View attachment 74771
I guess we were referring to this model which has absolutely no give in the pouch at all. The outer grey rib on the pouch was pure rubber and they attempted to cover it with thread, but often the rubber was exposed to rub you the wrong way. It even had a vulcanized feel to the pouch. Compare that to the BIKE #10 and see the difference. Which one looks more comfortable?
View attachment 74772
Great research, and thanks for the photos! I do not know the difference between elastic and rubber. So I am using those words incorrectly. If you understand the difference, I welcome to be enlightened. Which brands use which? Did the industry switch from rubber in the old days to elastic?
BIKEs, and most jocks, have
strands of elastic or rubber, and knit lanes of cloth that can stretch. The FRANKLIN appears to me to have rubber or elastic in every thread. It doesn't expand. I put a FRANKLIN in the dryer and it melted, shrunk and became hard as plastic. In the old days the schools put the BIKES in a hot dryer. They shrunk and became twice as snug, but there were still rows of knit fabric without the rubber and so it could still conform to your "assets", although tighter.
I found a FRANKLIN package on the web that said, PRO-GRADE ELASTIC. Then it listed the pouch material as 13% rubber like you said. I am surprised that it has that little rubber, only 1% more than BIKE. I must have guessed wrong, unless they have changed since I bought a FRANKLIN 25 years ago. Maybe they just weave the nylon tighter. Perhaps they improved the elastic so it doesn't shrink like it used to (?)
I agree with you that FRANKLINS feel more coarse. But, apparently the snug support is so important for some guys that they overlook it. The reviews include many 5 star ratings from athletes that say FRANKLIN is the only brand that gives them good support, and all other brands fail them. Here is one comment from a customer:
"The pouch does not have much stretch and is compact, but it supports firmly and is adequately shaped. I recommend this product. But if you are a horse it might not have enough room."
So, it's exactly what some guys need.
FRANKLIN is too tight for me. If you look at my photo, you can see that I am not small. But (when soft) I find most pouches to be too long and loose to give me good support. So, I have great sympathy for any guy who says that most pouches are too loose to even be useful.
Guys rave about how wonderful the old BIKEs were. I think a lot of that was nostalgia. They were made to be worn above the hips in those days. You had to pull the waist band up to your belly button to get the bottom of the pouch to cup your nuts and lift them up. Many guys wore them on their hips and were happy if they were somewhat baggy behind the balls. But I remember serious athletes who needed real ball lift, and they wore them way high on their waists. That was impractical, and it looked really strange if you took your shirt off and your jockstrap waist band was high above your shorts.
I am very happy that new jocks like GYM, PRO, JC and JOCK have shortened their pouches. We went through a long period of few brands offered and most had too baggy of pouches. We have come a long way in the last few years. We are hung in many sizes and many shapes. There is something for everyone now.
don't know how to make a woman happy in bed. 
They just imagine she felt ecstacy when they did.
But the WW2 ARMY jocks were about the same. They were issued to everyone. "One size fits all". And if your "vegetables" were bigger than average, that was your personal problem. You were out of luck. 
So, it's good that someone makes pouches for all the different sizes that athletes and working men come in. At the other end of the spectrum, the jockstraps with extra roomy pouches are useless for most working men.
Even though it's a little too snug for me. 
But, be warned, that the dryer will melt the rubber.
