Vintage DD turntables. Are we living dangerously?

Chakster, You yourself quoted the following: "By incorporating different carbon graphite material, we successfully achieved the identical performance of Mat 2 with less thickness (4 mm) and the reduced price."
So since the thickness of the Mat2 is no problem for me on either of two turntables where I use Mat2s, why would you say the new product is "better" than the Mat2, when even the manufacturer claims it is only "identical" in performance?
If it matters, probably Raul would object just as strenuously to the M-S mats as he does to the SAEC mat, on the grounds that all 3 are metallic.  I do see his point, in principle; you don't want to reflect energy back into the LP. However, I use my ears more than my principles, and the SAEC does seem to match well with the TT101, perhaps because it adds mass to the platter, which may be more important than energy transfer or lack thereof in that particular case.  Further, the SAEC does seem to be designed to delimit the spread of energy across its entire surface, for whatever that is worth.

Uber, With diligence and patience, I think you could find a used Mat1 or Mat2.  But maybe it's cheaper and faster to just buy this new copy.

Dear @best-groove @lewm : " for me if possible on the spindle you c....""

that tiny hole at the inner position in the SS300 is not to fix it to the spindle. SAEC makes a research about and they found out that the LP/records tend to slide through a metal mat surface so its advice is that with a small nail use that hole to fix the LP to the mat and for this you have to make a tiny hole on each LP at exactly the metal mat hole position then and before play you insert the tiny nail in the LP through the metal mat hole. In this way the mat and LP spins at unison/evenly.

lewm, about the Cu MS mats I already did it several times in different threads but as you people only say: " I like it ". Yes I now that they like those kind of distortions but that per sé does not means is rigth because is the other way around: wrong.
In audio and especially in the analog alternative what we like it does not really matters but what you say do not care: principles or facts or .......

Maybe it’s because I’m a way more quality  audiophile/music lover than you and several other gentlemans and that’s all and the origen of disagreements .

R.

Uber, With diligence and patience, I think you could find a used Mat1 or Mat2. But maybe it's cheaper and faster to just buy this new copy.

Not strong on patience I am afraid, hence the reasoning behind so many equipment changes over the years.... lol.

So since the thickness of the Mat2 is no problem for me on either of two turntables where I use Mat2s, why would you say the new product is "better" than the Mat2, when even the manufacturer claims it is only "identical" in performance?

@lewm I said "probably" because it’s much thinner without any loss in quality.
And for those who’re looking for BA mats this is the only one that is NEW for $250, old BA mats are all used (secondhand).

Chakster.
Thanks very much for the info on the "new" Boston Mat.
Wanted to try one but near impossible to find an original one.
Will look into it.

@uberwalts You’re welcome, i think it’s better to buy latest version, because each one who owned BA-1 claimed BA2 was better, now they have "mk3" with warranty from the Sakura Systems 

The Mat1 is thinner than the Mat2.  That alone may account for any differences in performance.  I own both versions, and indeed I prefer the Mat2.  I don't know why it might sound a touch better to my ears except for its greater mass; thickness is not an issue for any of my tonearms or turntables. Once again, on the issue of new vs used when it comes to tt mats, so long as a used one is "like new" or in mint condition, there should be zero advantage to buying new.  I purchased my Mat1 and one of my Mat2s new from Boston Audio.  My second Mat2 was purchased in mint used condition.  I can no longer tell them apart.  I think I paid $200 for my second Mat2, off eBay.  If one is fetishistic enough to require new only, so be it.