SM 165CM C cup (called 170) review.

avante · Post by **avante** » Sat May 25, 2019 11:20 am

Hi DS, sorry another long one, but first off you mentioned the pussy placement being mainly esthetic, but the looks are only the minor concern to me, but I do think that for doggy style positions you'll notice the one with more 'forward' placement is harder to enter. At least that's what I always assumed, and have heard from YL165 owners for example. Is it really you experience that in doggy even all doll pussy is the same 'enter-ability-wise' ?

The 'new' IT placement is looking like 3-6cm further up compared to this one...Damn shame really, for me that's the only minus for this model + the pussy being rather small in 'height' as you mentioned is bit unfortunate. Side-note: These pics really makes we wonder again why manu. dont leave the anus be (or just estethic) and locate the pussy more properly...it should basically at least reach up to where the anus is now. And since anal will rip that shit open in most cases, bet allot of dudes dont even use that (I know I don't). But hey, people been saying that on her for years, guess it's never going to happen. The no gaping hole is nice too; you reckon this is for both the insert and inbuild version?

But yeah I do fully agree on the body; she looks pretty damn nice. Will be bookmarking this, and looking at SM's galleries again too! I'll say she has nicer titties than the 163's I'm checking out (compared to that 'C' this one just has more boob width, which I find kinda find lacking on the IT one, while the G cup is just a bit to much for me). Hahaha well a little camel toe is ok with me, that WM 166C does nothing for me, other than being way to skinny, but the body sculpt is hot for sure (just stops being that after I see the measurements). So yeah I'd def. without a doubt prefer this one over that model myself too.

Actually the '161-165'ish cm class' it's really hard to find a proper gal in, but okey I keep high standard

. Either they're (even more) skinny than my WM158D, or way thick, or for some...just have this 1-2 things like tit size, leg shape, pussy placement. height/weight being way off. So I was kinda a surprised tho, to tell the truth, to find the weight of this SM doll being actually correct(ish), since allot of other manufacturers seem to measure while holding her

. And also good to read the shoulders are a proper width; those 2 things made me put her off my list months ago...

So I've just been comparing her to the stats provided by Panther for the IT163 and AS161 which also come at about 5cm short (dep. on head, so same shittyness all over), but with overall rather similar stats, it's pretty amazing that the SM170 is in the same weight as those gals, even tho she's longer and probably has just bit more volume. Probably they used some weight reduction in this one, right?

**31 dolls GOD DAMN! I dont need to tell you, you've a serious addiction

. If any of those by chance is a WM-158D...I would love to see some simple standing next to each other shots from side, front, back, if not to much trouble.

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Sat May 25, 2019 12:53 pm

avante wrote:Hi DS, sorry another long one, but first off you mentioned the pussy placement being mainly esthetic, but the looks are only the minor concern to me, but I do think that for doggy style positions you'll notice the one with more 'forward' placement is harder to enter. At least that's what I always assumed, and have heard from YL165 owners for example. Is it really you experience that in doggy even all doll pussy is the same 'enter-ability-wise' ?

The 'new' IT placement is looking like 3-6cm further up compared to this one...Damn shame really, for me that's the only minus for this model + the pussy being rather small in 'height' as you mentioned is bit unfortunate. Side-note: These pics really makes we wonder again why manu. dont leave the anus be (or just estethic) and locate the pussy more properly...it should basically at least reach up to where the anus is now. And since anal will rip that shit open in most cases, bet allot of dudes dont even use that (I know I don't). But hey, people been saying that on her for years, guess it's never going to happen. The no gaping hole is nice too; you reckon this is for both the insert and inbuild version?

But yeah I do fully agree on the body; she looks pretty damn nice. Will be bookmarking this, and looking at SM's galleries again too! I'll say she has nicer titties than the 163's I'm checking out (compared to that 'C' this one just has more boob width, which I find kinda find lacking on the IT one, while the G cup is just a bit to much for me). Hahaha well a little camel toe is ok with me, that WM 166C does nothing for me, other than being way to skinny, but the body sculpt is hot for sure (just stops being that after I see the measurements). So yeah I'd def. without a doubt prefer this one over that model myself too.

Actually the '161-165'ish cm class' it's really hard to find a proper gal in, but okey I keep high standard . Either they're (even more) skinny than my WM158D, or way thick, or for some...just have this 1-2 things like tit size, leg shape, pussy placement. height/weight being way off. So I was kinda a surprised tho, to tell the truth, to find the weight of this SM doll being actually correct(ish), since allot of other manufacturers seem to measure while holding her . And also good to read the shoulders are a proper width; those 2 things made me put her off my list months ago...

So I've just been comparing her to the stats provided by Panther for the IT163 and AS161 which also come at about 5cm short (dep. on head, so same shittyness all over), but with overall rather similar stats, it's pretty amazing that the SM170 is in the same weight as those gals, even tho she's longer and probably has just bit more volume. Probably they used some weight reduction in this one, right?

**31 dolls GOD DAMN! I dont need to tell you, you've a serious addiction . If any of those by chance is a WM-158D...I would love to see some simple standing next to each other shots from side, front, back, if not to much trouble.

Hi avante,

The entry in doggy style is not easy if the not anatomicaly correct doll has furthermore her vaginal entry displaced forward between the upper hips. That is the case of this one I mentioned (the greatly successful 166C with the 33-34CM buttock width in doggy style) as you may see on this pictures:

: P1020505.JPG (2.29 MiB) Viewed 1257 times

The vaginal entry on the SM 165C is correctly positioned in that respect and so easier and more agreable to penetrate.The shape and lenght of the genitals are the same as the one of this famously sexy 166C.
Sadly I have experienced at two occasions recently that when a factory decide to change the mold to arrange more anatomicaly correct entries they also change a lot of body thicknesses and shape which could ruin the top model aspect a sexy doll like this one has.

I agree with you that using the anal entry is not the right way to get children from your girlfriend.
Real women like dolls suffer from anal tearing when practising that game heavily. Anyway if well sculpted, positioned and not gaping that is also an erotic sexy detail for a realistic doll.I would not like a doll without that thing.

Shoulders width are important for a doll to have a realistic silhouette.However most manufacturers give measurements which vary too much with the OVERALL SHOULDERS WIDTH. I measure that Simply and correctly now with the red VERNIER measuring tool.
As a rule of thumb,
A N38 size doll must have 38cm shoulders width to look realistic (in average) and that is hopefuly the case here. The 166C is a N 36-34 and her 36 width is correct also, only her waistline is badly incorrect (in average).

As weight reduction device here I only note larger thigh pipe diameter (0.75 kg off °) than the 2018 tall dolls made by SM for IRT.But there is also here the effective hollow breasts when the 2018 dolls had quasi-solid breasts (one kg off °)
Consequently if I take the A. A. one 171cm SM-IRT at 46 kgs, keep her thicknesses, but reduce her height by 6 cm including two on the legs (81cm instead of 83cm) and 4 on the chest I spare 3 kgs which added to the above (°) give a final 41kg weight.

Yes I have now a collection of 31 dolls. However I am only interested as of now by adult sized dolls of 165cm and above, I find them more how to say it... "alive looking" as they dont have the size of dolls anymore. I have not the 158D in my collection.

avante · Post by **avante** » Sat May 25, 2019 4:57 pm

Ah yeah I see what you mean regarding pussy placement. And I've seen that too (the please change this 1 thing leading to changing mutliple things, often others for worse...baffling really). And I do get some people would want anal opening, just saying that for me no anus at the result of realistic pussy location would be a no brainer.

I fully agree with the shoulder width; anything less than say 35-36 as minimum is a no go for sure for me. And also I understand you looking for more realistic dolls. Going to try a 40-43kg next, if I'm able to manage; pretty sure I'm stick to the bit fuller / more realistic proportioned gals.

Little side note: I even just casually contemplated one day slicing open the leg on my 158D, removing the 'bond' of tpe with the skeleton/white wrap, and adding maybe a metal sheet around them to enlarge the diameter...was thinking because TPE is so elastic, I could add just a little...Tho I've not really thought tru the particulairs jet, like would I be able to 'bond' the tpe back again...but just wondering if you'd think this might at all be plausible/feasible?

*if ever you could make so standard front-back-side shots while standing, I'd sure love to see them! That standing one already gives a nice few, but it's sorta in an upward angle it seems...looking for like from an higer angle pics if that makes sense. Thanks for all the feedback btw!

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Sun May 26, 2019 5:04 pm

Hi avante,
I like your idea of slicing into the TPE to add some thicknesses of plastic foam on the skeleton in order to improve the overall thicknesses of your doll.I was comtemplating Something similar: replacing some TPE thicknesses around the skeleton (chest, thigh, calves..) by an equivalent foam volume in order to reduce weight.. If you are a patient good sculptor no problem to do that. The temporary cuts in the TPE for access can be kept small and hidden.These cuts are easy to open and close using the hot knife method.
Last year I enlarged heads by using polyurethane resin to increase the volume of the head skeleton box (I made a topic in 2018).
The tension on the TPE should however be minimized in order to avoid long term tearing.
The TPE will adhere by pressing on the foam which has a rough surface..

avante · Post by **avante** » Mon May 27, 2019 4:32 am

Hi man, sorry to derail this thread a bit, but that foam sounds like a nice way to reduce some weight + might also be used to add a bit (like calves, inner thigh). Kinda curious, since foam is rather 'broad meaninig' what kind did you mean? could you maybe link me / show me which. So you mean it adhere's just by pressing, or does it need some heating? That head enlargement sounds interesting too! Was thinking about some similar; would love to see that thread, but I'm lousy at finding stuff here...so if you might have a link for that one, I'd sure love to read/see it!!

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Mon May 27, 2019 1:43 pm

hi avante,
The foam panels that are used to protect the doll in the shipping box looks to me like a good candidate for a try as they dont react with TPE. viewtopic.php?f=383&t=100670 that is the link to my topic related to head enlargement.

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Tue May 28, 2019 4:19 pm

FullHouse wrote:Concerning the private parts placement, will this and others of your pre 2019 dolls get an overhaul?

Hi Fullhouse,
As I have already pointed it out, two brands made recently a new mold originaly to make more correct positioning of the holes of some realistic models.However they also modified sculpt and thicknesses in a way that the new model were completely different from the first one.(shorter legs, thigh diameter oversize, hipsline increase without modifying the upper body, poorer sculpt..)

We must be careful because bodies like this one (a 165cm CUP C with the right combination of N38 and N40 thicknesses resulting into a realistic body ratio TOP MODEL type) have a delicate silhouette which could be altered very quickly by changing some dimensions even slightly (legs lenght, hipsline...)
Look at that perfect youthful realistic body:

: P1020523.JPG (2.68 MiB) Viewed 1215 times

So the mold should be a copy of the original with only one modification in the genitals area. Is a factory able to do that? I have some doubts now.

Post by **Booty Call Dolls** » Tue May 28, 2019 6:01 pm

Real women like dolls suffer from anal tearing when practising that game heavily

Very good point!

Chuck Norris · Post by **Chuck Norris** » Tue May 28, 2019 9:59 pm

31 dolls? Wtf? Are you a hoarder of dolls? lol!
To be honest, It would be hot if you would manage a pic with at least 10 of them playing around just for fun.
That would be like just total hotness!

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Wed May 29, 2019 3:40 pm

Chuck Norris wrote:31 dolls? Wtf? Are you a hoarder of dolls? lol!
To be honest, It would be hot if you would manage a pic with at least 10 of them playing around just for fun.
That would be like just total hotness!

Hi Chuck Norris,
I have hesitated many time to show my collection to my neighbours. I hold my collection in a small village and I am afraid some neighbours of old age could have a heart attack when seeing so many half naked life-sized realistic sexy dolls like this SM 165C as an example.

Panther 68 has also a collection of more than 20 dolls but he is a good photographer and is also physically strong enough to move and dress his heavy dolls for posing. Sometimes he manage pics with half a dozen of them playing around.
As far as I am concerned I will see if I can do something along that line, keeping in mind that I am only satisfied by the realism of half of my dolls.

Chuck Norris · Post by **Chuck Norris** » Wed May 29, 2019 9:13 pm

Dollsampler wrote:
Chuck Norris wrote:31 dolls? Wtf? Are you a hoarder of dolls? lol!
To be honest, It would be hot if you would manage a pic with at least 10 of them playing around just for fun.
That would be like just total hotness!
Hi Chuck Norris,
I have hesitated many time to show my collection to my neighbours. I hold my collection in a small village and I am afraid some neighbours of old age could have a heart attack when seeing so many half naked life-sized realistic sexy dolls like this SM 165C as an example.
Panther 68 has also a collection of more than 20 dolls but he is a good photographer and is also physically strong enough to move and dress his heavy dolls for posing. Sometimes he manage pics with half a dozen of them playing around.
As far as I am concerned I will see if I can do something along that line, keeping in mind that I am only satisfied by the realism of half of my dolls.

No worries my friend, I know what you mean.I live also in a small village and I only brought my dolls out outside once for a photoshoot since the neighbors are very close and I knew were they sleeping at the time.

I have been following Panther's pictures also. He his a great photographer indeed.

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Fri May 31, 2019 3:44 pm

And finally to answer to an AVANTE demand here are pictures of the naked doll taken with the camera on an upper position.
The 165cm body take support on the standing body of the naked SM-IRT 168 (171cm) 2018 which dimensions except for the height are similar.The buttocks of the 165 SM top model type doll are a masterpiece of erotic art.I already pointed out that the two bodies have the same hipsline around 95cm but the SM165 has less hips width and consequently more buttocks thickness.

: P1020525.JPG (2.56 MiB) Viewed 1149 times

: P1020526.JPG (2.26 MiB) Viewed 1149 times

: P1020527.JPG (1.9 MiB) Viewed 1149 times

: P1020528.JPG (2.2 MiB) Viewed 1149 times

avante · Post by **avante** » Fri May 31, 2019 3:54 pm

Wow, pure coincidence I get the first view also

. Well I do see that ass thing you've mentioned now!
Thanks for these man! Being a lover of tits, well not melons, she wins it from that other one in that aspect for sure.
Will be taking these into consideration, but she does look totally hot without a doubt!

Dollsampler · Post by **Dollsampler** » Sat Jun 01, 2019 3:23 pm

avante wrote:Wow, pure coincidence I get the first view also . Well I do see that ass thing you've mentioned now!
Thanks for these man! Being a lover of tits, well not melons, she wins it from that other one in that aspect for sure.
Will be taking these into consideration, but she does look totally hot without a doubt!

Hi avante,
Yes the ass and body remind me a 20 years old woman I have been dating 4 years ago.Her 168cm 53 kgs sexy top model type body turned me crazy.
For the tits I already pointed out that these 165cm doll's poping up breasts look far more youthful than the melon like shaped one of the 168 (copied from a 28 year old woman)