I was lucky enough to get the PL and CH version of the Lilia and both in the same size! They were sold by different users on bratabase, still both practically new and both given to me around the same time. A 28K is a custom order from EM and while at that time they didn’t have the extra fee, it wasn’t something I was keen on doing without knowing my size. It was very coincidental and it was really awesome to have two styles of the same model.
As most of you know, Ewa Michalak is greatly known for their size consistencies. Thankfully, the inconsistencies are more between models and not styles and so the two 28K bras fit me nearly the same. The differences that occur between these two bras are because of the style, which makes comparing them so much more accurate without having to take in the factors you wouldn’t think would be so distinct when it comes to models.
Both these bras are listed for the same price on the Ewa Michalak website and consist of the same things. They both are 3-part padded bras with a pair of pads to help with asymmetry and three sets of straps for versatility; halter, padded partially-adjustable, and regular fully-adjustable.
Bust Cirmcumference: 41.4″/105.2cm
Perimeter of one breast: 12.9″/32.9cm
Perimeter of both breasts: 22.25″/56.5cm
Distance between breasts: 1″/2.5cm
Nipple to Neck Distance: 8.15″/20.6cm
Nipple to Nipple Distance: 8.4″/21.4cm
Outward Projection: 5.5″/14cm
Bottom to Nipple: 5.15″/13cm
Bottom to top: 10.5″/26.7cm
Bust Cirmcumference: 41″/104.1cm
Perimeter of one breast: 13.5″/34.2cm
Perimeter of both breasts: 24.5″/62.2cm
Distance between breasts: 1.5″/3.8cm
Nipple to Neck Distance: 8.6″/21.9cm
Nipple to Nipple Distance: 8″/20.3cm
Outward Projection: 6.9″/17.6cm
Bottom to Nipple: 5.5″/14cm
Bottom to top: 11″/25.4cm
So, where shall I start in this comparison? (if I can ever get myself to focus long enough to write more than a few sentences) The CH and CHP were similiar in shape, all around basically. But the CH and the PL…whoo, boy! The differences are astounding and the measurements I provided don’t even really give a good demonstration of that. I will be providing pictures to help this along.
I think the overall shape would be a good thing to discuss first. The PL is a plunge; the CH is a halfcup. Okay, anything else? No, but in all seriousness, that is the true difference between these bras. If you ignore the measurements and concentrate on shape, the PL will be the obvious choice for lowcut and cleavage. The CH gives that ‘bar-wench’ look that I do adore.
When regarding the measurements, I feel confused. Looking over them, I expected many of them to be reversed as the way I see them doesn’t match with the measurements. The first would be the projection. When looking at the photos, it does seem that the PL projects me more forward than the CH. When taking measurements, it proves that the CH is the one who accomplishes better projection.
I would think that the projection would be further on the PL as the cups aren’t as wide as so there’s only one way to go from there, when in fact it’s the CH that gives more projection by 1.4″. Now that this is pointed out, I do notice the difference of projection when looking down at myself. With this difference in mind, we’ll move on to the measurements for the ‘bottom to nipple’. When it comes to this, the CH still takes the goal, but not as severely as the projection difference. Comparing the two; it seems that my nipple, or apex which would be the more technical term, sits lower on my chest with the PL. Perimeter also supports the fact that CH is indeed more projecting than the PL by giving a perimeter of 13.5″ compared to 12.9″.
Now, as I’m sure some might be wondering, how can the measurements be so different, where does the tissue go? The tissue goes..up and against? I have very soft tissued breasts, they can be moved, manipulated, squished(to an extent) and pushed in every which way direction the cup of the bra wishes it to go–which is why I don’t get along with unpadded.
(I have no idea where my nipples lie in these pictures, so the line is just a visual to help)
The reason for the great different projection and ‘bottom to top’ measurement is the wire width and the cup depth, which are measurements you can see up on the tables provided by the wonderful Bratabase. It’s less than half an inch difference between both, but when you look at the measurements I took myself, you can really see how much difference is created. The pictures are proof of how much the little difference can affect fit and shape. The cup depth is less on the PL than the CH and thus allows projection to be greater on the latter rather than the former.
I had hoped that the PL would bring my breasts higher(which they do only if I wish for my arms to be lopped off) and by saying this, I mean my apex to be more central. The PL and CH do not different much at all when it comes to nipple to neck or nipple to nipple. These measurements aren’t necessarily terrible, but while you’d expect your breasts to be closer together in a PL, the plunge has caused the weight of my breasts to move outward. Even though my nipples seem to be further apart, there is a smaller nipple to neck measurement in the PL, which is a very good thing for a plunge and signifies that they are lifted higher on the chest.
Now, as I’m writing this, I’ve confused myself. I think it’s the numbers as I don’t seem to comprehend numerical related things very well(I have slight dyslexia.) Bringing in the numbers and measurements was to help prove and demonstrate all the differences to those that are more visual and better at mathematics than I happen to be. I know this isn’t the most scientific post or even the best comparison, but I believe that it shows how two styles can differ and I was lucky enough to have two that are the same material and the like.
Now that all those numbers out of the way, lets focus on how these bras can be used. The plunge is a plunge and that’s what it’s used for. When it comes to lowcut shirts, this bra does the job. The cups are sturdy and strong and hold the great weight of my breasts with ease. The bra comes with a halter strap and with it on, it doesn’t give the same ‘oomf’ that it should. I don’t feel that the halter strap is strong enough for the PL.
The CH on the other hand, the wider cups with the higher gore makes it a perfect candidate for the halter strap. If anything, with the halter strap on, it brings the breasts closer together. Another thing that the CH excels at is becoming a strapless bra. It was my first ever strapless bra since I was eight. The cups are sturdy with the gore being 5″ and the band is firm enough that without the straps, yes the cups go outward just a tad, but they stay in place and there is absolutely no adjusting throughout the day.
The PL bra definitely does take the metal for plunge-iness and will continue to do so despite all the measurements given. Both bras have their place. The PL for low cut and the CH is much more versatile as it could be a halter or a strapless.
I think this is the conclusion of the post as I truly can’t think of any other comparisons to make. If you have any questions to make, then please do, be it something I mentioned in this post or something I forgot to mention. I do hope this post was detailed enough and that you were able to take something from it.