# Revision Hellfly vs. Oakley Minute 2.0



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Feb 1, 2011)

So I've been wearing my Oakley's for a while and I really like them.  Ever since Revision came to this site, I wanted to give them another try (I had issues with their Sawfly sunglasses fitting properly overseas and
picked up some Oakleys as a replacement.  The issues were not Revision's fault, I have a tiny, odd-shaped melon and a large crooked nose).  I took a look at what Revision had to offer and finally picked up a pair of Hellflys.

First off, I would like to thank Revision for supporting our service members.  That caused a delay of a couple of months getting the sunglasses I wanted (black frame, polarized lenses), but I was more
than willing to wait knowing the guys that needed the protection more than I did were getting it.  Kudos!
*My needs*
A pair of functional sunglasses that look good while not in the field and offer superior protection while in the field.

*Oakley Minute 2.0*
*Appearance -*   I am a fan of the look and shape of the smaller lens.  I really like Oakley Half Jacket XLJs, but it's been years since I owned a pair and the Minute 2.0 caught my eyes since the Half Jackets were on back order.

*Fit -* They are very comfortable and fit nice for daily wear.  It's a whole nother story when wearing a kevlar though.  These sunglasses would not stay on the bridge of my nose.  The straps for the brain
bucket tend to press the ear pieces to my head and push the sunglasses up and away from my face.  That gets to be uncomfortable, distracting, and renders the sunglasses virtually useless until I can re-adjust them.  This is not acceptable in a field environment.

*Functionality -* While I haven't tested the ballistic protection, I trust Oakley and their QA testing.  The polarized lenses seem to do their job.  I would like the lenses to be a little darker to hide my eyes, but it's not a big deal for what I use them for.  Aside from the issues with the kevlar (which can be a big issue), these sunglasses performed as expected.


*Revision Hellfly*
*Appearance –* Of course the first thing I noticed was the design of the sunglasses.  My first impression was very favorable.  The one aesthetic part I wasn't 100% sold on was the part between the lens and the ear piece.  I prefer it to be skinnier, but I also felt this offered up more protection from the side, so I was definitely ok with it.

*Fit -* The biggest advantage I had with the Hellfly's was the fact that they stayed on my nose with my kevlar on.  The nose piece and ear pieces were comfortable and I could wear the sunglasses all day long with or without the brain bucket on.

*Functionality -*   The first thing I noticed after the shape of the lens was the replaceable nose piece.  Awesome!  While some people may think this is a mistake because you may lose it, I feel as though it added to the comfort level of the sunglasses.  While I haven't tested the ballistic protection, I trust Revision and their QA testing.  The polarized lenses seem to do their job.  The larger lenses also reach to my cheek bone, offering up better protection for my eyes.  I would like the lenses to be a little darker to hide my eyes, but it's not a big deal for what I use them for.
*Final verdict*
The Hellflys beat out the Minute 2.0s in my short, amateurish, unscientific comparison.  You may have different results, but I am happy with my purchase so far.   If you have other questions about anything I did not touch on, feel free to ask.
Now that Revision came out with a small version of the Sawfly, I will have to try those out when I need a new pair of sunglasses...
(I hate you Revision!  LOL)


----------



## policemedic (Feb 2, 2011)

The Hellflys are pretty sweet, and Revision gets major points for their participation here.


----------



## AWP (Feb 3, 2011)

LOST, how comfortable are the Hellfly's while wearing ear pro?


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Feb 3, 2011)

I haven't worn any muffs with these, but the ear pieces are pretty low profile.  Let me grab my set of muffs and wear them around for a day or so for extended periods of time and I'll get back to you.  In the past, it didn't matter when I was wearing a CV helmet, but I know it made a big difference with muffs and a hard hat.


----------



## AWP (Feb 3, 2011)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> I haven't worn any muffs with these, but the ear pieces are pretty low profile. Let me grab my set of muffs and wear them around for a day or so for extended periods of time and I'll get back to you. In the past, it didn't matter when I was wearing a CV helmet, but I know it made a big difference with muffs and a hard hat.



Thank you. I'm mainly thinking of muffs and a ball cap at the range.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Feb 3, 2011)

Ok, no problem.  I'll let you know.  In fact, I am going to be hitting the range this weekend, I'll skip the in-ear and use muffs and let you know if I can keep a good seal around the ears and how comfortable they are for me.


----------



## AWP (Feb 3, 2011)

I would appreciate that. Thank you!


----------



## SF4ever (Feb 4, 2011)

Just ordered Hellflys to replace a well worn, combat tested set of Oakleys....  I am excited about getting them and testing them in the field...... more to follow once I put them through a few operations.


----------



## Crusader74 (Feb 4, 2011)

SF4ever said:


> Just ordered Hellflys to replace a well worn, combat tested set of Oakleys....  I am excited about getting them and testing them in the field...... more to follow once I put them through a few operations.




I'm looking forward to your expert assessment as I might be looking for new eyepro as I hope to be deployed at the end of the year.. I have Oakley's which I think are great, and would be very similar to the Hellflys. I also have pair of wily-x SG1's that I think was the worst purchase I've ever made. They fog up nearly instantly when your active and its a pain in the hole trying to wipe them every 5 mins.


----------



## SF4ever (Feb 4, 2011)

Irish - Understand and Wilco! There was an SF Team Sergeant that was killed last year over here after one of the other SF Operators to his front stopped to wipe his fogged glasses and the Team Daddy walked around him and stepped on a IED. May he Rest in Peace and we learn from the incident so that it not be repeated.


----------



## Crusader74 (Feb 4, 2011)

SF4ever said:


> Irish - Understand and Wilco! There was an SF Team Sergeant that was killed last year over here after one of the other SF Operators to his frontstopped to wipe his fogged glasses and the Team Daddy walked around him and stepped on a IED. May he Rest in Peace and we learn from the incident so that it not be repeated.



Sorry for the loss of your Brother,  SF.. Ironic-ly I bought them off a  Green Beenie who ETS'd last year. I wouldn't recommend those to anyone!


----------



## x SF med (Feb 4, 2011)

> I had _fitment_ issues ..., I have a tiny, odd-shaped melon and a large crooked nose



Bro... _Fitment_ is not a word, even to those berated in my sig line.... "Yo, Sahge , I gots fitment probs wit my 'quipment..." Is this the beginning of a rap song?:confused:

As to your self stated physical deformities.... wow, more info than I really wanted... I now picture you like the Gary Larson cartoon victim of a headhunter only wearing oversized sunglasses.... I really didn't need that.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Feb 4, 2011)

I know it's not a word (my spell check told me that), unfortunately I was too tired to form the correct phrase in order to get my point across.  My error, I will check myself next time.

BTW, Gary Larson rules, and I think you've pictured me quite accurately.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 4, 2011)

fitment:  http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...&ei=LlxMTZqHO83UgAfZhenWDw&sqi=2&ved=0CBMQkAE


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Feb 4, 2011)

Oh hell, it IS a real word!  Too bad the meaning doesn't work in this instance.  Original post has been edited.


----------



## x SF med (Feb 4, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> fitment: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...&ei=LlxMTZqHO83UgAfZhenWDw&sqi=2&ved=0CBMQkAE



yeah, smartass....  I'm mental, and I'm gonna throw a fit - that's a real fitment....


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 4, 2011)

Actually, I didn't know until today that "fitment" was a word,  I just decided to check.

I did know that "orientate" is a word, despite what most of us are told in land nav class.


----------



## x SF med (Feb 4, 2011)

Um, sir...  like spandex...  just because it's a word doesn't mean that it fits....  'orientate', although in the dictionary, still sounds ignorant and other verbiage should be used in its place, like "fix one's position' or 'know where you are'


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 4, 2011)

Or "orient," which is usually what people mean when they say "orientate."  Then some guy (prob 2LT) who wants to look smart jumps up and says, "orientate isn't a word," and then he wishes he would have STFU when someone tells him it is a word, dumbass, it means "to face east," now let me finish this class so you don't get hopelessly lost out here on the star course... some thing like that.

You're right though; just because you can, doesn't mean you should.   Although I think you could make a case for "orientate" in the same context- "orientate" a map...


----------



## Dame (Feb 4, 2011)

Thanks Mara. I learned a new word today. And I agree with xSF, orientate sounds ridiculous.
But you guys should try living without "got."  My mother had a spasm if we used it.

Oh, and on the original topic: I'm dying to try the new "small" size from Revision.


----------



## The91Bravo (Feb 6, 2011)

Great Eval on the Revision Eye Pro!! I have been wanting a new set of Eye Pro for Range time, and I think my next purchase will be them.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Feb 6, 2011)

Thanks 91B.

FF - Spent the day at the range.  The muffs kept their seal the entire time, with NO discomfort.  I was really impressed.


----------



## AWP (Feb 6, 2011)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> Thanks 91B.
> 
> FF - Spent the day at the range. The muffs kept their seal the entire time, with NO discomfort. I was really impressed.



No pinching around the temples or ears?

I think that narrows down the list for my next pair of prescription sunglasses.

Thank you for taking the time to do the write-up!


----------



## Fritzy (Feb 6, 2011)

Do not do a google image search for "wily-x SG1". :-\

I don't know what happened to that poor guy, but I know one pair of sunglasses I won't be getting someone for their birthday.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Feb 6, 2011)

Freefalling said:


> No pinching around the temples or ears?



Normally after a while I feel ear pieces digging into my head or my ears being pressed into the ear pieces.  Not with these.


----------



## digrar (Feb 7, 2011)

Fritzy said:


> Do not do a google image search for "wily-x SG1". :-\
> 
> I don't know what happened to that poor guy, but I know one pair of sunglasses I won't be getting someone for their birthday.



I see two pics of blokes with face injuries who both have their eyes intact. Mission accomplished I'd have thought.


----------



## Fritzy (Feb 7, 2011)

> I see two pics of blokes with face injuries who both have their eyes intact. Mission accomplished I'd have thought.



Sorry, it was kind of a gut reaction of "ew, is that bone sticking out of that guy's face?!" moreso than 'the glasses didn't do their job'. I hope the glasses did protect their eyes. But with those pics and the info given above, it's kind of put me off this particular brand.

Anyhow, isn't the "mission" for sunglasses primarily to make you guys look more bad ass than your civilian counterparts.  If such a thing were possible...

Hannah


----------



## Dame (Feb 7, 2011)

Fritzy said:


> Sorry, it was kind of a gut reaction of "ew, is that bone sticking out of that guy's face?!" moreso than 'the glasses didn't do their job'. I hope the glasses did protect their eyes. But with those pics and the info given above, it's kind of put me off this particular brand.
> Anyhow, isn't the "mission" for sunglasses primarily to make you guys look more bad ass than your civilian counterparts.  If such a thing were possible...
> Hannah



LOL. I'm just a casual hobby shooter but the first and last job of those suckers is protection. I have a set of Howard Leight ear and eye pro that have zero cool factor. They aren't what I would have chosen for myself (Christmas gift) but I wear them at the range every time.

Now, if the guys happen to drop a little more coin on something they wear every day for protection anyway and it makes them look cooler? Hell yeah.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 17, 2011)

I won a competition here on the site, and a pair of Revision Hellfly sunglasses arrived at my house yesterday.

First Impressions:

First of all I want to express my gratitude for the people who made it happen, I assume it was Boon and Zushwa.

The sunglasses came with a cleaning/carrying bag and a semi-rigid hard case.  I like the size of the case; I think I could fit it into the sleeve pockets of my ACUs if I didn't mind the bulge.  It will definitely fit in my ACU trouser pockets.  There's a little Revision tag on the zipper of the hard case; I would have liked that to have been a bit bigger so I could use a miniature snap link to attach it to the outside of my travel pack for when I go back and forth on deployment, but I can add a piece of 550 cord and still achieve the same effect.

The sunglasses fit my face well, and the lenses seem high-quality.  They feel very secure; with my chin strap cinched down I think I could probably jump with them and not worry about them flying off when I exit the aircraft.  They're also not so tight that they cause me to have a headache, which was a problem I had with a pair of Oakley Livestrong glasses I bought (wife now wears those).

I usually wear a pair of Wiley-X sunglasses.  They were issued to me in my last unit and I liked them because 1) they were free, and 2) you can change out lenses and frame parts to make them sunglasses with regular frames or goggles with clear lenses and wraparound headband.  I don't dig my Wiley-Xs in "sunglasses" mode because they are very, very loose on my face and severely restrict my peripheral vision.  I also have a pair of Oakelys that I really like, but after 10+ years the lenses are pretty bad.  So it's good I have these Revisions now.

My wife put them on and we both agreed that she didn't look good in them.  My wife is average size and build for a woman; perhaps a smaller size would have looked good on her.  They look fine on me.

When I first put them on, the Revisions stood off of my face to the point where the gap between the bottom of the frame and the top of my cheek was so large I could stick my fingers in it.  I spread the adjustable nosepiece to its maximum opening and the gap closed up quite a bit.

Things I don't like:
-The sunglasses are gray on black, so I'm not 100% certain I can wear them with my uniform.  No drama if I can't, they'll be my "drive my Jeep and wear civilian clothes" glasses.

-Even with the nosepiece bent out, there is still a bit of a gap between the bottom of the frames and the top of my cheeks; I might be able to fix that by taking the nosepiece out altogether but I'm going to give it a couple of days first.

Bottom line:
 I think these are quality glasses.  They are going to be my "daily wear" glasses, replacing my aging Oakleys and my issue-grade Wiley-Xs.  Thanks again to the people who made it happen.


----------



## Crusader74 (Feb 17, 2011)

Photos?  (of the glasses, not your mug) lol


----------



## Casimir (Feb 17, 2011)

I was issued two pairs of the sawfly and decided to flip the bill and shoot at a pair with a couple of different calibers. My 22LR and 22Mag did NOT penetrate the lenses, but the 9mm and higher did (no surprise there)

After being struck with the 22's, the frames separated from the lenses but they were till intact and wearable, only had to snap them back together. The only deformity to the lens was the actual impact site.

Same day at the range, a buddy of mine did the same thing, only he shot his with a 12ga from about 10 meters away, not one of the pellets penetrated.

I am definitely a believer, even though I'm not a huge fan of the fit (they tend to slide down my nose a little bit unless I have the strap attached to the arms, which our unit does not allow) and I've found that the lenses aren't very scratch resistant, but all in all I like them.

I am looking for the pictures, I think they're on another external drive somewhere. When I find them I'll amend this post and include.

-Casimir


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 17, 2011)

Irish said:


> Photos?  (of the glasses, not your mug) lol


----------



## Boon (Feb 17, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> First of all I want to express my gratitude for the people who made it happen, I assume it was Boon and Zushwa



Nope, they were donated by Revision


----------



## Crusader74 (Feb 18, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> View attachment 3616




Cheers Mara.. Look similar to the Oakley 2.0 I have..

On a side note, I believe Revision have won the contract to supply the British Military with goggles..Congrats Revision !


----------

