Sharkskin Titanium Top & Bottom Review
Last updated: July 2025
The Sharkskin Titanium top and bottom were a major letdown, with exaggerated thermal claims, poor fit, and zero brand support. Making it easily the most regrettable gear purchase I’ve made.
Overall Score: 3.6 / 10 (Weak)
The Sharkskin Titanium top and bottom were a major letdown, with exaggerated thermal claims, poor fit, and zero brand support. Making it easily the most regrettable gear purchase I’ve made.
Pros & Cons
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Easy to put on and take off | Grossly exaggerated thermal claims |
| Decent durability of exterior material | Poor customer service |
| Poor sizing and terrible water retention at ankles | |
| Overpriced compared to wetsuit alternatives | |
Why I Chose the Sharkskin Titanium Set
This was an attempt to find a lighter-weight warm water alternative to a 3mm wetsuit. The Sharkskin Titanium line advertised itself as a 5mm thermal equivalent while offering flexibility and comfort. I thought it would be perfect for warm water trips where a full wetsuit felt like overkill. That turned out to be a mistake.
Verdict
This product is an expensive disappointment. Customer support was nonresponsive when I raised questions about sizing. Despite their premium branding and technical claims, I would strongly advise against this purchase. It’s the only item I’ve ever regretted buying this much.
Would I buy it again? Absolutely not. I’m planning to sell mine.
Who Sharkskin Titanium Top & Bottom Is Best For
This item is best suited for:
- Divers who prioritize how quickly they can get in and out of their exposure gear.
- People who value a tough exterior fabric more than overall thermal performance.
- Anyone comparing it as a cautionary example when evaluating premium exposure suits.
It may not be ideal for:
- Divers who expect 5mm-level warmth or even reliable 3mm insulation.
- Anyone needing a snug fit that avoids water pooling at the ankles.
Deep Dive into the Score
Scoring System: Each category is scored out of 10 and weighted by importance. This model is used consistently across all gear reviews for transparency.
Deep Dive into the Score
Scoring System: Each category is scored out of 10 and weighted by importance. This model is used consistently across all gear reviews for transparency.
| Category | Score | Raw Score | Weight | Weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Function & Performance | Weak | 0.0 | 30% | 0.00 |
| Ease of Use | Weak | 0.0 | 20% | 0.00 |
| Versatility | Weak | 0.0 | 15% | 0.00 |
| Durability & Build Quality | Weak | 0.0 | 15% | 0.00 |
| Value | Weak | 0.0 | 10% | 0.00 |
| Brand Trust & Transparency | Weak | 0.0 | 10% | 0.00 |
| Total | 0.00 / 10 | |||
Rounded Display Score: 0.0 / 10 — Weak
Deep Dive Score Explanations
- Function & Performance – 1.0: Fails its main purpose. Nowhere near a 5mm equivalent.
- Ease of Use – 9.0: Easy to don and doff, even wet.
- Versatility – 1.0: Too poor for diving use, and not stylish or comfortable enough for surface wear.
- Durability & Build Quality – 8.0: Surprisingly good material durability, despite everything else.
- Value – 1.0: An overpriced failure. A good 3mm wetsuit costs less and performs better.
- Brand Trust & Transparency – 0.0: Zero. Nonresponsive support and exaggerated marketing claims.
Performance in the Water
- Thermal Comfort: Inadequate. It does not feel remotely equivalent to a 5mm or even a 3mm suit. Calling this 5mm-equivalent is completely misleading.
- Fit: Sizing is inconsistent, and even when correct, it leaves sagging water pockets at the ankles after dives.
- Ease of Use: Very easy to get into and out of, which is honestly the best thing I can say about it.
- Practical Use: I stopped using this after a few dives. I now use either my Bare 3mm wetsuit or just a full-body rash guard instead.