SM 165CM C cup (called 170) review.

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:31 pm

Following the demand of a TDF member, I took three pictures of the 165C in doggy position on her knees including one from the side.

: P1020529.JPG (2.9 MiB) Viewed 800 times

Here the 52cm thigh circumference and the 95cm hipsline give impressive volumes and the sculpt is very realistic.

: P1020530.JPG (3.11 MiB) Viewed 800 times

: P1020531.JPG (3.16 MiB) Viewed 800 times

Post by **SMdoll** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 9:21 am

Dollsampler wrote:Following the demand of a TDF member, I took three pictures of the 165C in doggy position on her knees including one from the side.
P1020529.JPG

Here the 52cm thigh circumference and the 95cm hipsline give impressive volumes and the sculpt is very realistic.

P1020530.JPG

P1020531.JPG

Thank you very much for sharing and helping more people understand this doll

Star

avante · Post by **avante** » Thu Jul 04, 2019 12:10 pm

Hi man, was wondering if you might be interested to take some 'compare-with-other-model-pics' focused a bit on the ass looks (like that SM-RIT168) ?

And /or with all that ass you've around, how'd you rate the looks and size of her ass compared to your other favored asses??

*I'm very slighty thinking it should have a bit more 'height' (end higher in direction of her waist)

EDIT:BTW that side shot at start of the page, will it could have looked nice with ther upperbody hehe her ass+legs do look very WOW to me!

Zeester · Post by **Zeester** » Fri Jul 12, 2019 10:34 pm

thank you Dollsampler for the review.
I will cancel immediately
is indeed misleading 170 cm is really 170
hoping i'm not late
why is she fooling around with the sizes?

avante · Post by **avante** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:53 am

The height being off has to do with measurement methods not adding up. Used to assume the advertised name is the standing height too. It's more often than not tho the case tho, for many dolls from many brands; some brands are closer to their 'name', some brands have hit and misses (like the one 160=160 while their other one is 155cm for example), and some brands are just always way off. Not even going to go into the other measurements, but let's just say this is why I'll never buy a doll unless measurements are verified/corrected on here.

Post by **SMdoll** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:57 am

Yes, there are some differences in the height of the doll because of the different head. Our factory has verified that the height of this doll is about 164-168, and we will take 165 as her height. We will update the official website as soon as possible. Thank you!
Star

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:48 pm

SMdoll wrote:Yes, there are some differences in the height of the doll because of the different head. Our factory has verified that the height of this doll is about 164-168, and we will take 165 as her height. We will update the official website as soon as possible. Thank you!
Star

Yes to label her 165cm is fair for the would be buyers. That height is a perfect adult height on the Western countries markets.

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:47 pm

avante wrote:Hi man, was wondering if you might be interested to take some 'compare-with-other-model-pics' focused a bit on the ass looks (like that SM-RIT168) ?

And /or with all that ass you've around, how'd you rate the looks and size of her ass compared to your other favored asses??

*I'm very slighty thinking it should have a bit more 'height' (end higher in direction of her waist)

EDIT:BTW that side shot at start of the page, will it could have looked nice with ther upperbody hehe her ass+legs do look very WOW to me!

Hi avante,

Yes Indeed to compare side by side the buttocks of the best models of my collection could be interesting but that is against the rules of TDF.Such comparison may be done in the members only section of the forum.

Furthermore, here you mention the SM-IRT 168 (the original "master piece of art" AYUMI body) but this 46kgs, 172cm tall body is no more produced.IRT now sell a realistic N 38-40 168cm tall version, anatomicaly correct, whose mold was also made by SM where the legs were reduced down to 77cm which change somewhat the model silhouette-wise.

avante · Post by **avante** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 6:26 am

Comparison shots are against the rules?? You sure, cuz I see them all over the brand-section of this forum, plus you did some in the WM topic yourself

. Well besides the pics, I also just wonder about the 'perceived' look -in words- of the shape/size of her ass compared to some of your other favorites -in same hip width class- ? Esp. because this ones is not like 'rounded' as 99% of the asses, but has like a bit muscular cheek sticking out...kinda unsure about this (reason I asked).

P.s. been looking at the pussy placement some more, and just wanted to add: real unfort. it seems all newer SM models have WAY better placement, when looking at some of these (170C-big, 163,156 and 157 to name a few) in comparison it really does show this 170C/D-slim has the anus pretty much where the other have the vagina...Man how I'd wish they'd redo this mold; just the love holes, as over the last few years doggy has evolved into my favorite position. So still kinda debating whether or not to get this one or wait for another brand/model to put out similar body @ approx. 165cm height, as it seems at least IT and SM from now on will be getting this aspect right.

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:25 pm

Hi avante,
I also prefer when a doll is anatomicaly correct. But that is not enough.If the doll is A.C. but has giant gaping holes when legs are taken apart, frankly I prefer the SM design where the entries are well studied. Also you must get pleasure when penetrating the doll and SM is one of the best regarding that.
These are two WMdoll defaults encountered with the 166B (anatomicaly correct) as an example.

There is also a trend for some members to search for special aspects of the private parts when seen forward in standing position.
For example the 166C has fantasist private parts but they are very erotic when seen forward (camel toe quite visible) and they look as the real thing when seen in doggy position. However, good luck to have pleasure with vaginal sex in doggy position with her because the entry is too weirdly positioned.
I have read remarks of menbers who complaint that forward looking they see about Nothing of the female genitals when the position is anatomical. Most of my non anatomical dolls (for example ASdoll 166 muscular, 6YE 165F, some SM-IRT made dolls) seen forward in standing position show a huge part of the vaginal mouth unlike real women.Some want that back for erotism purposes.

So finaly I think that an "erotic compromise" with reality should be made here. The AMOR doll genital model is probably the best I have seen for the doggy position. However using that design and elongating a little bit the genitals total creaze lenght in order for a camel toe effect to appear forward looking would satisfy everybody.

Doggy position is important because, in average, when men get older than 50, beeing standing improve their erections.

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:41 pm

Hi avante,
concerning your comments on the protudingt buttocks of the SM 165C I want to point out that this is the Reason why I call this doll a top model type instead of Calling her a dream-body type. Indeed they made her a large hipsline of 95cm (like AYUMI ONE) I have shown that the hips width qualify fully for the N38 size measurements table.
Topmodels have long legs (not too long however) and a thiner hips width than DREAMBODIES. The N38 measurements edited by AFNOR France in 1987 and modified in 2006 in fact describe more the topmodels than the dream-bodies because these norms were adapted for the fashion industry which as you know is very important in France.

avante · Post by **avante** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 4:51 am

Hi DS, well to the first reply: I def. agree that the entry positions are well studied by SM, but imo it shows way more in their later models than this one

. When compared to some other brands, this one tho is def. better than allot of them (shit some brands seem to have 0 dolls which come even near correct placement, but let's keep it SM focused: there is little doubt in my mind they've done way better in later models with both anatomically and practical positioning, looks wise IT is nicer imo in general, but that is only secondary to me).

Also; that vaginal mount showing while standing; never got it; pers. dislike it, and not even consider dolls that have this in extreme ways. Always assumed it had to do with casting/molding 'incapabilities' since in general I think people want realism)

To the 2nd message: yeah def. I hear you on this 'top model' vs 'dream body' thesis. It's why I like this doll; it really stands out a bit from similar models with some body aspects -like the ass not being total bubble butt...Still thinking of getting one, but seeing about 5 SM dolls from behind, this one without a doubt is least appealing to me, while her body is the hottest to me tho

. So yeah still debating how to value what's most important to me.