What's new

On Aviators: Ray Ban vs. Randolph Engineering

Okay, so there aren't too many things a man can do to accessorize. Wearing stylish sunglasses is one of those things. Now, for years I was one who didn't care about the style aspect. Sunglasses were functional first and foremost and style came second. A couple years ago that changed, and like many things my tastes evolved.

I got into aviators late. I actually never tried a pair on until relatively recently, convinced that the square-framed navigator style suited me better. I was afraid the traditional teardrop aviator style would swallow up my face like my pair of hybrid-aviator Serengetis did. But I wore them because they had phenomenal eye coverage and head wrap. And really, too many men wear sunglasses that are too large for their faces anyway, moreso with aviators. It probably has something to do with "to look more macho, go large and in charge" thing, or it may have to do with many aviators being available only in larger sized lenses, because traditionally they were functional above everything else. Pilots needed eye coverage, ergo huge lenses. In any case, the large frames were a reason I didn't wear them for a long time.

Okay, long story short, I saw a movie. The star had a very particular pair of square Aviators. They were awesome and I wanted them. In the course of my searching for the exact model (which were Polo Purple label something), I was turned onto Randolph Engineering and American Optical. I researched that, not knowing at the time that Randolph was in vogue because of Mad Men. Now I don't watch Mad Men and I could care less what Don Draper is wearing, I just got the glasses. I liked the fact that they were military spec, made in the US, and the fit was tremendous. The problem was....I got curious about the more famous-shaped Aviators because of them. Traditional teardrop-shaped ones. So with the Top Gun soundtrack playing in the background, I'm going to compare two of them here. :001_cool:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

First up...Ray Ban. The Original. Ubiquitous. I always avoided them because they were huge and I have a small face, but as it turns out, the 55mm lens size isn't too bad on me. The aviator shape makes the lenses seem not so big side to side. When I was researching, people either lauded Ray Ban or spit fire at it. Condemnations of "They suck now," or "They're made in China," or "They aren't what they were since Luxottica bought them!" were mixed with praises of "They're great" and "The lenses are awesome." And I saw at least one Youtube video comparing new Raybans with ones from 1995 and the guy preferred the new ones. So...whatever. Here's what I think. And this is an honest assessment since I wasn't expecting them to compare with the Randolphs at all.

First, since Luxottica owns 75% of the eyewear industry anyway, if Ray Bans suck, then I guess so do the vast majority of glasses on the market...and that's not true. And I've owned 2 pairs of Luxottica glasses that have been just fine. So I don't get the hate here. The construction on them seems fine and solid, though the temples are a little thin for my taste, but from what I gather they were designed to be "wire" thin anyway. Second, while some Ray Bans are made in China, the majority of the Aviator models are out of Italy apparently. Mine are. Anyway, the lenses are great and the temples fit wonderfully without adjustment, and the nose bridge is awesome...easily adjusable with curved nosepads. It feels light yet secure on my face. I'm not sure how the "gold" finish will hold up over time though. Overall the glasses do feel solid and not cheap. On my face, the 55mm lenses are just a tad large but not overly so.

So, with the classic out of the way, it's time for Randolph Engineering. They're on a bit of a wave right now in terms of visibility, and have eclipsed their older counterpart American Optical and these days, hold the majority of the contracts with the military and NASA. I already have their classic square Aviator and I wanted to go with American Optical for the traditional teardrop one, but only Randolph had it in a smaller 52mm size, with the AO starting at 58...way too big for me. And the Randolph was shaped differently.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

The Randolph Concorde has a slightly softer take on the classic lens shape. The slant isn't as severe as on the Ray Ban. This aids in the overall look in my opinion. The frame also "curves" more, fitting the front of the face. The frame is thick and solid. It feels sturdy and high quality. The fit is snug and secure. It loses points in the nose bridge area though because it's tough to adjust. The sturdier frame means you really have to put some elbow grease into bending the metal stalks for the nosepads to ensure a perfect fit, because it ships with a stupidly narrow configuration that any grown man would find uncomfortable. With some effort, you can get it perfect, though. In all other areas I am impressed with it. The finish is bright chrome (I would've killed for it in matte chrome like the square Aviator), and like the Ray Ban, has a green G-15 lens that's just as good as the Ray Ban. Randolph fans say it's better but I think they're equal. And the frame and lenses and assembly are done in the USA...so that's a plus, though the nosepads are imported.

I got the Randolph first and I have to say that while the smaller frame LOOKS better on my face in terms of proportion, perhaps the 55mm lens on the Ray Ban provides a little better coverage. It's not very noticeable however, and in any case, Randolph skips the 55 size in the Concorde model...the next size up is 57. In terms of frame, the Randolph feels more solid, mostly because of the Ray Ban's wire-thin temples. And I don't know what the Ray Ban is made of, but Randolph makes a big deal about its 18% nickel/steel alloy being less likely to corrode and break. Ordinarily I would think that's marketing spiel but I've had glasses frames snap on me after a couple of years, so maybe that's something to keep in mind as an advantage. Randolph ships with a little screwdriver and extra screws and nosepads, a bigger cloth, and hands down the plusher case; the Ray Ban's case seems oddly hard.

Neither pair has hinges on the temples, which is something that I'm continually surprised about in sunglasses (though Serengeti has them). At this price point, ALL glasses should have hinged temples or at least the option for them. It eliminates the frustration of having to find the perfect width, since distributors or even manufacturers give false numbers. Luckily for me, the Ray Ban and Randolph both fit me like a glove and I couldn't be happier. Ray Ban has the better nose bridge hands down and I cannot complain at all about the feel or fit. In fact at this point (and I know they're brand new so it could get worse later) there's no real fault with the Ray Ban at all. The Randolph just feels a bit more solid and naturally hugs my face.

In terms of price they are about equal. Randolph is more expensive if you order direct or at some dealers, but there are places that sell the Concorde for as low as $109. The Ray Ban of course goes for around ~$100 or a bit lower. Is it worth paying more for the Concorde? If price is an issue, go for the AO General glasses. If you have an average to large head, the size will be fine. If you need a smaller size, I can recommend either the Concorde or the Ray Ban. Honestly I don't think Ray Ban deserves the sneering it gets. I could change my mind but it seems fine and high quality. It all comes down to taste.

So I hope this helps for some guys who are curious about different Aviators. Yes they're everywhere, but they're timeless and they look good (just get a pair that fits your face!). I should've worn them years ago. Now I always will.
 
Nice review!

After reading some reviews on B&B a while back, I picked up a pair of AO aviators. No complaints...well made, good price, and I like the way they look.
 
I've been wearing AO aviators for the last 17 years. Unless I pick up a cheap walmart pair (in a pinch), they are the only sunglasses I wear. I think my first pair cost me $20-$25.
 
...only Randolph had it in a smaller 52mm size, with the AO starting at 58...

Thanks for the awesome review! FYI, I got a pair of AO in 52mm no problem from OpticsPlanet.com. Lots of options in that size and not what I would call expensive (at least compared to Ray Ban and RE). I would love to get me a pair of the squared RE aviators but can't justify the cost at the moment. Some day...
 
I have been in the market for purchasing sunglasses this month because I broke my Maui Jim's. I do watch Mad Men and really enjoy the fashion of that era. I just purchased a pair of Ray Ban's New Wayfarers polarized and absolutely love them. I ordered the 55mm and I do wish they were larger.

One question for you. I had a pair of American Optics that I really enjoyed and I must have lost them about a year ago. I do alot of driving and have come to prefer polarized glasses. The pair of AO's that I had were not polarized and the lenses were glass which made the glasses really heavy on my face. I'm currently looking at AO's & Randolphs for another pair of but want polarized and a lighter lens..any suggestions?
 
I have been in the market for purchasing sunglasses this month because I broke my Maui Jim's. I do watch Mad Men and really enjoy the fashion of that era. I just purchased a pair of Ray Ban's New Wayfarers polarized and absolutely love them. I ordered the 55mm and I do wish they were larger.

One question for you. I had a pair of American Optics that I really enjoyed and I must have lost them about a year ago. I do alot of driving and have come to prefer polarized glasses. The pair of AO's that I had were not polarized and the lenses were glass which made the glasses really heavy on my face. I'm currently looking at AO's & Randolphs for another pair of but want polarized and a lighter lens..any suggestions?

AO come in polycarbonate polarized. I got a pair and they're great - glass is too heavy for me. Don't know about RE.
 
You might want to consider Serengeti sunglasses, especially with the driver lenses. They come in a variety of lens shapes including two classic aviator styles (medium and large). I have a large collection of sunglasses, including Raybans, Nikons, Carerras, Porsche Design, and Costa del Mars, but Serengetis are my favorites by far.
 
Another thing to consider is lens material. Glass has the best optical properties, followed by CR-39 (plastic) and then polycarbonate. Polycarbonate is light and has the best shatter resistance by far. I prefer glass for driving and everyday wear, but polycarbonate for sports.
 
Another thing to consider is lens material. Glass has the best optical properties, followed by CR-39 (plastic) and then polycarbonate. Polycarbonate is light and has the best shatter resistance by far. I prefer glass for driving and everyday wear, but polycarbonate for sports.

Yes, great point. I forgot about that. Thanks.
 
Thanks for the awesome review! FYI, I got a pair of AO in 52mm no problem from OpticsPlanet.com. Lots of options in that size and not what I would call expensive (at least compared to Ray Ban and RE). I would love to get me a pair of the squared RE aviators but can't justify the cost at the moment. Some day...
I don't mean the square Aviator style. AO comes in 52 for the square (the "Original Pilot"), but not teardrop style, which they call the "General". That starts at 58.

From what I can tell, the AO Original Pilot and the Randolph Aviator (not the Concorde, reviewed above) are virtually identical. If I could do it again, I'd get the AO's because they're cheaper.
 
I just bought the gold AO's Original Pilot in polycarbonate polarized for under $70 shipped at Eyewear Planet. I'll post some pics when they come in...
 
Nice write up. I wanted a pair of aviators, but they were bigger than I wanted. So I went with Ray Ban Cockpit glasses since they were a tad smaller.
 
I just bought the gold AO's Original Pilot in polycarbonate polarized for under $70 shipped at Eyewear Planet. I'll post some pics when they come in...
The extra-wide nose bridge on the AO/Randolph military frame takes some getting used to in the way it makes the glasses look on your face. But after a few days I liked it.
 
Wore the Ray Ban most of the day today and I have to say that it was extremely light and comfy. A joy to wear with a perfect fit. I have concerns over the long-term durability of the frame however. It seems like you have to really be careful with it.
 
The lenses in my AOs are great, but they're glass and too heavy for normal wear. They're sturdy, the blade legs are great for wearing with an aviation headset or helmet and they were cheap enough when i got them ($25). I have a pair of Fossil aviators that do a decent job for $30 glasses. They're a little flimsy, but the lens quality is good enough. I have a pair of Oakley square frame aviators on the way and I'm really looking forward to them. They're sturdy and Oakley has been my producer of choice for 15 years or so.

Thanks for the review, it was a good read.
 
I've had a pair of Raybans since about a week after 9/11 when I got my eyes zapped prior to enlisting.

Both companies make a good pair, I've just never had a reason to replace my Aviators (oddly enough, only ever wore them in civvies). These days if things get interesting I'm wearing Revision Sawflys or Hellflys.

There is no hinge on the temple because the original design didn't call for it, and Aviators are designed (originally) to fit under a helmet so tight fit was assured. Most actual aviators I've known (having worked with F-16, F-15, Tornado, Harrier, C-17, C-130, KC-135, RC-135, KC-10 and E6B crews) use the bayonet earpieces so they'll fit under a helmet without beating up your ears, at least among fighter crews. The transport/refuler/recon bird guys are more or less flying airliners so it doesn't matter.
 
Been in the market for some good sunglasses. Was just about to order some Ray Ban's when I saw this thread. Just ordered two sets...

1) AO General Sunglasses, Silver, Bayonet, Grey Glass Lenses, 52mm, Polarized
2) AO Original Pilot Sunglasses, Gold, Bayonet, Grey Glass Lens, 55mm, Polarized

Hopefully they are better than my current sunglasses.
 
I don't mean the square Aviator style. AO comes in 52 for the square (the "Original Pilot"), but not teardrop style, which they call the "General". That starts at 58.

From what I can tell, the AO Original Pilot and the Randolph Aviator (not the Concorde, reviewed above) are virtually identical. If I could do it again, I'd get the AO's because they're cheaper.

My pair are "General" (model AO-SG-FlGGen-S-PCCP-CC-52), teardrop design, and are 52. Just go here and choose "52 mm" for Lens Diameter and you will get somewhere around 80 options.

"AO American Optical Flight Gear General Series Sunglasses Product Info:
If you want fashion and comfort, plus the optical performance demanded by the U.S. Military pilots, look to American Optical Eyewear.
AO Eyewear offers performance-tested sunglasses with classic aviator styling which characterized by the tear-drop shaped oversized lenses that look well both on male and female consumers of all ages. AO General Series Sunglass provides maximum protection, and comfort. The rugged and sturdy structure and high quality finishing of the steel alloy frame coupled with distortion free, toughened and polished True Color glass lens have made the AO Flight Gear Collection the standard bearer of all fine military sunglasses.
52mm or 58mm AO American General Optical Sunglasses are available in Gold, Black and Silver colors. You can choose AO Sunglass with Bayonet, Wire Spatula or Comfort Cable Temples. 52 mm and 58 mm AO General Flight Gear Sunglasses come with Glass Lenses (True Color Gray, True Color Green, Cosmetan Brown, True Color Gray Polarized and Cosmetan Brown Polarized) or with Polycarbonate Lenses (Color Correct, Color Correct Polarized, High Contrast Amber, and High Contrast Amber Polarized)."
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom