Nam sunglasses if you ask me. pictor Link to post Share on other sites
Lance Jackass Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Old mens woodowrking glasses look like aviators. I wonder if they make tinted lenses for old men who like to make things outside on hot days? Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 LJ that made me giggle for a few seconds. Link to post Share on other sites
Ledpocket Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 The ansi Z87.1 rating is the standard in the usa for impact and such, it's the same minimum requirement they use for paintball and a lot of other eye protection. The only thing I'd verify is that they meet with the rules of your playing field. Being safety glasses they are not really designed to deflect bb's coming from odd angles, etc. (I know, one in a million that a bb will be shot and bounce around inside the glasses, then take out your eye...but who wants to be that "one" ) Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 so how does that rating compare with, say, guarder airsoft glasses, or other well known brands used for airsoft ? you think they would withstand the '1J at point blank' test with that rating. sorry for all the Q's dude, it seems providing the link brings a whole heap of questions to you lol. as for being shot from odd angles, they have the side protectors, so its only the top an dbottom. and i cant see any physical way a BB could bounce off my face and go behind the glasses. but i could always stick a small, thin strip of foam around the edges to seal them. Link to post Share on other sites
Lance Jackass Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Well by leaning forwards to say, pick up a mag, you do leave the gap between face and glasses vulnerable. Would they not have used SWD goggles in the 'nam? Link to post Share on other sites
Whitedingo Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 so how does that rating compare with, say, guarder airsoft glasses, or other well known brands used for airsoft ? you think they would withstand the '1J at point blank' test with that rating. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ANSI Z87.1 is the rating used on real shooting glasses here in the states, meaning it'll withstand most shrapnel that you'd be likely to find on a real steel shooting range. Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 yeah i suppose LJ. the foam idea wouldnt look too obvious, and wouldn't intrude on my vision at all either. what are SWD goggles ? from what i have seen they didn't really wear anything on their faces. edit - post above is the best thing i have heard in this thread (no offence anybody else). i am noe hopefull that if these bad boys are used at shooting ranges, they can withstand a coupld of plastic BB's at 328 + a little bit to be sure. Link to post Share on other sites
Lance Jackass Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 SWD = Sun wind and dust goggles. I guess the 101 might have had them on their helmets. Link to post Share on other sites
Ledpocket Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 http://www.safetyglassesusa.com/ansiz8712003.html http://media.msanet.com/NA/USA/HeadEyeFace...NSI_Changes.pdf http://www.flinnsci.com/Sections/Safety/eyeSafety/goggle.asp http://idoc.davisvision.com/davis/es/Visio...s/vision_07.htm A couple links to info on the z87 standard edit: a useful tidbit about the tests: All safety eyeglasses are designed to withstand impact. In fact, they are required by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to pass two important tests: The High Velocity Impact Test The frames must be proven to resist the force of a quarter-inch diameter steel ball moving at 150 feet per second toward its front and side. The High Mass Impact Test A pointed projectile that weighs 17.6 ounces is dropped 51.2 inches onto the front of a frame. Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 i think SF were too hardcore for things like that. aviators or nothing i feel. thanks again Led - so this comment : The High Velocity Impact Test The frames must be proven to resist the force of a quarter-inch diameter steel ball moving at 150 feet per second toward its front and side. The High Mass Impact Test A pointed projectile that weighs 17.6 ounces is dropped 51.2 inches onto the front of a frame. does this mean ALL glasses with the rating have passed this test? i got confused as it started talking about glasses/goggles/face shileds in one link. if these glasses have withstood these tests, these are the bad boys for me. Link to post Share on other sites
Ledpocket Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 A little more background info. I took the data on the steel ball test to try and figure out the joules for an impact of the steel ball at 150fps. I used a couple sites to help me out: energy conversions http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/energy_conv.html an energy calculator/converter: http://www.1728.com/energy.htm technical data on steel balls: http://www.steelmedia.com/steel-balls-data.htm airsoft pellet weight/velocity/energy (for comparison0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsoft#Pelle...ergy_and_weight and I did a little calculating a while back: It looks to me like a 1/4" steel ball weighs 1.0432625 grams and if it is traveling at 150 feet per second it is transmitting 1.0904 joules of energy. Which (according to the chart from wikipedia) is lower than the 1.14 joules that .2g pellet exerts at 350fps I never got around to figuring joules on the pointy object test. EDIT: To get the ansi rating, the goggles must pass those tests...so any goggle/glasses that pass the test get the rating. There is one other factor, the "intended use" which distinguishes goggles from glasses from face shields...saftey glasses are not intended for chemical splash resistance, so wouldn't meet ansi z for that type of job. This whole issue was important to me because I bought some wrap-around raquet ball goggles that had the ansi-z rating...I was curious if the intended use of raquet ball protection (big rubber ball) made a less stringent test required than for shooting glasses (metal shrapnel) or how it would affect my intended use for airsoft. To be honest, I'm still a bit confused, and will just be wearing the JT paintball goggles that I have been wearing for years. Link to post Share on other sites
doc_newstead Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 I was taking the pee eye mate, but that's because I made a joke about aviators with side-protection just being lab glasses. Then someone posted a link to some lab glasses. So I wasn't wrong, was I? Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Led - thanks for all that stuff dude. im probably going to order 5 pairs - 2 each for me an dmy bro, and one to test to destruction to see how far we can push them. if they dotn withstand the F/A at 328 close range, i wont wear them. if they do, then sweet as a nut. and they're onyl $10 each, so no biggy if they break. Doc - yes i saw the cunning link you made between the stuff. the blokes wearing those lab coats - they look a bit.....fruity. but then i posted my link to issue sunglasses that look remarkably similar considering they are completly differnet things....i win Link to post Share on other sites
Ledpocket Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Anytime I have something marginally useful, I will post it For what it's worth, the guys I play airsoft with have been using shooting glasses/safety classes for a few years with no breakage. The only glasses incident I'm aware of is some fake oakleys cracking (not suprising) and someone taking off their eyewear during a game and being hit (thankfully he wasn't blinded). But, we're changing the eywear rules for this season to only allow goggle type eywear that provides a full seal to the face. We're in a safety before comfort mode right now (my fault, mostly) edit- he WAS NOT blinded ---oops Edit again: I found the reply I got from one of my teammates on the pointed test: So far your numbers seem pretty good, however I think the test more relevant would be the pointed steel projectile that is dropped 50 some odd inches at weighing 17.6 oz. PE=mgh KE -roughly equal- PE (Unless someone wants to do the math with mu involved, which I don't) 17.6oz = ~.5Kg g= 9.8m/s/s h= 1.3m PE= 6.37Joules I would have to say that if someone is firing at you with a gun that exerts 6.37 Joules, run, run fast, then hide, and I checked the experiment they use, the pointed object they use has a fairly smaller contact surface area than that of the 6mm BB. However, the pointy object drop and the steel ball at 150fps are only preformed on the safety goggles that are marked with Z87+ instead of just plain old Z87 Someone should probably check my math too, just in case I zoned out on one too many physics classes. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.