I was wondering if anyone uses this suit and could make a comment on it. I saw Simon Lessing wearing this (or a similar suit) at the LA Tri this weekend. I thought it was a wetsuit because it looks like neoprene. Anyway, I overheard him saying that it makes him much faster in the water because it provides additional flotation. Isn’t a wetsuit, by definition, a suit that provides buoyancy? Are these suits considered faster than regular lycra suits? If so, by how much? Are they legal according to FINA rules for “swimming only” races? If they truly provide buoyancy, then FINA declares them illegal by rule. If this is the case, then why are they legal for USAT non-wetsuit races?
arent FINA or ITU legal(ITU, you need to swim bike run wiht the same suit…) …the material is technicaly not providing any additional boyency…(the suit wet dosnt sink but dosnt come up on the water either… so it might mostly be a friction reduction improvement in the water.
there is no agrement or official review on what is the exact saving… but there is definitly one and something worth exprimenting with.
I’d be interested to find this info out as well. I saw a guy in one in a race about a month ago, and it sure looks a lot like a wetsuit, I wonder how it’s legal…
John,
They are illegal for FINA races; however, they are legal for USAT non-wetsuit races. You will not see them in ITU races, as they can not take off any part of their suits after the swim in non-wetsuit races. I actually have a skin-suit, and I don’t really think there is a huge difference. I’m sure it is faster, but it is not nearly the same benefit of a wetsuit. With that said, it certainly is possible that suit along with the strong current last year are what kept Normann in the lead pack so he was able to attack off the front on the bike right away. IIRC, you race without a top on, so it will not help you quite as much. It seems to provide the biggest benefit by covering up any pockets from tri shorts or tops. As Rappstar once said (paraphrased), “If Phelps could wear it, he would…”
I can’t comment on why they are legal, all I know is that they are legal and they rock! I used mine for both IM Louisville and IM Wisconsin and it is a noticeable difference from swimming with only tri shorts on. They do provide some buoyancy, but I feel it is the slick coating that makes the difference. The .03 refers to the amount of drag when wearing the suit, which is claimed to be over 50 times less drag than bare skin. Again, I’m not a scientist, but when I swam at my local reservoir I was 45 sec. to 1 min. faster per 1,000 yd. That’s 3 to 4 minutes in an IM swim. Plus I feel like I use much less energy. The suit is not intended for pool use, only open water.
3-4 minutes over a 4K swim is a HUGE amount. That’s much more than I would save wearing a wetsuit vs. a regular fastskin suit. I can’t seem to find any specs on the .03 suit, but I have heard from multiple places that it does contain neoprene, and it does look like neoprene. I’d like to verify this. Also, doesn’t USAT use FINA, UCI, and USATF as the bases for their rules? If FINA says this suit is illegal, then why would USAT say it is OK?
It’s made of 0.5mm neoprene. Yamamoto calls the fabric ModTech. It’s basically just the jersey with an SCS coating. It is NOT legal for ITU racing (though I think it might be legal if you wanted to do the whole race in it, as Tom Evans did in Kelowna, where it was about 50F and raining and cold) due to the no-removal-of-clothing rule. It is definitely NOT worth 3-4 minutes over an Ironman. I think it might be worth 1sec or so per ~100m, or 30seconds over an Ironman. My initial testing was done over 50’s at the beginning of a workout, and I think the suit is definitely best then, before it is really wet. I’ve worn it a lot more (and also had some friends where it to get their opinion) and we figure ~1 sec per 100m. It is declared “neutrally buoyant” by USAT. I suspect that it does in fact provide some buoyancy. But then again, so does a fastskin. That is really why they are fast. All those airbubbles you see attached to the suit underwater, those are providing buoyancy. The skin friction coefficient deduction is likely minimal in comparison with the bubbles, which is why Fastskins are most effective in the shorter duration races. The ModTech fabric is constructed differently, so I don’t think it is affected in quite the same way over the course of a race, but I definitely think it does get slower as the race goes on. It is definitely fastest at the start, before it absorbs much water. Air = buoyancy = fast. I think it makes sense for long course racing, where your race suits usually has pockets. For an Olympic distance race, I don’t think I’d wear it, since I don’t think it is fast enough as compared with the top race suits to justify the time it takes to get off. I.e., it might be 5 seconds faster, but it probably takes 4 seconds to take off. That’s my opinion.
was going to ask how good itll be for an Olympic race but rap alredy answered my question.
im using the Orca Killa suit,im doing all the race in it,when its hot im boiling in the suit,was wondering if there any other suits that “make you faster” in the water and then you can keep racing with them without getting them off that you prefer for an olympic distance?
The pointzero3 is legal because if conforms with the USAT testing protocol for such a garment (swim-skin). Essentially the pointzero3 has to be neutrally buoyant in order to be considered legal for USAT sanctioned events. It was submitted to Charlie Crawford some ago (pre Kona 2006) and was approved.
Neutrally buoyant means that when saturated and then left in water the garment neither sinks not floats. It effectively sits just under the surface. This is achieved in our case (blueseventy) by ensuring the ratio of lycra fabric and jersey in relation to the modetech ii s98 is correct. We have spent years developing this product and it has taken time to get it right.
It is significantly faster than skin. Subjects noticed between 2-4 second improvements in 100 yard times (short course) during our ‘in-house’ testing.