gyoung wrote:
Jay Honeck wrote:

Now, of course, I've talked to a pilot friend who tells me that
progressives totally suck,

I agree with his verdict, but for a different reason (I wasn't flying
when I had 'progressives'). I found that the cone of correction is
-narrow-; I found it necessary to move my whole head side-to-side in
order look left and right across a page (or my computer screen, etc.); I
couldn't just move my eyes because left or right of center, acuity
suffered. The vertical angle also is, or seemed to be, small.

So, what's the verdict from my fellow "old farts" on this group? Do
you guys wear "progressives"? Or do you prefer the "lined" bifocals?
LensCrafters has a 30 day money-back guarantee (I don't actually have
them, yet), so I can change my mind.

I chose bifocals (a few years ago), and as my eyes 'hardened up' I went
even to trifocals. I did have to play with the location of the 'lines'
since that equates to the vertical angle where the correction changes.

I'm very pleased with 'lined' bifocals and now trifocals (I've required
glasses since I was 14, almost 50 years now, so I was already accustomed
to the limitations spectacles impose).

Yup. Tri-s are the answer. My mother was an avid bridge player. She
pointed out the value of the intermediate zone in trifocals for looking
at the bridge table. The instant I put them on, I said, "This is
right!" Looking at the instrument panel is the same distance as the
bridge table.

Any prescription for bifocal lenses can be used for trifocals. They put
the middle zone half way between the distance and reading prescriptions.
You can play with the vertical placement of the lens structure.
It's easy to go back to bifocals if you don't like trifocals.