Faraday's Prototype

An up-and-coming underwear company called Faraday’s decided to send me some samples from their upcoming line to write a review on. (Since they didn’t give me a proper style name, I will just refer to it as “the prototype.”)  The prototype’s design is an interesting one, mixing some features that are common on high-end men’s underwear with one that is quite new and original: A special material in the pouch that purports to shield the user’s genitals from EMR (electromagnetic radiation). While I can’t attest to the success it has in that endeavor, I can attest that, for a new underwear company’s first attempt at a product, this is a very respectable effort, and I’ll be interested in seeing their further developments. 

Materials and construction: The prototype is a boxer brief design that’s fairly short on the legs. While not obvious from the external appearance, there is an internal pouch with some small sheets of fabric to separate the scrotum from the legs. There are two types of fabric here: A bamboo fabric surrounds the entire garment, which is reinforced by a “silver metallic” fabric lining the inside of the pouch. The thin, stretchy bamboo material around the hips and legs made the sizing flexible: The company sent me two adjacent sizes, both of which fit me comfortably. The waistband is very limp, and there is little extra elastic around the legholes, two features which, together, do significant damage to the functionality of this underwear, despite its overall practicality. 7/10  

Comfort and usability: Slipping these on, the first thing that struck me was the lower-temperature feel, not only due to the thin material outside the pouch, but also the cool first touch of the metallic pouch material. The pouch is more accommodating than it looks, although it will never compete with something like Obviously or Sukrew for space. The position of the pouch also makes it significantly more comfortable standing up with than sitting down. This prototype should be considered a low-activity underwear, because the thin fabric is unsupportive and unsuited for anything athletic. Finally, it’s held up well after a number of washings, with no obvious signs of wear. 7/10  

Aesthetics: The focus of this pair of underwear was not on appearance, but it doesn’t look bad. The grey accent on the waistband and lack of branding (or any other form of text) on the outside give this a sleek, space-age look. 6/10

Overall score: 7/10

Big enough? Not quite, but it is better than most underwear and not bad in a standing position.

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. 

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.

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.

MeUndies Boxer Brief

 
MeUndies is an underwear company from Los Angeles that has gained a reputation for making comfortable underwear for both sexes. The company’s items for men are the standard options (boxer brief, trunk, boxer, brief) and a few miscellaneous items, such as t-shirts and leisurewear. All of these items are offered in fairly conventional designs, so does MeUndies live up to its reputation?

Materials and construction: The MeUndies BoxerBrief is offered in 92% modal fabric blended with 8% spandex, which is a blend that is common in high-end men’s underwear. Besides the sizing (very small unless you go a size larger than usual), the shape is fairly conventional, with some semblance of a pouch in the form of some extra fabric in the crotch. The stretchiness of modal fabric helps with the fit, although I’d prefer a more substantial pouch. Overall quality seems quite good, with just a small tag stitched onto the inside of the waistband, which provides no discomfort. Overall, the item is a little longer than most boxer briefs, which means that it resists riding up a little more than most, but the only boxer briefs I’ve tried which don’t ride up any significant amount are long enough to come close to the knee. The item has held up well after numerous washings, with no noticeable deterioration to the stitching or fit. 6/10

Comfort and usability: The MeUndies Boxer Brief neither fits particularly tightly around the legs nor is baggy. While I ultimately did not find this comfortable to wear, I can understand why people who do not have comfort issues in normal underwear enjoy MeUndies as leisurewear. People looking for something to wear during vigorous exercise should look elsewhere (and keep in mind, modal dries slower than most other materials). The material is a little thicker and softer than the other modal garments I’ve tried, and is warmer, too. There aren’t any exceptional features, but this is a little more comfortable than the average pair of underwear. 5/10

Aesthetics: The green color matches the purple inside of the waistband, which makes me wonder why they didn’t make the entire waistband purple. Nothing is either offensive or compelling about the way this looks, with MeUndies preferring a practical, rather than stylish, approach. 5/10

Overall rating: 5/10

Big enough? No.