Per Des Soto sight, "The TRES (pronounced like "dress", but with a T) Pullover, Bibjohn and Vest are made of Yamamoto #38 SCS™ Super Composite Skin Rubber. This rubber is Yamamoto's next-to-the-best. It exhibits the same characteristics as the rubber used in the T1 Original, but just a slight bit heavier, which means it is not quite as fast in the water. The addition of the SCS now makes TRES as easy to remove as the T1 Original."
When I read this description of the new T1 Tres, I seem to have a bit confused.
In particular, "(the claim is)...it exhibits the same characteristics as the rubber used in the T1 original, but is a slight bit heavier, which means it is not quite as fast in the water. Then in the next sentence, "The addition of the SCS now make TRES is as easy to remove as the T1 original."
My first thought is, ...how can something heavy make it slower unless it was thicker and thus less flexible? On the other hand, it's as easy to remove as the T1 original. To be easy to remove wouldn't it have to be the same flexibility as the original as T1? And, thickness (in and of itself) would not make it slower (unless the intent was to say, it was more dense (i.e., contains less space/air pockets) and therefore less bouyant? Now, less bouyancy and the resulting increased water resistance could make your swim slower. But, so could less flexibility (or both). And from how I see it, less flexibility would mean it's harder to get off than T1 - and, not the same as claimed.
There seems to be a conflict, poor choice of words or I'm missing something. Perhaps it's a marketing approach to avoid certain words or just my over interpretation of what they wrote (or meant to write). But, I would be interested if anyone can explain what I'm missing? The last time I looked, "weight" (of itself) in water makes very little difference with regard to speed - unlike resistance. Ultimately, this would mean it can't show the same characteristics.
FWIW Joe Moya
When I read this description of the new T1 Tres, I seem to have a bit confused.
In particular, "(the claim is)...it exhibits the same characteristics as the rubber used in the T1 original, but is a slight bit heavier, which means it is not quite as fast in the water. Then in the next sentence, "The addition of the SCS now make TRES is as easy to remove as the T1 original."
My first thought is, ...how can something heavy make it slower unless it was thicker and thus less flexible? On the other hand, it's as easy to remove as the T1 original. To be easy to remove wouldn't it have to be the same flexibility as the original as T1? And, thickness (in and of itself) would not make it slower (unless the intent was to say, it was more dense (i.e., contains less space/air pockets) and therefore less bouyant? Now, less bouyancy and the resulting increased water resistance could make your swim slower. But, so could less flexibility (or both). And from how I see it, less flexibility would mean it's harder to get off than T1 - and, not the same as claimed.
There seems to be a conflict, poor choice of words or I'm missing something. Perhaps it's a marketing approach to avoid certain words or just my over interpretation of what they wrote (or meant to write). But, I would be interested if anyone can explain what I'm missing? The last time I looked, "weight" (of itself) in water makes very little difference with regard to speed - unlike resistance. Ultimately, this would mean it can't show the same characteristics.
FWIW Joe Moya