• Take 30 seconds to register your free account to access deals, post topics, and view exclusive content!

    Register Today

    Join the largest Oakley Forum on the web!

Non-Serial Xmetals

toosteeley

I should Work at Oakley
685
1,393
Toronto
Due to recent debate in a for sale thread where I called a non-serialized set of xmetals "gen 4" and "matching", I wanted to create this post to discuss the issue. Based on the research I've done, it's my understanding there are 5 generations of most xmetals (using XX 24k as an example):

Gen 1: XG######
Gen 2: XG######A
Gen 3: XG######B
Gen 4: no serial on frame, old style box with serial (produced after late 2004)
Gen 5: SKU on frame, 3-piece box with small coin

Whether the non-serial pairs are considered their own generation or an in-between the gen 3 and final SKU gen, is irrelevant. The fact is, there was a few years when Oakley stopped printing serial numbers on the frames but continued issuing serial numbers on the boxes. These are the cases I want to discuss in more detail since they're understandably, the hardest to legitimize.

This has been confirmed by a number of knowledgeable members in various threads:

I can understand this causes confusion as there are certainly warranty frames out there which also don't have a serial number. These warranty frames however, did not come with boxes. So how can you tell if a boxed set with serial number on the box but not on the frame, is legit? Let's look at a few XX boxes for example (thanks mjt42 for the pics):

Gen 1 XX
20200319_124611.jpg

20200319_124645.jpg


Gen 2 XX Ti02
20200319_124501.jpg

20200319_124527.jpg


Gen 3 XX 24k
20200319_124155.jpg

20200319_124259.jpg


As you can see, each of these boxes is from a different generation XX. Regardless of generation however, the "A" suffix and date (2000 running virtically up the right side) are consistent and therefore not helpful in dating or legitimizing if the box matches the frame. This was the contentious issue in my thread where It was argued my box was gen 1 based on the suffix and date, whereas the shiny plasma on my frame (and no serial) clearly indicates the glasses are NOT gen 1, thus not a matching set.

However, as shown above, the "A" suffix and date are consistent across all gen examples, so in this case, can NOT be used as the determining factor. Also, there is no "A" or "B" at the end of the numerical serial on the box to indicate generation, as there is on the frame. Instead, we need to look at the serial number itself. Assuming the numbers are sequential, let's compare the gen 3 "B" XX 24k serial # box from above to my gen 4, non-serial # box:

IMG_3957.jpg


My gen 4 box serial # is clearly higher in sequence. If 40677 is a gen 3 "B" frame, it stands to reason 48748 indicates a later frame. Knowing that my frame has no serial, it's reasonable to assume the XX 24k got rid of serial numbers somewhere in between these 2 numbers. With no other method to determine legitimacy and everything else appearing to be correct, it's reasonable to assume therefore, that this is a legitimate and complete, matching set of gen 4, XX 24k.

Although I've used the XX 24k as an example, this appears to hold true for other XX colorways as well as most Juliets. So, for anyone questioning whether a boxed set of XXs or Juliets without a serial numbered frame are legit, try to get a hold of a gen 3 box and compare serial numbers. If the serial number on your box is higher, chances are good your set is legitimate.

I hope other members find this useful.
 
Last edited:
I understand intuitively it would make sense to think the “serial” number on the gen 4 label would be higher than a gen 3 serial but You cannot just assume that is the correct. I think you have to test that theory with several pairs trial and error before concluding that.. It is just as likely the numbers are random on the gen 4 box and I would actually think that is more likely since they did stop putting the serial on the frames. I am not sure why they would keep the number sequence counting up after they eliminated the serial number on the frames.

Maybe @SiRacer420 has some input on this subject.
 
That’s a very good point. Again, I’m only assuming this is the case based on what I’ve discovered. I believe my logic is sound, but I’d be interested to hear from others and see some further examples.
 
I can imagine it was pricy for Oakley to put unique serial numbers on the frames which could be why they removed them then switched to a standardized SKU. However, if they continued to put serial numbers on the box label (which wouldn’t have been as pricy as on the frames) it doesn’t make sense for them to shift from sequential to random.

Even if they did randomize the box serial number of gen 4, the serial numbers would all have to be higher than the previous generations to avoid duplication.

I believe in either case, my assumption is correct but interested in seeing other examples to confirm.
 
Last edited:
This is very interesting as I have a similar question on my thread regarding Juliet gen 4 with serialised box. I have this Juliet gen 4 picture with the serialised box but I do not have a Juliet plasma gen 3 box to compare this A106131. From the assumption this number should be higher than the gen 3 box then.

image0.jpeg
 
I understand intuitively it would make sense to think the “serial” number on the gen 4 label would be higher than a gen 3 serial but You cannot just assume that is the correct. I think you have to test that theory with several pairs trial and error before concluding that.. It is just as likely the numbers are random on the gen 4 box and I would actually think that is more likely since they did stop putting the serial on the frames. I am not sure why they would keep the number sequence counting up after they eliminated the serial number on the frames.

Maybe @SiRacer420 has some input on this subject.
I think it much more likely to keep incrementing the serials than have random numbers or restart the sequence - both would require IT development for a start, for no benefit.
 
I think it much more likely to keep incrementing the serials than have random numbers or restart the sequence - both would require IT development for a start, for no benefit.
But in both of those scenarios without knowing if it has been restarted or just continued on from gen 3 we cannot assume it's a higher sequence. We need members to show some of there 4th gen labels that they know are the original box so we can compare to some 3rd gen serials.
 
I don't think it's logical to restart serial numbers. There would be duplicates then.

I'm still 90% sure the frame in the XX 24K example I showed above matches the box. The issue with gen 4 frames is they don't have a serial number which makes it impossible to say for certain the frames match the box. Unless there's a member here who originally purchased their set that way.
 
But in both of those scenarios without knowing if it has been restarted or just continued on from gen 3 we cannot assume it's a higher sequence. We need members to show some of there 4th gen labels that they know are the original box so we can compare to some 3rd gen serials.
It’s a perfectly logical assumption and in line with Occam’s Razor; it also requires the least effort.

Basically, there’s no such thing as a matching fourth gen box because there is nothing on the glasses for the box to match against.
 

Similar threads

U
Replies
15
Views
2K
Username Hidden
U
U
Replies
2
Views
2K
Username Hidden
U
U
Replies
3
Views
1K
Username Hidden
U
U
  • Locked
Replies
4
Views
1K
Username Hidden
U
Back
Top