Product Review: BARE XCS2 "Tech Dry" Drysuit

[Deep South Divers]

This thread is really a continuation of this thread: Product Review: New “Generation 2” BARE SB Drysuit

Since the thread from this point on will be focusing on the new BARE XCS2 rather than their SB, I figured I'd make a new thread with a new name.

After a very long summer not being able to dive the latest offering from BARE (and a warranty replacement of my SB) due to warm water, I was very pleased to see the local water temperatures finally hit 74 degrees... Just BARELY cool enough to dive a drysuit (with base layer undergarments only).

...So today, after work (I am a commercial diver) I finally took the suit off the hanger in the shop and cut the neck seal to fit me. I use this method to do that:


I did it right, too, ring by ring, fitting in-between. It's a long process, but the last thing I want to do is cut the seal too short. As with the SB, I removed three rings and got a really great - if not slightly tight - seal on my latex neck seal. This is the same as what I removed on my SANTI suits and my BARE SB... It's the same SiTech seal. Three rings off the neck seal is my magic number.

...Then I reinstalled a drysuit LP inflator hose on my work regs... Which I took off at the beginning of the summer in preparation for diving wet all summer (3mm). While I was at it, I lubed some things and retied my SPG... Which I recently replaced with a SubGear XPH dive computer. I wanted depth, time of day, and water temperature... But can't wear a wrist-mount gauge at work. The line had loosened, so a retie was in order. Simple. I love the system, by the way.

After an hour-long conference call with an insurance company (trying to get paid for recent hurricane work), I hopped in my backyard pool to test the suit. I purposely left my weighting alone - set to what I use with a 3mm full wetsuit in salt water.

First impressions:

Wow, what a good-looking suit. Very simple and stretchy. Boots, seals, valves are all SiTech... Which is the same as what is found on most suits, including SANTI, which is currently recognized as the industry leader.

The zipper is the new YKK plastic zip, which is very flat and flexible. I like it a lot. It seems to be equal to - if not greater than - a TiZip Masterseal, which is what was on the SB that this suit replaced.

The fabric is great. Yes, the suit is probably twice the physical weight of the BARE SB, and probably pretty close to the SANTI e-lite and the DUI CLX450... Except it stretches. A LOT. Oh happy day!

The suit seems very rugged. I'm impressed. I'm not sure that I'm real happy with the butt pads (see previous thread)... Given that the fabric of this suit seems super-durable (this is BARE's answer to the DUI CF200, which is legendarily durable), they may be completely unnecessary. They seem to be oddly low anyway - more like an back-of-the-upper-thigh pad. If I had to do this suit again, I'd probably opt out of the butt pads.

The thigh pockets are outstanding. Zero fault with these. I chose the zipper pockets made of the same "hyper-compressed" neoprene that the suit is made of. I prefer the quick access of velcro pockets, but velcro quickly stops working in our silty, nasty environment, so zips it was. They're perfectly placed.

There's virtually zero difference between this fabric - which BARE claims starts out as 7mm neoprene and is "hyper-compressed" (squished - probably with a hyperbaric chamber and heat) - and a trilaminate suit... Except that this fabric stretches. It's REALLY stretchy... Stretchier than the SB was. Probably twice as stretchy. In practical terms, this means that the suit can be dived with NO air in it whatsoever without the joint restriction found in trilaminate or "membrane" suits.

...So how'd it dive?

Outstanding. Just great.

It felt exactly like the BARE SB... Stretchier, even... Weighted exactly like I weight in a 3mm summer suit... Except that I'm dry. I just left the exhaust valve completely open (not depressed) and put in a little air at depth, which was only 8' (my pool). Zero air in the suit, but equalized. Here's my rig:

SS backplate: -6lbs
Koplin Light STA (the figure-eight one available at Oxycheq): -1lb
Luxfer S080: -2 to +4 full to empty
A pair of 3lb weights on the backplate webbing, at the hips
Scubapro Jet fins: -2lbs or so

The rig was neutral in the water with a full tank... Meaning that it might be ever-so-slightly light, especially if I hit saltwater, and within a pound or two of how I weight in a 3mm suit. This is almost exactly what I found to be true in any leading trilaminate suit, including the BARE SB, a SANTI e-lite and a DUI CLX450. Virtually indistinguishable... Except that with the SANTI and the DUI, I was badly restricted in movement and had to inflate the suit to get full range of motion... Which means more weight and a moving bubble.

Okay, I need to dive this suit a few hundred times to really be qualified to talk about it... But the bottom line is that the XCS2 seems to be a dramatic move in the right direction for range of motion, and weight out at least as good - if not better - than trilaminates. Best of all, the durability seems to be top-notch and probably equal to the legendary durability of DUI's "crushed neoprene" CF200.

...Which I have dived before; and whose fabric I have a sample of. It seems indiscernible from the fabric used in the BARE XCS2, which is a better design (in my opinion), better looking, and more affordable... And comes with non-proprietary boots, valves, and seals... And a modern, flat, flexible, near-zero maintenance, industry-leading plastic zipper. The CF200 is old-school brass zipper only.

Next I'll change the tanks I'm using for Faber steel 80's (the compactness makes sense in our work), reweight (maybe no weight?) and do a few hundred dives... And keep y'all posted.

So far, a big thumbs up on this suit. Manufacturers not using "hyper-compressed" or "crushed" stretchy neoprene are missing out. The bottom line is that a stretchy suit means a smaller internal bubble, which is better in every way... Especially for those divers unable to maintain a prone position due to work.

Some people say that neoprene suits are warmer than trilams... That may be true for regular "compressed" neoprene suits (read: very buoyant), but I found this to be virtually indistinguishable from trlaminate suits in every way, except that it stretches and is probably more durable. Nope, it's gonna be all about the undergarment... Just like in a trilam.

I wish I could get a sample of this fabric - like DUI gave me, relative to the CF200 - and buoyancy-test it like I did in the previous thread. That would give a lot of insight.

Is it fair to call crushed or "hyper-compressed" neoprene "trilaminate?" That's pretty much what it is... It's just that it's stretchy neoprene sandwiched between two layers of equally stretchy fabric - with all the air squished out of the neoprene (the key feature) - rather than butyl rubber (or in the case of the BARE SB, polyurethane) sandwiched between two layers of non-stretch nylon or Cordura. It's still technically a trilaminate.

To call this suit "neoprene" is a bit misleading for anyone used to thinking of neoprene in terms of wetsuits... Like divers. I wish we could call it something else to avoid the marketing nightmare. Yes, it's neoprene... Yes, it's a trilaminate. Yes, it's a "membrane" suit - they just made the membrane out of neoprene... And yes, it is as comfortable and easy to dive and as stretchy as a wetsuit... Except that you're dry inside.

Can we call this a "hybrid" fabric suit? Maybe a stretch-dry fabric? A neolaminate? It's just too easy to wrongly think of this as an oversized wetsuit - with all of it's thick fabric and buouyancy. It doesn't help that some neoprene drysuits are exactly that.

Yeah... I like the term "neolaminate." A membrane suit made from neoprene. The bouyancy of a trilaminate (maybe even better than a trilaminate) with the stretch and durability of a neoprene suit. That's the only fair way to describe this.

 

[stuartv]

In practical terms, this means that the suit can be dived with NO air in it whatsoever without the joint restriction found in trilaminate or "membrane" suits.

...

So far, a big thumbs up on this suit. Manufacturers not using "hyper-compressed" or "crushed" stretchy neoprene are missing out. The bottom line is that a stretchy suit means a smaller internal bubble, which is better in every way... Especially for those divers unable to maintain a prone position due to work.

My XCS2 Tech was my first drysuit. I've had it for about a year and a half. I got a Waterproof D9X (which is a breathable quad-lam) a couple of months ago.

I bought my XCS2 in part based on statements like yours which I read on SB. My expectation was that the XCS2 would fit more snugly (which it does) and that would result in less air inside the suit and an easier bubble to manage. As a new drysuit diver and a fairly new diver, I really did not want a drysuit that would add any extra challenge to my buoyancy and trim control.

My experience is pretty much the opposite of yours and of what I was expecting. The summary is: I feel like I have less air and an easier bubble to manage in the shell suit. And maintaining an odd position (e.g. doing a valve drill) is easier when the suit has the range of motion inherently versus constantly holding tension against stretched material.

The neoprene is much stiffer than the quad-lam (or a bi- or tr-lam). That seems to me to create pockets where you can never completely get the air out. Try this: Put on the XCS2 and then try to squeeze the suit tight around your leg just above the ankle. Now compare that to putting on a shell suit and squeezing the suit down around your ankle. With my suits, squeezing the XCS2 around my ankle is more like just folding the excess material and wrapping the fold around my ankle. No way I'm getting all the air out. The shell suit will squeeze down like a vacuum-sealed bag.

When I'm in the water, it feels the same way. The XCS2 material is so thick and stiff that it never completely squeezes down like a shrinkwrap job and I'm always left with a little bit of extra air inside. The D9X material is, by comparison, very thin and flexible. It feels like the water pressure squeeze shrinkwraps it onto my body everywhere, so it ends up fitting as close as a wetsuit.

Alternate experiment: Take an ordinary household object - say a spray can of something. Maybe a can of WD40. Now get out your 3mm wetsuit. Stick the can inside the leg of the wetsuit, up around the knee area. Fold the bottom of the leg up. Then stick the whole thing into a sinkful of water and see how much the suit squeezes onto the can. Then stick the same can in a big ziploc bag (with the top open) and stick that in a sinkful of water. I believe you'll see that the thin, flexible ziploc bag squeezes on the can and has a lot less air inside than when the can is in a "bag" of 3mm neoprene.

To be sure, if I get in wearing the D9X and I don't take the right steps at the start, the suit will squeeze onto me where the upper body part is too "low" on me and it does restrict my reach to my valves. But, if I get horizontal on or near the surface for a second and just stretch my arms out above my head, it pulls the upper part of the suit into place and then it squeezes to my body in the right position to give me unrestricted motion of my arms/shoulders.

With the XCS2, if I wear very thin or no undergarments, I can reach my valves just fine. But, when I put on my Fourth Element Arctic undergarments, they add just enough bulk that the suit fit feels great... BUT, it makes it very difficult to do a valve drill. Sure, the suit is stretchy and I can still reach the valves. But, holding that position while I'm turning the valves and also fighting against the tension of stetching the suit makes it very hard for me to complete the valve drill.

With the looser cut and the telescoping torso, the D9X feels like it fits me the same whether I am wearing a thin t-shirt and shorts or my full-on cold water unders.

The XCS2 is a lot more durable. And it's warmer, if I'm wearing the same amount of undergarments. I use the same weighting with either suit (double 120s and SS BP plus a 4# V-weight, for either suit, if I'm wearing my FE Arctic gear - no V-weight if I'm wearing very thin or no unders). But, for ME, the nod for comfort and being easier to dive definitely goes to the shell suit. And I would definitely rather have every motion be accommodated by my suit without needing to stretch. Stretching the suit just means working against tension that is resisting my motion. No thanks.

 

[Deep South Divers]

Thanks for the counter view... And I really appreciate the detailed explanation... That way I can relate to your thoughts.

I have one question that came to mind when I read your post... Are we talking about the same suit? You mention using a 3mm wetsuit on a can to demonstrate the "shrink wrap" at depth... Yet this suit's fabric is nothing at all like 3mm wetsuit material. It's much more like a typical trilaminate suit - except that it stretches.

I can tell that at one time, yes, the fabric USED to be typical compressed neoprene, based on the WEIGHT of the suit. It's close - but slightly heavier - than the tougher, thicker trilams like a SANTI e-lite or a DUI CLX450. That hints that the fabric is very dense - "hyper-compressed" BARE calls it.

Standing side-by-side, most divers could not tell that this was a neoprene suit. It's much more like a trilaminate... Except the fabric stretches.

The inherent stretch isn't for extending - say, for a valve drill. The stretch is for movement at the joints. To describe the issue, have a look at this video... Specifically, the 1:00-1:30 mark:


Note that the reviewer in the video makes note that when the air is removed from the bag, whatever is in it becomes very stiff and "not bendable." Even though the garments she puts in the bag are soft and flexible... And even though the bag itself is very flexible... Everything gets very stiff when the air is removed. This same thing happens when a diver removes the air from a trilaminate drysuit at depth. It limits movements at the knees, hips, elbows, and shoulders. It basically "locks" the diver into position.

If the bag in the video was made of a stretchy material, this "lock" wouldn't happen. Instead, the fabric would be able to give on the outer radius of the joint, and the contents of the bag would be much easier to move. That's the advantage of a stretch fabric... Much improved range of motion with a squeeze.

Of course, we all know that a diver with a squeezed drysuit can simply add a little air to the suit "to take the squeeze off," and that should be done regardless of what fabric the suit is made of... The problem is - if the diver is forced into a heads-up or head-down position rather than a properly prone (flat) position (as we often are because we're working), all of the air inside the suit moves to the highest point... While leaving the lowest point to be squeezed. It's not uncommon to actually feel a bubble moving about your shoulders while your feet or butt is being squeezed while working on a propeller, for example. What's worse is if you reach up, like into a sea chest... Suddenly all the air rushes into the arm and your feet get squeezed even more. If we were always able to be properly prone in the water, we would not have to deal with this issue as much... Which is why I suspect this is a bigger issue for us than most divers.

Obviously it's every diver's goal to "minimize the bubble" inside the suit... But a diver diving a stretchable fabric suit can minimize more, because his movements are restricted less than a diver that's diving a non-stretch drysuit. For that reason, I propose that a diver diving a suit made of stretchy fabric can actually use LESS weight than a diver diving a suit made of non-stretchy fabric. For reference, we always dive with our exhaust valves all the way open and simply add for depth to equalize. There is NO air in our suits, but they are equalized.

Rest assured, fit is still important regardless of whether the fabric stretches or not. If the shoulders are too tight then a diver won't be able to reach his valves for a valve drill... Or in the case of stretch fabric, he might be able to - but he'd be working against the stretch in the suit. Fit is still key whether the fabric stretches or not.

...But I agree with you about fabric in a suit - thinner is better for dumping air inside the suit. This fabric is REALLY thin... Not at all what you'd expect neoprene to be. It's at least as thin as Cordura-equipped trilaminates... Maybe thinner.

...Which is why I'm thinking it might be a good idea to call this stuff something other than "neoprene." Maybe "neolaminate?"

Is that how your suit is?

 

[Deep South Divers]

By the way... I suspect that reaching your valves is a problem with the Arctic/XCS2 combination not because of the drysuit, but because of the undergarment. If the suit dives well with other undergarments but restricts you when you add the Arctic, then the problem is probably the non-stretch nature of the Arctic undergarment, not the drysuit itself.

We use FourthE's base layer and Xerotherms in different combinations for warmth. Yesterday I dove using simple UnderArmour stuff. All of these stretch and provided absolutely no restriction in movement whatsoever. I'll dive that again today.

Stretch is the key to maintaining movement with a squeeze, which we all have to work with in varying degrees depending on how prone you can stay in the water and how much extra weight you're willing to carry. If it's minimalism you're after... Which has a lot of advantages, including very little lead and next to no migrating bubble... Then you want to dive a stretchable suit - that fits right - with the exhaust valve fully open.

 

[stuartv]

Yes, I have a Bare XCS2 Tech. All black, but otherwise the same as yours, purchased new by me at my LDS about a year and a half ago. I used a 3mm wetsuit in my example because I can't think of a way to use the actual XCS2 to demonstrate the effect I'm talking about.

However, I would say there is no way that anyone looking at my XCS2 Tech would mistake it for a tri-lam or anything else other than neoprene. I think they claim it's 2mm thick and I'd say it's every bit of that. Nothing like a tri-lam. Especially a thinner tri-lam (versus one that has a heavy Cordura outer layer).

As I said before, I agree that if you let the tri-lam squeeze onto your body without positioning it properly, it definitely restricts motion, as in for a valve shutdown. But, if you position it properly when you first get in and are at the surface, where it isn't really squeezed onto you yet, it will then stay in position and not restrict movement (assuming it fits properly, of course). At least, that is my experience.

You can put on any jacket or coat and look in a mirror and see that if you reach up with both hands, the torso of the coat/jacket rides up. If you held your arms down and put straps around your torso then tried to reach up, the jacket would bind and restrict you. I think it's the same with a shell suit. So, I deal with that by getting in and stretching my arms up over my head to pull the torso of the suit up a little bit. Being a telescopic torso, it has plenty of room for that. Done at the surface, in the water, it stays there once you do that and then it doesn't restrict movement during the dive. I have tried putting air in my suit to let me do that at depth and it doesn't work for me. At least, not with any amount of air I'm willing to put in the suit. The friction between the shell and what's underneath, over such a large area keeps it from wanting to slide and let me pull the torso up.

Also, I wear the same FE Arctic undies under either suit. I can reach my valves just fine in the shell suit (if I have positioned it properly). So, it's not the undies that are binding me up in the XCS2. It's the combination of the two, which makes the suit more snug, which in turns requires me to stretch it more. And, as we know from Physics 101, if it required a 1 inch stretch before and now it requires a 2 inch stretch, that will require twice as much force to stretch it. In my case, the additional force required is very difficult to overcome long enough for me to complete a full valve drill.

Don't take any of this the wrong way. The XCS2 is a great suit and I'm happy for you that you like yours so much. I just wanted to give another point of view about the pros and cons of that suit versus a shell suit - mainly since my experience has been so different for me than what you are experiencing. In case anyone else reads this thread while considering what suit to buy.

 

[Deep South Divers]

Yeah, definitely... And it's only fair to offer counter opinions. It's what makes the world go 'round.

I wasn't able to get BARE to send me a sample of the XCS2's fabric for buoyancy testing (and thickness measuring), but I was able to get DUI to... They sent me a sample of their CF200 material and their CLX450 material, which they claim to be their top-of-the-line, most durable drysuit fabrics. Admittedly, there are many thinner fabrics out there - like the ones used on the SANTI e.space and the DUI TLS350. I'm not familiar with the suit that you've got, but I know HOG is making a super-thin bilaminate suit and Hollis and FourthE are making thin trilams too. None of them have any inherent stretch in their fabrics - the norm in trilaminate fabrics. Due to this, the extending torso has become necessary for movement like reaching your valves... And for self-donning... For the exact reason you demonstrated with the dress jacket example. This is unnecessary if the fabric itself stretches.

Here's one of the videos I made when I received and unboxed the XCS2 last Spring. In it, you can see the XCS2 and a sample of DUI's CF200 material and CLX450 material:


For reference, the CF200 sample is so similar to the XCS2 fabric that I virtually can't tell the difference... Not even in thickness. Not even when I double it over. In fact, there's not a whole lot of difference in thickness between the CF200 sample and the CLX450 sample... Microns, maybe... But they dive completely different from each other.

As you can see, the samples are most definitely not 2mm thick or thicker. Yes, BARE claims to "hyper-compress" 7mm neoprene to 2mm in thickness, but it seems thinner. I have no sample to measure, and of course, I'm not going to cut the suit.

...But with a "crushed" or "hyper-compressed" neoprene, it really doesn't matter if the fabric is 1mm thick or 2mm thick - because it stretches, and offers no resistance to movement, even in a squeeze. And in case you're thinking there'd be a difference in buoyancy, remember the photo I posted on the former thread:

That's a photo of the CLX450 fabric FLOATING on top of a glass of freshwater while the "crushed" NEOPRENE sample sinks. I don't think I can stress enough how "not neoprenish" this stuff is.

Is the XCS2 immediately recognizable as a neoprene suit? Well... That's subjective, of course... But to me it looks more like an e.lite or a CLX450 or even the BARE SB (all trilams) that I warrantied than my old neoprene O'Neill from decades ago.

The point that I'm making is that I don't think it's fair to call this a neoprene suit. Yes, it's true, but that gives the incorrect impression that it is thick, fluffy, and very buoyant - like my old O'Neill was... And like a wetsuit is.

 

[Valery]

I bought mine in November 2014, to make it short I love this DS. When winter comes and when I dive it, it's like diving a 3mm wetsuit, correct undergarments keeps everything stretchy and comfy.

I've had mine made to measure which is to my opinion 1 of the most important feature for a DS.

 

[Deep South Divers]

Great news!

Through diligence and persistence, I have managed to get in touch with the right person to answer questions about the XCS2 fabric and it's manufacturing process. What's more, he's sending me a variety of sample swatches of fabric tomorrow.

Soon I'll be able to take measurements of things like thickness and buoyancy.


EDIT: I just got off the phone with him... Darrell Hepplewhite. He's been with BARE since 2002, prior to the buyout by Huish Outdoors. He's currently the regional guy for the Northwest area of North America, but Huish Outdoors really considers him BARE's resident drysuit expert... And yes, he dives... A lot! He's an instructor and BARE's liaison to the US military, to include the Coast Guard and some of the Navy SEAL teams. For what it's worth, he says that the SEALS seem to be favoring MOVEMENT and WARMTH as their main suit characteristics, and thus says that they have favored a special version of the BARE XCS2, the BARE SB, and a BARE semi-dry for the same reasons that I have listed. Boy, did I talk to the right guy!

1. The XCS2 fabric begins life as 7mm neoprene foam, like what you see in wetsuits. It is mechanically compressed (rather than hyperbarically compressed like DUI does) and then heated for an extended period of time. It's published thickness is 1.8mm, although he admits to some variance in the thickness of the fabric. The name that BARE gives this product is "Diamond-Tuff" fabric, and is completely unique to BARE.

2. The BARE XCS2 is also unique in that, beginning in 2015, the entire suit is made without a single stitch - at least, until the zipper is installed. Until recently, this was not possible; but it has obvious advantages in sealing and long-term wear. The seams have a LIFETIME warranty... And if you've seen my unboxing videos of the XCS2, I noted their peculiar, high-quality, and rugged appearance - before I knew what "no-stitch technology" was, and that it was unique to BARE.

3. The BARE XCS2 isn't new this year - although the no-stitch technology ("NST") is. The XCS2 is actually a next-generation of the BARE XCD2, which used a different fabric on the INSIDE of the suit and was not as stretchy and compliant. The XCD2 also appears to be thicker, even though the suit looks the same as today's XCS2. I suspect that anyone in this thread claiming to have a "thick" XCS2 actually may be talking about an XCD2, not an XCS2... And yes, it does make a difference.

4. My observation of the protective pads on the suit's shoulders, underarms and elbows was spot-on... While the knee pads are made of non-stretchy Kevlar, the shoulders, underarms and elbows are covered in another proprietary fabric that BARE calls "Protekt." Think of it as a type of stretch Kevlar... With about three times the abrasion resistance of their already excellent "Diamond-Tuff" hyper-compressed neoprene fabric that the rest of the suit is made of... Without losing any of the stretch characteristics.

Darrell is sending me samples that can be cut and measured and tested for buoyancy. When I asked him if "Diamond-Tuff" fabric was positive or negative (because we know from my previous post that the CF200 fabric is counterintuitively NEGATIVE), his answer was exceedingly practical: "I'm not entirely sure - it depends on depth, water temperature and salinity." He then extended into a scientific study that was done that showed that at a specific depth, salinity and temperature the fabric had been tested as completely neutral... And that at depths above if was NEGATIVE, while at depths below is was POSITIVE, meaning that it had nothing to do with compression and everything to do with the specific gravity of the surrounding water. This explains why no marketing person at BARE has jumped on the "our XCS2 fabric is negatively buoyant" bandwagon... Because - well - it depends.

It also explains why Susan Long of DUI didn't jump on that bandwagon either, even though - for all practical purposes - I found it to be true. In fact, Sue seemed genuinely surprised when I told her that the CF200 sample sank while the CLX450 trilaminate fabric floated... Which is something I would think she'd have known and used for marketing purposes, given that trilaminates' big advantage - according to the current thought in the drysuit market - is it's lack of excess buoyancy.

He also mentioned that testing the individual fabric samples may not tell the whole story - because valves, boots, and fittings are added to the suit - and therefore a whole suit may be positive once manufactured, even if the fabric is actually negative. My idea of deciding which fabric is best based on buoyancy may be too close to call - or at least not significant enough to matter. Even if this is true, however, it still makes my point: Despite being called "neoprene," this suit does not have the inherent buoyancy that one might expect.

Darrell followed his comments up with additional practical observations: "The reason why divers tend to use less weight with a hyper-compressed neoprene suit (DUI has trademarked the term 'crushed neoprene') is because a drysuit diver using a trilaminate [membrane] suit has to add more air to the suit to maintain mobility; and that air needs to be compensated for with lead."

...So there you have it... In terms of weighting requirements, a trilaminate, bilaminate, or membrane suit will require MORE weight for a given dive than a "hyper-compressed" neoprene suit... And probably STILL not give you the same degree of mobility in the fabric. The argument to choose a trilaminate suit because it requires less lead is antiquated, null and void with the invention of "hyper-compressed" or "crushed" neoprene, and only applicable when compared to typical "wetsuit" style neoprene.

...Which BARE still makes; their D6 line of neoprene wetsuits are this type of fabric, and favored in very cold climes where lots of weight is the norm... Like in the commercial diving industry in Alaska.

Darrell is sending me a full line of BARE fabric samples which I will be able to test for abrasion, cut, thickness, and buoyancy. I even discussed the proposition of creating a demonstrative model whereby I'd build a mannequin arm, clothe it in various drysuit materials, place a typical "equilibrium" squeeze on it (as if it were diving), and test the mobility in the elbow joint. The model would certainly prove - with hard data - the advantage to having a stretch fabric along the outside radius of the elbow... And why divers should be gravitating toward "hyper-compressed" or "crushed" neoprene as their drysuit material of choice.

 

[stuartv]

I suspect that anyone in this thread claiming to have a "thick" XCS2 actually may be talking about an XCD2, not an XCS2...

This is my suit:

As you can see, it is an XCS2 Tech Dry. The sleeve label says "XCS2 Pro Dry", but the only difference between Pro and Tech is that the Pro suit is a back zip and the Tech is a front zip. And you can see that my suit is a front zip.

You can also see that it is a NST suit. As it was an in-stock suit at my LDS, which I purchased new in April 2015, it is obvious that the No Seam Technology is not new for 2016. Nor is it even new on the XCS2 Tech for 2016.

a trilaminate, bilaminate, or membrane suit will require MORE weight for a given dive than a "hyper-compressed" neoprene suit.

To be polite, this statement is simply false. I have this suit and a membrane suit (Waterproof D9X) and the WP needs exactly the same amount of weight at the Bare suit. I don't have to put more air in the D9X than I do in the XCS2. And if my D9X was restricting my mobility, the amount of air I would have to put in it to reduce the friction between the suit and the undergarments enough to let me slide the suit around on top of the undies would have me shooting out of the water like a porpoise at Sea World.

If I get in the water in the membrane suit, lay flat at or near the surface, and stretch both arms up above my head, it pulls the torso of the suit up my body some, just like reaching high while wearing a coat would pull the coat up. Being already in the water, after I do that, the suit stays there and then it doesn't restrict my movement at all. With the same undergarments on under my Bare suit, I can reach up above my head... but then I am fighting the tension of stretching the neoprene. It's definitely more work than in my membrane suit.

Darrell is sending me a full line of BARE fabric samples which I will be able to test for abrasion, cut, thickness, and buoyancy. I even discussed the proposition of creating a demonstrative model whereby I'd build a mannequin arm, clothe it in various drysuit materials, place a typical "equilibrium" squeeze on it (as if it were diving), and test the mobility in the elbow joint. The model would certainly prove - with hard data - the advantage to having a stretch fabric along the outside radius of the elbow... And why divers should be gravitating toward "hyper-compressed" or "crushed" neoprene as their drysuit material of choice.

Why are you so interested in convincing everyone that these suits are The Best choice in drysuits? Do you sell Bare drysuits, or have a financial stake in some place that does?

 

[Deep South Divers]

Nope. No financial interest. I'm simply sharing my experience as I have it. I don't own BARE, any part of BARE, or own a dive shop. I'm a commercial diver in Savannah.

Your response to the idea that a neoprene suit can be equal - or even less - buoyant than a membrane suit is exactly what I'm after. Even you admit that they're equal - or at least indiscernible - in terms of buoyancy. This flies in the face of the well-accepted notion that trilaminate suits are less buoyant than neoprene. It's simply not true, as in the case of this XCS2.

I respect that your experience and opinion differs from mine. Thank you for your input. I mean it sincerely when I say that your opposing view is welcome.

I believe that our views differ because your idea of "mobility" is being able to reach your valves, which can be supplemented by adjusting the fabric of your suit in an acceptable position for the movement PRIOR to submerging. Yes, we do that, too, in our trilams. But our idea of "mobility" is being able to pull a 1200 pound prop off of a boat shaft, inverted and upside-down, and with legs wrapped around the shaft. I'm not being smart... I'm being serious. I think it's just a matter of perspective.

...And I respect your perspective. Sincerely, thank you for your opinion.