 Poster: A snowHead
|
Back in the Beginning (70s) the biggest problems with goggles was that they fogged up easily and the lenses scratched within seconds of putting them on; 40 years later the two major hassles for me is that they still get fogged up and scratch easily . But a good pair will set you back well in excess of £100. Especially if you write something like "Seth Morrison" on it.
They've also become a must have part of the kit with the rise of the board scene. It's not that I think wearing them is a bad thing but it's just that I have the feeling that there's a couple of factories somewhere in China where they churn 'em out a pair every 14 seconds for £1.75.
(A version of this may be repeated somewhere else on Snowheads. Apologies if so. I'm sure I sent it earlier but can't find it on screen hence this repeat. )
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sun 26-09-10 14:53; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Funnily enough there was an episode of "How do they do it?" or "How it's made" on Discovery on the TV whilst I was doing the washing up, and it showed them making ski goggles. It looked like a very labour-intensive process, so I very much doubt they can make them for £1.75.
| Quote: |
40 years later the two major hassles for me is that they .
|
That they what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
jonm, leave you in suspense? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
jonm - I was being overly facetious there but can you give us a brief description of what was done and where.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| jonm wrote: |
| It looked like a very labour-intensive process, so I very much doubt they can make them for £1.75 |
but not far off. I know that sunglasses selling for £30 can cost as little as a dollar a pair with the case, swing tags and all the usual protection credentials. One you add shipping, duty, wholesale and retail margins though, you quickly arrive at many tenners for the retail price.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Maybe but it's what you're prepared to pay that swings the deal. I stick Anon goggles because they're comfortable and they look good, although I've paid a mere £25 for last seasons, right through to £110 in resort when I lost a pair - the £110 was a bit of a wounder but they're still with me now and work great. That for me is why i stick with that brand and sometimes have to pay over the odds for the privilege. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds to me like you are buying on impulse rather than shopping around or waiting for the sales or a good deal on here. I've got a pair of Scotts and a pair of Oakleys neither cost more than about £36. IMHO the biggest rip off for ski gear is helmets when what swings the deal for me is what fits and what is comfortable and I guess doesn't look too bad luckily I got these to the latest safety standard in a helmet for £16!!! So why the hell do some helmets easily cost £100+ when they must all have similar manufacturing methods and materials in them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Megamum, Sweet helmets use carbon fibre (cheapest helmet about £120 with others in the range at £180 and £200). I'm not sure if the manufacturers making cheaper helmets use carbon?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Megamum is dead right. There's no need to pay 3 figures for a top brand. My goggles are Salice bought in Italy for €32. No fogging or scratching and no complaints, although I'd far rather wear sunnies. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Megamum wrote: |
| So why the hell do some helmets easily cost £100+ when they must all have similar manufacturing methods and materials in them? |
I don't think all helmets are the same. Mine has a layer of material similar to kevlar which is included to protect against penetration by sharp objects (such as pointy bits of rock).
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
So why the hell do some helmets easily cost £100+ when they must all have similar manufacturing methods and materials in them?
|
Because they don't use the same materials, and also you will often find that the better (and usually more expensive) helmets grip and stay on your head better during (multiple) impacts. All helmets pass the safety tests, some exceed them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
not sure about carbon for a helmet if it is the only part of the layup as it is prone to brittle failure. Also, like glass if the resin matrix is lost/damaged at a point it will fail there very readily- Strength to weight is great.
They used to use a kevlar outer skin in the external layup on ocean racers as it would still hold together if the system delaminated or was otherwise damaged. It does make a marginally heavier boat, (kevlar is much weaker in compression than carbon or glass fibre) and it is really expensive to work because of its toughness (it requires special ceramic cutters), hence it is not really done any more, but if it was it would make the helmet more expensive. Although I am not an expert at composites I imagine it is not just carbon in carbon helmets.
Oh, and I have smith goggles and they fog, or at least the cheap low light lens does between the double lens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jonNZ, it's not just carbon. It appears to be what I'd describe as a 'weave' between the standard inside bit of the helmet and the out casing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Yes, they're expensive and yes, they're essential. Unless you move at a snail's pace on spring conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Scotia,
(I will work out the quotes sometime)
I like that concept. It sounds almost exactly like the idea used on the boats which was to maintain the integrity of the rest of it when damage occurred at a specific point and would be a huge improvement on standard. If I did lots of off piste with rocks etc around I would give that a serious look.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Here we go again, another "what's the difference between blah blah" thread. Not all goggles/helmets/jackets/ski socks are the same, and quite frankly you're a bit thick if that's what you think. Stuff is made to a cost to suit a particular market. If you're a cruiser of pistes, stop for coffee every two runs and go skiing one week a year then you won't need the more expensive high performance gear that is designed and manufactured to withstand the rigours of a season hard shredding in the back country. You may choose to buy the more expensive kit because it's going to last longer and probably looks better, but that's your prerogative as a punter living in a democracy operating a free market economy.
I've got a lot of expensive kit because I go often and spend as much time as I can off-piste (and because I'm a dreadful kit whore. So sue me), whereas the mates I go on the anual lads trip only go on the anual lads trip, and they have bog standard everything, much of it my cast-offs, and it all works perfectly. Everyone is happy. Not a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I know it's reverse snobbery but I've a lot of days with my £10 Tchibo specials (full TUV standard), I've never missed a storm day and my recent visit to the opticians confirmed my eyes are fine and dandy.
On the other hand I stand by my statement elsewhere that people who wear pikey ski kit are losers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I agree someone is earning big money with this. I also agree production cost is £1.75 or even less, but let's face it... it's everywhere the same. Ski boots are molded plastic with some other cheap stuff doing work as liner, where I doubt production cost would be much more then few £, yet they sell for 800eur. Bikes on the other side are done out of few carbon tubes, yet they cost up to 10.000eur. Milk in store is (at least around here) around 0.8eur/liter, when farmers get around 0.1eur/liter for it. If nothing else... photos I sell go for 100+eur/photo, and they are done in 1/5000 of sec, and since it's digital, there's no production cost... if you don't count cost of equipment, knowledge etc., which also goes for every previously mentioned product. So for me, it's pretty much useless to worry about difference between production cost and retail price. If I like/need something, and I can afford it, I buy it. If it's too expensive I don't. And if I think I could make my own goggles for £1.75, I would go and start making them 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
