The Cetma Shark mask has recently hit the market and we have as first media given the news ot its launch and the great similarity with the loved and missed Technisub Micromask. Now we can analyze deeper the similarities and differences between the mask from the Italian Company and the one that has made history.
The skirt
The total width of the skirt of the Micromask and the Cetma Shark mask is practically the same and equal to 12 cm. So is the height of the skirt, measured 10 cm. The difference is though in the angle of inclination of the profile going inside the internal part of the skirt. With the Micromask such angle is almost vertical to the lenses and the chassis, while for the Cetma Shark it has a greater angle making the width of the skirt reduce fast while moving towards the lenses. This determines a feeling of a more compact solution with the mask fo the Italian company compared to the one by Technisub. Such aspect could definitely, as anticipated by Cetma Composites, and as we will measure and certify, determine an even smaller internal volume of the Shark compared to the Micromask.
Lenses
Key are also the lenses of the two masks. Apparently of the same design and dimensions, the ones of the Cetma Shark mask have a thicker silicone frame coming from the skirt compared to the Micromask. This determines a slightly smaller free area of the lenses and a narrower space in the upper nose area between the two.
We will of course verify if this situation generates somehow a smaller field of view of the Cetma Shark. It is though not said, as aspects like the softness of the silicone, apparently greater on the mask by the Italian Company, may move the lenses closer to the eye and determine an increase infield of view and an additional reduction of the internal volume.
It is important to underline how the silicone skirt of the Cetma Shark partially also covers the external sides of the lenses. This is a very minor difference with the Micromask, and might not even impact the field of view, and could instead reduce internal volume, but all this we will check with our certification measures.
Cardic joint
The connection of the rear head band to the chassis, which has identical design in the two masks, is exactly the same between the Shark and the Micromask, with a Cardic joint. This is definitely a key element, which permits a great positioning of the mask on the fact and avoids incorrect and unwanted deformation of the skirt.
Nose
The nose area on the skirt is very similar between the Shark and the Micromask. maybe the latter has some deeper grooves on the sides of the base of the nose. These are very useful to insert the fingers and help equalization. The nose design of the Shark is just a little shorter and flatter than the Technisub mask.
Conclusions
Overall the new Cetma Shark is not identical to the Technisub Micromask, but has many aspects which are the same or similar. It feels smaller on the face, but this is something that each one of us must try directly with masks. So, if you are looking for an alternative to the Micromask, go and try out the new Cetma Shark mask and let us now your sensations!
