Sunday, July 9, 2017

Longevity test 2

I switched from wearing loose boxers to higher quality pouch underwear about a year and a half ago. This has given me enough time to observe the actual longevity of these products. The following is some observations on some items of the first few brands from which I purchased. (You can assume that I’ve washed these on a gentle laundry cycle an average of about twice per month since I purchased them, and have air dried them each time [unless otherwise specified]. Of course, more use means more wear.)

Obviously AnatoMAX Brief, first pair purchased February 2016: In the previous post, I mentioned an Obviously product. This one did even better. The waistband is still in very good condition, and it wears nearly identically to when I first acquired it. There is some minor pilling, but I suspect this item will last a long time to come.

Ergowear EW0119 MAX Light Boxer, purchased May 2016: The viscose in this item has the softness and stretchiness of modal fabrics, but has pilled much faster. It’s still highly wearable, but the fit is a little looser.

Cocksox Sports Brief CX76N, purchased September 2016: This is my first Cocksox item, and it has impressed me a great deal with its longevity. It is the only underwear item in regular usage that seems to be indistinguishable from when I first purchased it.

Saxx Ultra Long John Fly Bottom, purchased October 2016: Unlike the Saxx item I mentioned previously, this has very rapidly deteriorated over a single winter of usage. The internal pouch is rapidly coming undone, and the outside surface has more pilling than any other underwear item I own, resulting in an inferior, less even fit. I am quite surprised by how much this has deteriorated in one season. 

Saturday, July 8, 2017

Cocksox Bikini Briefs Comparative Review: CX01, CX01BD, CX16N


Cocksox is an Australian company that makes underwear and swimwear for men. They offer a wide range of fits and styles, including four different pouch variations, two of which are smaller (the Snug and Contour pouches), and two of which are bigger (the Original and Natural pouches). As I mentioned in my previous review, I’ve been trying out bikini briefs for the first time in my life, and since I’ve always been impressed with the quality and longevity of Cocksox products, I decided to give the three main Cocksox bikini brief varieties a try. Cocksox ended up being the bikini briefs I was most impressed with. A comparative review of the three follows.

Materials and construction: Cocksox is the only company I’m aware of that primarily uses Supplex as its fabric. As a result, it’s hard to determine if it’s the material or the manufacture quality that is responsible, but Cocksox underwear has the best longevity of any company that I’ve tried. Supplex also dries faster than any common material. The 8% spandex blend makes it a tough but accommodating material. The differences between the three come in terms of the shape and support. While all three of these items use the Original pouch, it fits differently due to the different shape of the items. The CX01 is the most minimal of the three, with just a small, thin, streamlined silhouette that covers as little as possible and is supported by some minimal elastic. The CX01BD is quite similar, but has thicker layers of material surrounding the waist and leg holes (highlighted by the second color). The CX16N is a completely different design, similar to a jockstrap and utilizing a normal waistband, but with a normal backside rather than just two straps. The pouches on the CX01 and CX01BD are both positioned much more upwards than the comparatively relaxed CX16N. The CX01 and CX01BD are both quite stretchy around the waist, while the CX16N is has a tighter, stiffer waistband, possibly in an attempt to help alleviate the shifting on the backside (see next section). 9/10

Comfort and usability: The pouches on the CX01 and CX01BD are the same shape, but the CX01BD ends up being a better, more consistent fit, because the superior traction keeps everything more firmly in place. (A minor tradeoff to this is that the CX01BD is somewhat warmer, albeit still much cooler than most underwear.) Despite not covering much on the backside, the CX01 and CX01BD both stay in place better than one would expect, but can be irritating if they do fall out of place, which lots of sitting or friction against tight pants can do. The positioning of the pouches in the CX01 and CX01BD give more room for your penis than your testicles, but can be comfortably rearranged, and the lack of seam right behind the pouch gives them an advantage of comfort and flexibility that most pouch underwear lacks. Keeping the package away from the legs makes walking more comfortable. While I’m usually not a huge fan of low-rise underwear, both the CX01 and CX01BD surprised me with how comfortable they felt after I got used to the fit. While the CX16N’s pouch is as big as the other two, the tightness of the elastic pulls it in closer, restricting the amount of space. It’s still more spacious than most underwear but much tighter than ideal. The waistband is tight and narrow enough to dig into your skin, and the overall cut creates more friction against the inner thighs while walking around. In addition, the backside is rather unstable. The CX16N isn’t ideal for daily wear, but I did like it as a superior alternative to a jockstrap: The lack of strap attachments behind the pouch allows it to lie flatter and be much more comfortable against the body. I would definitely recommend the CX16N for people considering a jockstrap for workouts. 6/10

Aesthetics: I think part of the appeal of the pouch on the CX01 and CX01BD is that it’s supposed to make your bulge look bigger and more conspicuous, but it’s not very flattering in that regard. The minimalist approach to the tags/branding is welcome. The CX01BD’s two-color scheme looks good, and will please those who enjoy lively and unique color schemes. The CX01’s toned-down look is more of my style. From the front, the CX16N looks like a jockstrap. It’s not a bad look. The stitching around the angles in which the different parts of the item comes together looks a little rougher (but doesn’t indicate poor quality in this case). The CX01 and CX01BD (and arguably the CX16N) have a low enough fit that people who wear looser pants or shorts shouldn’t have to worry about the top of their underwear being visible under their pants. 7/10

Overall score: 7/10

Big enough? I could make the CX01 and CX01BD work, with some adjustment. They have bigger pouches than most underwear and can be worn low for comfort. The CX16N offers enough space for workouts, but not for prolonged usage.

Monday, July 3, 2017

Ergowear EW0334 X3D Suave Bikini

Ergowear is a Chilean underwear and swimwear company that utilizes innovative, unique designs. Since their products have some of the biggest pouches available on the market, they’re of keen interest to this blog. I’ve reviewed them before and was impressed with what I experienced. The EW0334 is the first bikini brief I’ve tried from the brand, and I was generally pleased with what it had to offer overall. 

Materials and construction: The “SuaveMicrofiber” is listed as 95% polyester and 5% spandex. It’s a thin artificial material, which is moderately stretchy and dries fast, but is a little warmer than other fabrics found in high-end men’s underwear, such as modal fabric. The pouch, which is fairly large, is effectively smaller than the pouch on the MAX Light Boxer due to the less stretchy material, and it lies comfortably downwards. The narrow strips of material on the sides of this item are well-stitched and stay more secure and flat against the body that I had originally suspected they would. This garment has kept its shape after washing it numerous times, although the material has gained a bit of a fuzzy texture, which indicates that it will not last forever. 7/10 

Comfort and usability: I have only tried wearing bikini briefs recently, looking for something to help keep me cool during the hot weather. Despite my initial reservations, I managed to enjoy the fit after a little adjustment. The lack of waistband and very low cut results in a few differences from other briefs: First, that the pouch, which is a little smaller than ideal, could fit simply by wearing the item lower on the hips; second, that this vertical narrowness means the item can be quite cool if you need to wear warm clothes (such as a business suit) outside on a summer day, and third, the drawback that the lack of waistband will mean that the waistband of your pants will rub against your skin, which might be uncomfortable, depending on the pants in question. As leisurewear and with light exercise like walking, it stays in place most of the time, although when it does get out of place, it gets quite uncomfortable and will have to be fixed. For that reason, I can’t recommend these for intense exercise. The downward position of the pouch will give you a less conspicuous bulge than you’d find in a Cocksox bikini brief or even an Obviously Anatomax item. 6/10

Aesthetics: The lines, especially the horizontal line across the top, are a little more tastefully subdued than many bikini briefs. In person, the color is a pale purple, not far from white, and although it has a mild shine to it, it’s not too gaudy looking. 5/10

Overall rating: 6/10

Big enough? It’s a variable fit. I’d prefer it to be bigger, but it can be worn in such a way that it is comfortable.