Bifocal eyeware experience

[Jim Roemer]

Has anyone had good or bad experience with bifocal contact lenses in formula cars? With the rapid eye movement of focusing back and forth from gauges to the track, does that cause any vision problems? Any advice from our "experienced" drivers?

Thanks!

[Brian]

I've never experienced any issues. I wear the invisible biflocals, with progressive change. But it's going to be all about where the lens is set up, the difference in correction, and your head angle. I have found myself sitting the glasses pretty low to bring the distance correction lower, sometimes.

Brian

[RussMcB]

I agree with Brian. I don't think the progressives themselves are a problem. The bigger issue is having them fit well and stay in the right place. I have a hard time with my combination of glasses, helmet, nose, ears, balaclava, head angle, etc.

[Modo]

Oh CONTACTS!! guys corrected me below......oh well bifocal glasses below

wore a pair of executive bifocals (line halfway) once in a race without trying them in practice, even with wraparound wire type temples they walked up on me and I couldn't see the track clearly thru the bottom reading lense....at first didn't realize what was wrong being in combat and all, then realized they walked closer to eye sockets and couldn't readjust because of helmet (actually hard to tilt head down with wind trying to pull helmet off and lenses so close wouldn't matter)........as guy above said afraid of movement in critical vision planes, walk back with helmet movement et al....I now race with sightly corrected distance glasses with monster size lenses ($8.00 at americanreadingglasses.com) so there is no "what's that" caused by the frame in your scanning eyes......even recommend them for dark rainy tow nights instead of stylish glasses where u r looking around the lense to a sideroad, etc.......wouldn't wear them in DC rush hour cause the person in front will be laughing at your monster 60's style glasses in the mirror, hi.....the dash is still corrected enough to see with the slight correction for distance with these....... I have the typical didn't need glasses til 45 or so and now need correction for near and slight for far.....

[timos]

Strictly speaking about bifocal contacts, I found them totally unusable. At least the type I tried, as a nearsighted person.

I was using the "Aspheric Multifocal" style. They are set up for distance in the periphery and near vision in the center (where the resolution is highest) and that just didn't work for me. It gave me headaches (and degraded vision) that the single-prescription lens didn't.

My doc told me maybe 10-25% of people don't like 'em, and I'm squarely in that group.

http://www.allaboutvision.com/contacts/bifocals.htm

[azjc]

I wear progressive bifocal glasses, mostly needed for reading, but I do wear them all the time. I have very little distance correction but anything at reading distance is quite blurry (old age gets to you ) - gauges and mirrors. Gauges are not an issue, I can see the needle and know what range the needle should be but can't read the numbers... things are generally moving too fast for more then a quick glance anyway . Mirrors do seem a bit clearer with glasses, but the position of the bifocal is very critical, needs to be so that you do not have to tilt your head in order to bring something into focus (an old pair of glasses I have are unusable in the care because of that).

I had been wearing my glasses so I could see the image in the mirrors a bit clearer, but it was raining at the December event and my glasses fogged up before I even got in the car... being from dry Arizona I did not have any anti-fog on hand . So ran without and discovered that it wasn't too bad, but better if I had my glasses. Of course last weekend I still hadn't gotten any anti-fog, rained the day before the event and again it was too humid to wear the glasses, so again no glasses but I'm finding that without glasses is almost as good as with, just taken a bit of time to get used to the image and field of view.

[Frank C]

Before Timos noted that Jim was asking about contact lens bifocals, I was going to suggest that Brian, Russ, and Michael needed new glasses! I am fundamentally near-sighted and have worn bifocal glasses for a long time. For racing, I just wear photo-gray glasses with my distance prescription. I can read gages adequately with them. I have gone from relatively large lenses to fashionably smaller ones and had no problems with field of view. The only problem I have with glasses is putting them on with the helmet on.
- Frank C

[budawe]

I wear distance lenses only. The progressive have a very narrow view point and I really don't like bifocals. I tilt my head in the corners and that blurs most progressives. Same thing on my motorcycle. Perscription distance sunglasses for driving and riding and cheap readers if I need them, In the car I rely on the position of the needles to monitor the engine. An old aircraft approach is to put the operating range at 12 oclock. All it takes is a glance to check. My data acq. panel has large readout.

[D.T. Benner]

Contacts,not glasses.

[RussMcB]

That's funny. I totally missed the "contacts" reference. I think my brain is more to blame than my glasses! :-).

Sorry I helped send the thread off in the wrong direction.

[John Robinson II]

I am sure that if he sees this, ha ha get it, that Stan (eyerace) will chime in. Have you ever thought about wearing onlyone contact for reading? Sort of like the surgery thing.
My vision is not bad enough yet that I have to wear my bifocals for racing. Besides, the CDS has pretty lights across the top and I just use them to shift by.
John

[smcqueen]

I went from progressive glasses, to contacts (astigmatism) however you spell it, then did lasek surgury.

Glasses were a pain, always fogged up, and always seemed to fall off the car or into your lap where you could not find them after I was buckled in the car.

Contact had to sit on my eye a certain way to work. Less hassle than the glasses, but the g-forces in the turns would make my contacts rotate where I could not see well. Also a real pain on the long road trips.

About five months ago did lasek just to correct distance vision. Much better vision for looking down track. My eyes almost never fog up (except for heavy drinking). I just have trouble seeing the dash.

I know this is a little more than was asked, but I am glad to be away from the contacts for racing and other sporting activities. Downside is that I still need reading glasses for regular reading activities, and it is getting pretty difficult to read the dash other than the pretty lights that come on now and then.

scott

[Steve Demeter]

At my advanced age, my arms are no longer long enough.

But have 20/20 in both eyes at distance.

If you have analog gauges, just paint yellow lines on the face at the high and low allowable readings and al long as the needle is in between them, you are OK.

[Tom Sprecher]

While we're on the topic of contacts and glasses I wonder if anyone has ever had bifocals that the bottom section provides no correction? I am nearsighted and have worn glasses most of my life. Over the past couple of years I am no longer able to read, or more fustrating fabricate, without looking under or over my glasses. If I could get bifocal safety glasses that I could see out of the bottom, I would not have to tilt my head so much and chance getting something in my eye while grinding, sawing, welding, etc.

[RobLav]

Great thread. I've been struggling with glasses and fogging all the time. Taped a few nickels to the bottom of the visor and using a breath deflector now. Has helped. Had debated contacts for astygmatism but after reading Scott's comment, that goes out the window. Maybe it's time to shave the moustache and ditch the head sock or get a helmet with a LOT of interior airflow. I've always used distant vision glasses anyway in the car and a seperate set for reading. Those gauges sure are hard to read though.

[timos]

Scott and I have slightly different experiences. Surely I'm not pushing my FA hard enough , but I have no problem with (single-prescription) contacts - but I definitely agree with him that they are not great over long time periods. I pop them out post-race and go back to glasses.

I'd do lasik but I love the fact I have a built-in magnifying glass (3.0 nearsighted).

tim

[Scott Hutchison]

Hi Jim,

I wear contacts and I have the left eye corrected for far sighted and the right eye for near sighted, I think they call it mono vision. I can see both the dash and the track great and it doesn't seem to hurt my depth perception. There was a short period of adjustment but your brain apparently just figures it out.

I suggested this once before on Apex and it met with a lot of resistance but it works great for me.

[Becker Motorsports]

my son has worn soft contacts for years for years while racing both Moto Cross and our 95VD FC with no problems. In the VD we clock the tach so that the shift point is at 12 o'clock. We also mark the shift point with a yellow line, so when the red tach needle touches it we ars +/- 200RPM's from the shift point. We also mark the oil pressure and water temp min./max with a white line. He feels more confortable to glance at them, rather then trying to read them during a race. Works for us.
I would NOT recomend wearing bi-focal lenses of any type while racing, just my opinion.

Regards ernie

[azjc]

While we're on the topic of contacts and glasses I wonder if anyone has ever had bifocals that the bottom section provides no correction? I am nearsighted and have worn glasses most of my life. Over the past couple of years I am no longer able to read, or more fustrating fabricate, without looking under or over my glasses. If I could get bifocal safety glasses that I could see out of the bottom, I would not have to tilt my head so much and chance getting something in my eye while grinding, sawing, welding, etc.

When working on anything with bifocal glasses can be a pain in the ass. Getting your head tilted / positioned correctly can be very difficult. I'm OK working on a formula car, but trying to work, for example, under the dash of a car is next to impossible. When welding I use a $10 pair of glasses because I just can't get the angle right for my bifocal under a welding helmet.

[John Robinson II]

Tom,
Contact eyerace (Stan) I am sure he can make some glasses for what you need. He made me some where the bifocal section was on the top and bottom, which worked great for work but not so great for normal use. I have never seen safety glasses that only have the correction on the top. I use ones that are like standard bifocals and they are available at most of the larger safety supply outlets. In the shop I use the cheap drugstore version reading lenses with side shields.

John

[Frank C]

John:
I think bifocal safety glasses with the near vision at the top are available without too much trouble. When I worked for Lockheed in Atlanta (Marietta), I heard of production workers who had them for overhead work. I agree that bifocals interfere with my welding (which is not great to start with) the most of anything. Bifocals are the worst part of aging I have experienced, at least so far!
- Frank C

[sflaten]

Tom,
Not sure if it would help, but there are bifocal lenses that you can stick on the interior of sunglasses, safety glasses etc. They bond on to the surface on the interior with lense with some warm water. The cost is about $25 a set.

While we're on the topic of contacts and glasses I wonder if anyone has ever had bifocals that the bottom section provides no correction? I am nearsighted and have worn glasses most of my life. Over the past couple of years I am no longer able to read, or more fustrating fabricate, without looking under or over my glasses. .

[EYERACE]

Wow........this place finally let me log in....wierd.

More later as a patient just walked in but real quick like

bifocal soft lenses huh? ..............ha ha ha ha ........i think that says it all

but if it didn't..............

timos says his doc says only about 10 to 25 % of people don't like them........i'm sorry but i'm of the opinion that doc is out of touch.........i'll say the numbers are exactly the opposite....there....that says it all

i'm 57 and would not wear them....there....that says it all

..........more later

[Richard Learned]

I can't speak WRT contacts, but I have experienced no problems with bifocal glasses when the frames are chosen with the helment in hand at the eye doc. I ended up utilizing a pair of women's frames that fit the Bell almost perfectly and stay in place at all times. Having the frames match the helment seems to me to be the most important factor in making bifocals a "transparent" item while on the track.

Richard L

[EYERACE]

bifocal spectacles for racing - not with a progressive, go with what's called a D28 and set it a little low - what the heck - if you can put the car on the trailer, take it and your helmet to the doc's office, get in the car and have the people measure your "seg height" on the spot - then try putting the upper edge of a piece of scotch tape across the frame at the height measured, the lower part of the tape should cover your gauges

if you race at night - get an antireflection coated spectacle lens

i'm one of those racers that still has those 20th century round things with red needles, not digital displays [YOU SHOULD NOT WEAR POLARIZED LENSES IF USING DIGITAL DISPLAYS IN THE RACE CAR OR FLYING] - if all the needles are pointing straight up for me [or down or sideways] everything is fine, so i don't care about bifocals if racing and would wear single vision contacts or single vision spectacles.

the general frame i recommend for racing spectacles is from Randolph Engineering called the "Aviator" with the bayonet temples - 50 mm - not every doc can get these frames

[EYERACE]

Hmmmm.......actually the problem is Jim is admitting that he looks at the gauges

[captaineddie1975]

bifocal spectacles for racing - not with a progressive, go with what's called a D28 and set it a little low - what the heck - if you can put the car on the trailer, take it and your helmet to the doc's office, get in the car and have the people measure your "seg height" on the spot - then try putting the upper edge of a piece of scotch tape across the frame at the height measured, the lower part of the tape should cover your gauges

if you race at night - get an antireflection coated spectacle lens

i'm one of those racers that still has those 20th century round things with red needles, not digital displays [YOU SHOULD NOT WEAR POLARIZED LENSES IF USING DIGITAL DISPLAYS IN THE RACE CAR OR FLYING] - if all the needles are pointing straight up for me [or down or sideways] everything is fine, so i don't care about bifocals if racing and would wear single vision contacts or single vision spectacles.

the general frame i recommend for racing spectacles is from Randolph Engineering called the "Aviator" with the bayonet temples - 50 mm - not every doc can get these frames

Please enlighten me with respect to Polarized Lenses. Do you mean the Photograys that I wore for years that instantly went dark when I popped out of the clouds into bright sunshine? I have always worn lenses that turned dark since 1975 and I have never had a problem flying or racing. I presently race with a digital display ( Digatron) and also have no problem. Now with regards to contact lenses I never wore them flying or racing and gave up on them entirely a few years ago. I do remember trying bifocal lenses but they were tough at night driving on the roads as they didn't let in the peripheral light enough for me to read the street signs so I went back to regular contacts and reading glasses at the time.

[EYERACE]

A few years back I had a lengthy discussion with an SCCA Medical......uh...director?....or the title was....chief?......executive?........or uhhh?......what the heck.....SCCA Medical Doctor Dude in charge of stuff. As best my memory serves me, it was his opinion and mine that to wear monovision contacts was not acceptable for racing. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

Indeed monovision is NOT allowed by the FAA for either a private or commercial pilot so it sort of makes sense that it would not be that way if racing. I'm certain that someone somewhere has raced wearing monovision contact lenses and will do it again......but if the distance vision blur of the "reading eye" would be the recorded number for that eye's distance visual acuity, it would probably not be a passing item on the SCCA physical form. The "reading" eye's distance visual acuity would be something like 20/50 or 20/70 or worse which.......would be a red flag to the home office people [maybe] but for sure to any Doc asked to sign off your medical form as being fit to drive.

These "multifocal" contact lenses have multiple curves across their surface and therefore multiple powers simultaneously focus into the back of your eye. It's sort of like letting your brain run on double exposure.....and who needs any confusion or decrement to their vision at 100+ mph? Your night vision would be terrible......I've worn them. One patient summed up the ability to read with them aptly > "Well I can read this little print but it's like the print stands up off the page sort of like it's 3-D and the page behind it is a blur at the same time." Many simply say > I can't read up close.....or my distance vision is blurred [and it makes perfect sense too because they are looking through multiple powers all at once]....or they can't see clearly at both distances!

[EYERACE]

Photogray was what the lenses that lighten and darken in glass were called [pittsburgh paint and glass].....the plastic ones are called either Transitions lenses or SunSensor brand [different companies].

Polarized is a whole different concept. A polarized lens does not lighten and darken......but then there's the new thing called a DriveWear lens that is polarized and does lighten and darken.......it even does some lightening and darkening when you're in the street car.....but a DriveWear lens doesn't come close to getting all that clear.....partly because of the polarization. There is no clear polarized lens.

I say to avoid polarized and digital gauge displays because the numerals and letters on a digital display are polarized to begin with and it may render the figures harder or impossible to see.................however.............earlier in the day today I had a fellow name of Simpson who works with PCA here in Florida in the office and he was telling me about how he wears polarized lenses and has no problem with his display. I know I can't see the display on a calculator properly if I'm wearing the polarized DriveWear lenses and looking at the display from other than a straight ahead angle. I've not really tried it in a car looking at a digital dash.......so the statement I made about polarized vs. digital is somewhat a generalization based on theory. If I'm right, and your display is on your wheel and not on a fixed in place dash, then you change the angle of the polarization as you turn the wheel so figures would be visible or faded or gone depending on the amount of steering input.

Transitions or SunSensor lenses would be no problem with these displays........but when one is wearing a full face helmet with a visor made of Lexan [Lexan blocks ultraviolet light]....... the tint of the lenses might not change much at all because it takes UV striking the chemicals in the lens to change.

[EYERACE]

Hmmmm......learn something every day

sitting here right now and as i grabbed a calculator i thought...what the heck...put on the DriveWear lenses and i can read the calculator at all angles through the lenses......it's slightly faded at some angles and if i was at speed i'd be getting the information i need at a quick glance in all likelihood

so i stand somewhat corrected

[MAC Racing]

First to the question of contacts in the race car. Soft or gas permeable lenses can be worn in a race car. They should be fit well and you should have worn them enough you are adapted to the lens and are comfortable with the lenses. There are many types of bifocal lenses and many options between monovision, modified monovision and then full bifocals. I tell all my patients getting into bifocals contacts or glasses they need to realize everything we do will be a compromise of some sort. In this case glasses in a race car have the compromise of fog, movement, overall fit, helmet issues. Contact have the compromise they are difficult to fit, the distance or near can change if the lens moves to much, drying with air flow or decreased blinking from concentrating. So either way if you want to use bifocals in the race car find some one experienced in fitting bifocals. Get a exam and see if you are able to wear lenses at all and go through the fitting process. If they are good at contacts you will go through a fitting process and expect to pay a seperate fee for this. I tell my bifocal patients expect three or four visits and a month or more time.

Mat

Wow........this place finally let me log in....wierd.

More later as a patient just walked in but real quick like

bifocal soft lenses huh? ..............ha ha ha ha ........i think that says it all

but if it didn't..............

timos says his doc says only about 10 to 25 % of people don't like them........i'm sorry but i'm of the opinion that doc is out of touch.........i'll say the numbers are exactly the opposite....there....that says it all

i'm 57 and would not wear them....there....that says it all

..........more later

Not to argue with you but how many soft bifocals do you fit? My success rate is 80%.

Mat

[MAC Racing]

Although we are now hi-jacking the thread,

Drive wear is one of the first to make a sun sensing polarized lens. There are many, many other tinted polarized lenses on the market.

In a race car you need to use caution with polarized lenses. If you have gauges with a lens that is polarized in the same direction your glasses are the light will cancel and the display behind the lens will be less visable depending on the ammount of polarization. This can be decreased by rotating the lens on the instrument to change the angle of polarization. If the displayed numbers are certain LCDs they can be polarized with out the lens and still unreadable.

However the point of wearing a polarized lens whild driving, race car or street car is flat surfaces will polarize light creating glare. Polarized lenses will eliminate this glare and can improve vision against this glare. They can be great for race car drivers.

Mat

Photogray was what the lenses that lighten and darken in glass were called [pittsburgh paint and glass].....the plastic ones are called either Transitions lenses or SunSensor brand [different companies].

Polarized is a whole different concept. A polarized lens does not lighten and darken......but then there's the new thing called a DriveWear lens that is polarized and does lighten and darken.......it even does some lightening and darkening when you're in the street car.....but a DriveWear lens doesn't come close to getting all that clear.....partly because of the polarization. There is no clear polarized lens.

I say to avoid polarized and digital gauge displays because the numerals and letters on a digital display are polarized to begin with and it may render the figures harder or impossible to see.................however.............earlier in the day today I had a fellow name of Scott [I forget, first or last name] who works with PCA here in Florida in the office and he was telling me about how he wears polarized lenses and has no problem with his display. I know I can't see the display on a calculator properly if I'm wearing the polarized DriveWear lenses and looking at the display from other than a straight ahead angle. I've not really tried it in a car looking at a digital dash.......so the statement I made about polarized vs. digital is somewhat a generalization based on theory. If I'm right, and your display is on your wheel and not on a fixed in place dash, then you change the angle of the polarization as you turn the wheel so figures would be visible or faded or gone depending on the amount of steering input.

Transitions or SunSensor lenses would be no problem with these displays........but when one is wearing a full face helmet with a visor made of Lexan [Lexan blocks ultraviolet light]....... the tint of the lenses might not change much at all because it takes UV striking the chemicals in the lens to change.

[azjc]

I usually run with a standard Bell dark sheild... even when it's cloudy or as in December raining. I just feel comfortable, focused. Part of it may come from growing up at the beach and on the water all the time along with light sensitive blue eyes.

As for running with glasses, no issues with them moving using the normal glasses I wear every day, just put my helmet on and slide in the glasses. If they moved around or were loose was I'd wonder if the helmet was too loose. For me it's just a matter of the bifocal being positioned correctly so when glancing at the mirrors they are in focus without any head movement, same for looking down the track.

[EYERACE]

I've been in practice for over 30 years. I remember when Wesley/Jessen and B&L [the PA1 lens] rushed their original bifocals to market in 1980....without FDA approval. We had just elected someone who used the expression about "getting Government off of America's back".......good attitude towards lenses that were made in an FDA approved facility using FDA approved plastic and sterilized according to FDA protocol....but US Marshalls shut them down anyway. I remember the original Ciba bifocals many years ago......the company would not even tell the Doctors the size of the center OZ.......real nice huh? I remember the Echelon lens and felt like the entire world had a smooth smear of WD-40 over itself with them on my eyes. I remember the Paris Soft-Site true seg - I did some of the FDA Clinicals on them [sort of like the Tangent Streak RGP] soft bifocal....it was an alternating lens design and people could see very well if the lens would translate on the eye....but the seg was in the bottom and people stare at computer screens that are at eye level, so when I could get them to work, all too often the patient worked on a 'puter....so we'd bag the lens. B&L repackaged that lens for years as their own brand, so I had two sources. I remember the HydroCurve bifocal...and some would wear them but mostly people were blurred. I remember the B&L Occasions lens......a lens I was supposed to expect people to wear only on occasions......???.......excuse me?......people want to see clearly in general and not switch back to their other regular lenses because then they could see better than the Occasions. Proclears and PS45s and LifeStyle MV2s and Synergeyes.........I don't have many wearing the Synergeyes bifocal but they've worked out. I have roughly one person daily in the office that ends up with a pair or varying pairs and/or varying brands and pairs of bifocal or multifocal soft lenses on their eyes. Roughly on schedule for their follow-up annual exam, I have many of the truely successful fits coming back still wearing them and they want to stay in them - so I know some will wear them. Though above I've spoken about the people who say they can't see for beans with the lenses, the reason I try them on many people is that from rare time to rare time someone says the lenses are fine - they see, binocularly, 20/20 at a distance and 7 point print up close. I like to find someone who truely sees well and then it's all so simple....you know......like butter. I can't explain why that one person does so well but I'm always looking for them. And this is about 20% of the time tops. The alternative is to slap the lenses on virtually anyone and then after the fact of the person saying they're not happy with how they see just keep telling them, "Oh just keep wearing them, you'll adapt." Bull$**t. Doctors easily delude themselves into thinking that a patient that later is not complaining, did adapt and is happy.........more likely they gave up wearing the lenses and you don't hear about that. Simply getting paid in full by them and later not seeing them further is not my definition of success. I want results. I don't just talk to the patient in the chair for a few minutes, write something up on the flow sheet and have the Assistant put a pair of 'em on and bingo! the patient is at the front desk for their fees and I holler NEXT. The lenses work out great on people that don't mind being blurred is all too often what is really going on.
I love to put them on some who is an uncorrected 46 year old +1.50 at a distance and only wears drug store +1.25 cheaters to read in the recent past.....that person is already somewhat adapted to being blurred and doesn't even know how blurred things really are because when they were younger they were +50 and never wore any pair of glasses or contacts......they are not overly blurred worse at a distance with some kind of "eliptical/hyperbolic curved lens" and they can see better up close than with nothing....so they love the lenses......ignorance is bliss. I know they'd see more clearly with spectacles....but they don't care about the lack of true clarity and suddenly they are seeing without having to wear those "terrible" glasses of which they know little because they have no experience with proper lenses in the past. I find few that truely see very very clearly at far and near. You can compromise if you want....but often you're compromising clarity. Let's face it, the baby boomers are getting old, they've been in readers or bifocal spectacles for a while now and guess what....many of those same people actually have got some real money....so......the contact lense companies advertise them and then the people show up in our offices and the CL companies move boxes out the door at a great profit margin because their actual production cost is dirt cheap.....once the FDA start-up costs are recouped. To me my profession is not just about making money and telling people "you'll adapt" but about results and it takes clarity to get it. I would not recommend, for best vision, any current multifocal or bifocal or monovision or modified monvision to a racecar driver.......but if they want to try it out for themselves......I've got many many trial kits.

[MAC Racing]

Eyerace,
I am not going to get into a professional pissing match with you. Since our experiences with multifocals are vastly different I asked a simple question. The point being are you speaking from real world experience or limited experience with the lenses. I am not making any statement towards your ability as a doctor or the care you give patients but trying to help the original poster with his question.

My advice to the original poster still stands. There are many options out there and if you would like to find a contact lens correction for racing find a doctor experienced in contacts and in particular multifocals and go through the fitting process. Given the results I have with the lenses and if you are a good candidate (the type of prescription you have, can you wear lenses comfortably, etc) you should be able to wear the lenses in your race car.

Matthew Cutter OD
(Normally I don’t sign with my title but I was questioned in a PM about my credentials)

[Jim Roemer]

Brothers,
Once again, ApexSpeed has provided a forum where someone can gather valid data points from across its members. In the span of a couple days, I picked up information that would otherwise take months of research and perhaps a fair amount of money in trying different solutions. You guys are awesome and I thank each of you for providing your opinions.

What am I going to do? Well, in my day job, I wear glasses to correct a slight stigmatism and have progressive bifocal lenses. My car has an AIM dash with pretty bright warning lights. In past seasons I chose not to wear glasses as I could see well for distance and could rely on warning lights (both low and high warnings) and maybe an occassional squint at the dash numbers down the long straights at RA.

What spooked me lately was a conversation with another "senior" racer when he told me that after a couple laps he would see four brake lights (from a car that had two) while going into a corner and he would close one eye to compensate for it! Holy crap!

So, like I said, you guys are awesome. Thanks for your advice. We're all better off collectively due to guys like you and a forum like this.

Have a safe year, everyone.
Jim

[RobLav]

I found this to be one of the most valuable threads here on Apex in a long time. It's unfortunate that the two eye docs seem to be in the midst of an argument. (and I have done the same thing here on Apex as well...).

Seems to me, though, that this a good example of why a lot pf people recommend second opinions in the medical world. It is the patient's choice to determine which path to follow.

The timing for this has been great for me because I have an eye Doc appointment on Monday... and I've already printed out the Aviator frame Randolph Engineering webpage to bring with me (as racing distance vision glasses - and I will get the sunshade clip-ons too). And I also like another Randolph Rx set of frames for daily wear. So this has been most helpful. Thank You Very Much!

[EYERACE]

No pi match in public thank you so I guess we can continue the PMs too....however since you asked something in public again, a reply in public is no bother.......

By the way, when you ask about real world experience or limited experience, you fail to provide your definition of your own terms.

You ask real world experience..........well just what the heck is over 30 years of my own private practice, being an FDA Investigator for many different lenses [some of them RGP bifocal/multifocal and some soft multifocal/bifocal lenses] of FDA Clinical Pre-Market or Post-Market studies called? Every brand of lens I mentioned above in the long post I have fit, prescribed and dispensed over the past 30+ years.........since you didn't provided a definition, I take the liberty to state that the past 30 years seem to me to have been real enough for me.

[jlwolf]

I have had pretty good luck wearing a Nike frame with a progressive lens. I have a clear pair and a tinted pair for bright days. I have used them with a Bell M2 and now with an HJC carbon fiber. They are very easy to get on and off in the helmet with a balclava on as well. The only track where blurring was an issue was at Sebring turn 17 through turn 1. I would have taped them to the bridge of my nose, but was concerned about fogging.

I agree that this is a great thread.

Joe

[EYERACE]

Joe Riley.....two time SARRC Club Ford Champion and all around nice guy.........or was it once?.........is the reason why I added Nike frames to my office. They are made from quality materials and the temples lend themselves easily to putting the glasses on while one is wearing a helmet. Thanks for bring this up - I had forgotten about that when mentioning Randolph Engineering....and I shouldn't have forgotten because Marchon Corp. [who make and distribute Nike frames] has been one of my racecar sponsors for over ten years.

pip pip and cheerio