Questions on FastSkin suits

Should wearing a FastSkin suit give the same performance benefits of shaving whatever area the FastSkin covers? Also, do people generally only wear them for "big meets" - like how swimmers would typically only shave for big meets? i.e. do college kids today wear them for all dual meets, or only for championships? Would you lose some of the benefit if you wore them too much? Thanks for any info! John, The suit companies will tell you that their suits repel water and have less drag than human skin. I'd tend to think they're probably right. As for when to wear them, I have seen people show up to the most rinky-dink of meets in their FS2s. The suit companies will tell you they're not meant to be worn more than for a few meet. Seeing as how my FS 1 Jammers are essentially a water magnet these days (after 3 years and probably worn at 20-25 meets), I would tend to think they're right on that too. I usually busted that suit out at any meet for one event that I really wanted to do well in. But for the most part, I wear a regular speedo at meets until we get to zones and nationals.

Don't know anything about the Yellowstone thing. I have the original fastskin, couldn't pass up the $75 bargain. First meet I wore it in I set PB's in every event I entered. Was it the suit, my training or in my head? Who knows and who really cares? When you're my age and at my ability level, getting a PB in any fashion is all that matters. More than likely it was a little bit of each....but from my experience with the fast Skin I that I used at Nats in 2005, the fastskin really seemed to make a difference.(of course it is all a matter of perception which can be fooled). I think it probably had as much to do with the slight increase in bouyancy (and all my races were 100's and 200's so not too long) as it did the drag resistance.....there supposedly is also something about reducing micro-muscle tremors or something that supposedly helps you to conserve energy (although I am very skeptical about the actual impact of this effect even if there is a non-negligible difference in this regard). My personal feeling was that the suit does make some difference...but as nkfrench pointed out....It seems like a strange kind of techno way to gain an advantage....but then again the best speed cyclists have the most aerodynamic lightweight bikes and aerodynamic helmets and such....Is it reallly fair though to compare cycling with swimming? (this has probably has already been discussed here before somewhere?). But for some reason I like them anyway because you feel so fast when you swim in them...In fact I would be for racing some events (maybe techno events) with all possible non-motorized gear enhancements allowable (this was also discussed n an earlier thread from fairly far back?)...so you could then wear the best fins and paddles money can buy ....some kind of mini sleek pullbouy that fits between the upper portions of the legs so that you could both kick fairly comfortable and still feel the extra bouyancy near the lower midsection...and of course a cap and fastskin super suit both made of the same optimal materials.....I have been swimming a lot at practice with zoomers and paddles...(or buoy and paddles at times as well)....mainly because I struggle to keep from sinking (as in almost drowning) without the extra enhancements right now....but at least I have a means of compensating enough with these techno swim devices that are available to make working out more doable right now. Newmastersswimmer

This link may offer you some insight. There is definitely a benefit...and some people swear by them. The 'fit' may depend on how comfortable you feel with the suit as far as range of motion. Some swimmers don't want to restrict their movements...and that's probably why you'll see some with only knee length suits. (This may be true, particularly for breaststrokers.) coachesinfo.com/.../

Very interesting link quicksilver! Thanks for posting it....At least from a self perception like perspective the article seems to indicate (according to the interviews of the swimmers in the article) that at least the fastskin suits provide the "sensation" of increased bouyancy and reduced drag....and to me the sensation is the most important part anyway.....Similarly its very likely IMO that the sensation of shaving down has as much to do with the advantage it provides as the actual drag reduction that also results from shaving down does. Newmastersswimmer

do college kids today wear them for all dual meets, or only for championships? Most college teams will only wear these suits for big meets - like their big invititationals in December and then their big championship meet at the end of the season.

I think the skinsuits have pretty well settled the old arguement as to whether increased feel or decreased drag was the more important factor in shaving down. Since the suit decrease drag without increasing sensation and they are roughly as fast(maybe faster,maybe not) as shaved down the decreased drag must be the more important factor.

This is a better article with less scientific jargon... coachsci.sdsu.edu/.../knowsuit.htm There does not appear to be any benefit to wearing these suits. Any benefits will be restricted to the peculiarities of some individuals. For every swimmer that derives a benefit, there will be a least one, and probably more, who slows because of their invasiveness on the swimming experience. Too many swimmers recorded inconsistent results at the Australian Olympic trials to justify any attribution of benefit to full-body suits. Grant Hackett was slower in all events, despite wearing several variations of Speedo's suits. He opted for a waist-to-knee suit in the 1500m). His disappointing performances came after his "best ever" preparation for this meet. Suzie O'Neill achieved her biggest improvement in personal best times wearing a modified Aquablade (neck-to-knee) suit in her 200-m world record butterfly swim, while she wore the full "fastskin" suit to get the 100-m crawl stroke Commonwealth record. Keiren Perkins did his best time since Atlanta in a full "Fastskin." While wearing the full Adidas suit, Ian Thorpe improved two of his world records by small amounts. The size of those improvements should be attributed to his physical and mental maturation. His suit appears to have had no impact. This was certainly so in the 100 meters, where he was slower in the final (49.74) than the semi-final of the Pan Pacific Championships of 1999 (49.71).There was no universal 3% improvement in performance derived from these items as Speedo claimed in its advertising hype. The magnitude of any effect they and Adidas Body Equipment might have, is grossly inflated, and then it only occurs in isolated cases. The improvement in "overall depth" of swimming performances at these trials was what should be expected of Australian swimmers competing for selection in "their" Games. No performance improvement impact of a general nature at these trials can be attributed to the advent of these suits. As hypothesized in September, 1999 , these full-body-arms-leg suits fail because they interfere with, and cause a loss of, "feel" of the water, due to the skin being covered. The full versions have been rejected by most swimmers. It is important for swimmers to sense the water for propulsion, particularly when the forearm and part of the upper arm contribute to more of it than the always-exposed hand. As well, the position of the torso indicates to the swimmer the streamlining of the major load in the propulsive task. Pressure on the shoulders and flow over the chest and sides, are the senses that serve as the "speedometer" used by most swimmers. To cover these sensitive areas, is to take the swimmer out of the aquatic interface. To not understand this, demonstrates the incompetence of the designers of these suits and the marketing "whizzes" who seem to have pushed this idea. One is set to opine that improvements in swimming will come from practitioners and scientists, not corporate marketing offices. The "feel" hypothesis is supported by breaststrokers. It is the stroke that requires as much feel in the legs as it does in the arms and upper body. Even though the US swimmer Ed Moses, uses a sleeveless neck-to-ankle Speedo, the overwhelming majority of breaststrokers prefer the true skin-to-water interface to its removal by an artificial covering. TO TAKE THE FEEL OUT OF SWIMMING IS NOT AN AVENUE FOR IMPROVING PERFORMANCE!

Most people ahve answered this... The technical suits are made for championship meets. Unless you have the money to buy a new one every 2-3 meets, I wouldn't do it. Put it in perspective: I got a new FS for my state meet last year (2 days long). I went to nationals and most of the water repellant coating had worn off, so I need to get a new one for this year. At Kiefer's website www.kiefer.com they have the NEW FS there - the FS Pro. It's designed to absorb less water and dry faster which, in turn, makes the special coating last longer. But they only have men's suits, it looks. Us ladies will have to wait. Kiefer also has colored FSIIs which are pretty cool because now we can break away from the normal black, blue and silver. I propose suit makers go back to the old school paper suits. That suits lasted me a few YEARS. :applaud:

Hi Quicksilver: “TO TAKE THE FEEL OUT OF SWIMMING IS NOT AN AVENUE FOR IMPROVING PERFORMANCE!” You said it very well. I’ve probably talked my self blue in the face on this subject, however I will say it again I absolutely don’t care for the “Taking a bath with your clothes on” sensation you get from swimming in so called “technical” suits and it just ruins the sport -for me at least. :mad: I’ve heard a rumor going around that in the late 90’s, Calvin Klein bought out the Speedo company and CK’s marketing advisors thought that swimming in conventional briefs had become “too bland” and they wanted to come up with something more “fashionable” and “techy”. Hence, the technical suit fad was born. Of course the Summer Olympics are an excellent way for the makers of these suits to provide commercial exposure for their (rather expensive) products and I’ve heard that they even provide financial sponsorship for the swimming events. Hence, everyone has to wear them (at least while on camera) or they are out of the race - figuratively and literally. My advice for anyone considering what kind of suit to get is not to go out and spend $50 to $90 on something just because it's part of a fad. I just go to my local department store and buy the the most comfy (and also the most economical) briefs on the shelf. After all, it’s not the suit that’s swimming –it’s the you, the person wearing it! Cheers - Dolphin 2 :groovy:

Hi Galen, I agree. The quote was from the article by the way. They say that some of the fastest swimmers wear the old school Speedos (or Jammers) ...in spite of the current trend to be fully dressed in a Superhero costume. Obviously the FastSkins have proven work at the elite level...but it seems that it's more of a fashion trend when they're worn by the masses in my humble opinion. There are some folks better off bundled up....than letting it all hang out. On that note they should be strongly encouraged. Each purchase should include a cape that could double as one of those fancy wicking towels... and a utility belt for holding goggles and a cap. A good marketing incentive. :) Until then, it's "Skin to Win".