Comparing DTR and TLC air models

[Tilopa]

I am curious as to how the TLC model differs functionally from the DTR model.

I own both a TLC-X and a DTR and have been using the air kit with the DTR for about 4 months now. I am extremely pleased with it. I have been alternating the air pressure with the bi-di method and also the strap method. At this point though I'm thinking the air method will be my primary method, as the more inner skin I can grow, the more outer skin is exposed and available for tugging as it will not be at the rollover point or in the skin tube.

The DTR method uses a collar as a way to direct the inflated pressure towards the area right behind the glans. I tend to put the edge of the collar at the corona so that only the skin behind the glans can be ballooned. It would seem that the conical shape of the TLC would provide some direction for the pressure because it limits what can be ballooned to what is closest to the glans, however cannot prevent the inner skin covering the glans from also being ballooned.

Anyone have experience with both and can make a comparison? If anyone here does not understand the language I have used in describing how the air pressure is directed, I can try and clarify.

[admin]

I am curious as to how the TLC model differs functionally from the DTR model.

I own both a TLC-X and a DTR and have been using the air kit with the DTR for about 4 months now. I am extremely pleased with it. I have been alternating the air pressure with the bi-di method and also the strap method. At this point though I'm thinking the air method will be my primary method, as the more inner skin I can grow, the more outer skin is exposed and available for tugging as it will not be at the rollover point or in the skin tube.

The DTR method uses a collar as a way to direct the inflated pressure towards the area right behind the glans. I tend to put the edge of the collar at the corona so that only the skin behind the glans can be ballooned. It would seem that the conical shape of the TLC would provide some direction for the pressure because it limits what can be ballooned to what is closest to the glans, however cannot prevent the inner skin covering the glans from also being ballooned.

Anyone have experience with both and can make a comparison? If anyone here does not understand the language I have used in describing how the air pressure is directed, I can try and clarify.

I think the primary difference is the control the TLC-XAir gives you over exactly which skin is held at the narrowest part of the device. If you have a particular part of your skin tube in mind to become your Future Flaccid Roll-over Point (http://foreskin-restoration.net/forum/showpost.php?p=45822&postcount=44) then fine-tuning the starting length of the device will help you roll your skin out onto the device so that the target FFRP falls exactly at the very narrow part of the Tugger body, so that zone of skin can stay/become narrowly puckered as the rest of your skin expands.

The means by which we change the length is by introducing spacers - called TLC Selects - in between the Pusher and the Tugger body. See the attached pic which shows 4 CYL-X disks between the Pusher and Tugger body, expanded so you can see the separate disks.

TLC air devices are furnished with something we call the Cuff which keeps the retaining cone from lifting away from the Tugger body under pressure. Some guys say they don't use the Cuff.

TLC air is supplied with a 2' silicone hose (inflate by mouth) and binder clip to clamp it closed (for now), so if Chuck has some fancy 1-way valve, that would be another differnce.

Lastly, TLC air gear is available in configurations which allow simultaneous bi-di tension, strap tension, or integrated weight tension.

[Tilopa]

Thanks for the reply Ron. I can see how the ability to use spacers to keep your FFRP consistent and the integrated aspect of the setup sounds great.

I would wonder though about whether or not it would be best to wrap or otherwise limit the amount of ballooned tension of skin tube. When wrapping the collar around the glans, but leaving the area just behind the glans exposed, the air is forced behind the glans and a bubble of skin is created.
Fortunately this folded area is closest to the glans. The areas of skin that are wrapped with air tension also receive good lengthwise tension but without the ability to expand its circumference much.

The reasoning to keep an FFRP consistent are somewhat in line with the reasoning for limiting the areas that are tensioned circumferentially. Both are saying that expanding (in the temporary sense of the word) the circumference of the skin tube could affect the tone of the tube.

Generally I have not paid so much attention to FFRP because devices I have used have not tensioned the circumference of the skin tube beyond what would seem to be its ordinary tension limits. From flaccid to erection the circumference of the tube changes dramatically, and I have tended to think that without tensioning the circumference greater than this, the skin tube would be unlikely loosen or tighten in response to tugging.

Just some thoughts. Also, if instead of having to use a collar or other wrap, I wonder if the Cuff could be made in various shapes to cover parts of the exposed skin tube,so the pressure of the air can be pushed through the tube so that it affects via ballooning the mucosa nearest the glans primarily?