RENCHU’s article describes three silicone sleeve variants labelledNo.1,No.2 andNo.3, with differences in internal texture,wall thickness andsoftness. The article is dated7 September2019 and remains accessible today. It supplies no dimensional or hardness table for those variants. A buyer should define the physical differences and current set contents rather than use the article’s claimed delay ranking as a specification or treatment result.
Replace an effect ranking with an actual variant specification
The supplier’s names identify variants, but a quotation needs their dimensions,formulation andpacking identity. The source does not quantify any of them.
| Parameter | Published specification | What to confirm |
|---|---|---|
| Material | Silicone, supplier article [1] | No formulation,hardness or model-level report supplied; the word alone does not define the variants’ mechanical properties. |
| Variant differences | Texture,thickness andsoftness described qualitatively [1] | Obtain the drawing and compound identity for eachNo.1/2/3 part, not an invented ascending numerical hardness scale. |
| Product boundary | Supplier explicitly states it is not a condom substitute [1] | Keep this sleeve set distinct from a condom/barrier-product order. No protective or clinical outcome is established by this article. |
Make each sleeve traceable to a drawing and a pack position
Ask RENCHU to complete the following definitions for each of the three variants. These are requested fields, not published measured values or a finished comparison.
| Variant feature | Order definition to obtain |
|---|---|
| Internal channel and surface | Labelled opening/channel dimensions and texture locations forNo.1,No.2 andNo.3. |
| Wall profile | Thickness by defined location,with the drawing revision andtolerance; not a single value guessed from an outside photograph. |
| Softness and material | Actual compound identifier andhardness method/value if offered; the article’s qualitative wording is not a measured scale. |
| Set mapping | Variant marks,quantity andposition in the retail pack; confirm that the current offer still matches the old three-variant article. |
Keep the old article separate from a current supply and care file
The2019article is evidence of what RENCHU published then; accessibility in2026 does not establish that the same formulation,pack or instructions are supplied today. Request the current variant list andcare instructions with the quotation,and record any changed drawing or material revision.
The source describes delay outcomes and suggests cutting a sleeve if it is long. This page does not adopt those statements as efficacy evidence or reproduce them as QQIP fitting instructions. Request the manufacturer’s current supported sizing andhandling documentation for the offered parts instead.
For commercial comparison,ask for the actualNo.1/2/3 set,unit of sale,quantity basis,price,currency andpack measurements. No numeric MOQ,current unit price or independently verified variant performance is provided by the reviewed article.
Sources and editorial review
QQIP Editorial re-read RENCHU’s dated2019article on14 October2026. Variant/material wording andthe supplier’s product-boundary statement are attributed; efficacy andcutting instructions are not adopted. No clinical,sample,material,dimension orcurrent-offer test was performed.
- RENCHU —助时套, article dated7 September2019 ↗
Three named silicone variants,qualitative texture/thickness/softness differences andexplicit not-a-condom-substitute statement. No quantitative variant sheet,current quote or independently verified effect. The manufacturer publishes this historical article over HTTP; transport is not represented as authenticated HTTPS.