Unboxing Sino-doll SI-172/H body style & S4 head

[Boobman]

A little technicality that I've noticed is the knee joints. They're a double hinge enabling her to kneel. From one point of view these worry me as that's a double joint to loosen perhaps in due course. This is taken from the idea of Irontech/SM who started doing the same but achieved with a gear mechanism to do it. As this is patented Sino Doll have to go to the simpler solution.

Not to sound overly sarcastic, Since when do the Chinese really care about anyone's patent(s), intellectual property & design even from fellow Chinese companies.

[Dollstudio]

@Harem: You are derailing this thread. This thread is not about solar energy, and my customers are not in Africa. Please feel free to share your unrelated thoughts in your own thread.

Also I need to ask you again to kindly disclose if you have received a free sample and only paid for freight and/or import fees. Everybody knows that freebies come with obligations which counter an unbiased review. If you do not want to disclose the terms for your sample, please leave this thread.

As far as the Sino-doll silicone blend is concerned, there is nothing special about it. It is really old news that silicone can be easily blended to a softness that equals typical TPE blends. Maidlee Doll has used such a blend for at least four years; JM has been using such a blend for at least about two years; Brash from R13 has literally stretched the limits for boob pillow prototypes beyond what is good, and Z-Onedoll uses such a blend for about one year. In direct comparison with Z-Onedoll silicone from last year I do not notice any significant differences. It's similarily soft and leaks similar amounts of oil. Without having a Chemical analysis perfomed, my guess would be that the Z-Onedoll silicone blend is identical with the Sino-doll silicone blend.

@Aeron: This is an interesting observation which would deserve further investigation. Actually this was one of the things which prevented me to consider the 161 cm body for a review, some things in the promotion photos appeared odd to me, e.g. head to body proportions. Though I paused my Unboxing review for the 172 cm body before starting to pick holes in this kind of quality details. There is too much fundamentally off, so I don't see much point in looking closer.

Generally, considering the Z-Onedoll heritage where we have seen quite a couple of heads with odd head/neck angles, I think it's not improbable to find this in Sino-doll heads as well. The problem for a proper assessment is that I have one S4 head only for inspection, so I can not tell if it's the neck connector, the mold form, manufacturing spread of this particular specimen, or a 'design element' characteristic for Sino-doll. Another possibility would be that the neck joint is placed a little bit too low.

Sandro

[haremlover]

@Harem: You are derailing this thread. This thread is not about solar energy, and my customers are not in Africa. Please feel free to share your unrelated thoughts in your own thread.

No not so. I have experience of Chinese companies and the art of success is how to work with them, with their foibles, see what the strengths are and see if deficiencies can be worked around.

I owe no favours to Sino-Doll - David knows that were there to be anything significantly seriously wrong I'd say so. I'm a person who's definite, as I was historically about Z-One originally supplying TPE inserts for silicone dolls with disastrous consequences. I raised the alarm and Z-One made the change appropriately rapidly. If a doll doesn't come up to standards that are good enough I don't say otherwise. If a doll is good I say so.

My enthusiasm is because the silicone is good. I don't know about Maidlee, the JM is good and is known to be and I find it good, but the Sino-Doll silicone fooled me. That was enough to impress me. That's the test and an appropriate quality about which to express enthusiasm.

As a result of the queries on the skeleton that you have raised I've enquired and found that the nuts and bolts are not welded and are adjustable. That's good.

Perhaps you might indicate what Sino-Doll have offered to compensate your dissatisfaction. I'd expect them at least to send you a perfect replacement doll for the cost of the shipping as I'm sure that someone would happily take on your lady at cost. I'd recommend you get a 161.

Best wishes

Harem

PS viewtopic.php?f=263&t=108305 - It's been known for a long time and standard for the cousin brand Z-One to measure weights using different scales. "She's advertised at 55 lbs., but hits my scales at 62 lbs." As an experienced and long-standing vendor such should be of no surprise. Bottom line is that the customer is still delighted despite the extra weight.

[Boobman]

Why would a customer have to pay freight back, assuming he paid for freight already or its in the deal they made? Have them send a prepaid shipping label for the original return & as soon they see it in the pipeline coming back to them re-ship the 2nd perfect replacement. I have owned only 2 dolls but the way the head looks attached to the body on Sandro's & Harem's dolls it seems the neck is too long or the mount in the head needs a much deeper inset mounting point.

[Dollstudio]

As an experienced and long-standing vendor such should be of no surprise.

Guess why I explicitely asked Sino-doll to confirm the weight before making the payment.

Again, they did confirm 36 kg to me via email before purchasing, and even now they are still advertising the weight of 36 kg.
And they publicly advertised a weight reduction back in September.
The doll delivered did not even meet the specs before the weight reduction announcement.

So poor David got scammed by Sino-doll management, I got scammed by David's promises and Sino-dolls announcement - and Sino-doll keeps trying to scam other customers by keep lying about their doll's specs.

In previous cases I made the mistake not to get myself heard properly. For example with the Candy8teen Amber Doll Unboxing back in 2015. The doll produced by an U.S. (!) manufacturer was a disgrace, and it was yet another manufacturer telling me to f**k off when I asked why the doll I got was not like the one I ordered. Yes, they lied to me, too. And they were not from China.

Back then not pursueing to get this manufacturer kicked off TDF was wrong. Later a lot of people were scammed by Candy8teen. Just ask Hollows if he ever got a doll or his money back. I will not make this mistake again. A lie is a lie and water does not flow upstream - unless you are on Ali-yadayada, where a wheel can be square and the moon is a cucumber.

Sandro

[CoenT]

Sandro, I'm thankful for your reviews and verdicts on dolls and their manufacturers. Despite you being a big supporter of Silicone dolls, you don't shy away from confronting flaws and problems that occured with some of these dolls. To me, a customer, this is very comforting and makes you appear way more trustworthy than if you were to ignore or sugarcoat these issues!

[haremlover]

Yes I can understand why you're incandescent but with a product that is clearly capable of being so good I don't see the advantage of being self-righteous at the expense of rubbishing the manufacturer of fundamentally a good product.

Yes improvements need to happen but that can be achieved without trashing the manufacturer wholesale. The same effect can be achieved without doing that. Encouragement to get it right can be more effective than simply trying to put them out of business.

Modern dog training is that same psychology - the "lure reward technique" https://positively.com/dog-training/met ... -training/ is more effective than the punitive techniques https://positively.com/dog-training/met ... g-methods/

It comes down to not only what is morally and ethically correct, but also what is safer. Positive training has proven to be a much more effective, safer and humane way of teaching dogs than punitive training methods and while ultimately every person has the right to choose what techniques they use, the evidence is clear. Positive training teaches a dog to cooperate, while punitive training teaches a dog to respond through domination.

Bringing Chinese companies up to speed and helping them to be more open in a cooperative way is not much different.

In releasing the 172 to you at a weight that personally I would not be able to lift SinoDoll have made a serious mistake. That overriding weight problem only applies to the 172.

Why would a customer have to pay freight back, assuming he paid for freight already or its in the deal they made? Have them send a prepaid shipping label for the original return & as soon they see it in the pipeline coming back to them re-ship the 2nd perfect replacement.

No that's not what I'm suggesting at all. Sandro doesn't ship the overweight 172 back to China. It's a fundamentally good doll and he should have people queuing at his door to buy her for the shipping cost of a new perfect doll from SinoDoll whether a perfect 172 replacement or a 161.

By now SinoDoll must have suggested some sort of settlement surely? Haven't they offered a solution yet?

I have owned only 2 dolls but the way the head looks attached to the body on Sandro's & Harem's dolls it seems the neck is too long or the mount in the head needs a much deeper inset mounting point.

I can see what you mean but the neck in reality did not strike me between the eyes as being too long. In contrast taking a look at a TPE doll I have, without the wig the boobs look course and large setting the scene for a head that's too small. When I photographed her my photos showed her to be rather glamorous, as I saw her, and Stacy has taken a set of photos of her flawless too. That brand of doll does not have "treasured doll" status.

The Sinodoll deeper inset mounting point in the head might be possible and I think the suggestion's good and well worth putting to SinoDoll. It might, however, interfere with the clearly excellently intended oral facilities of the orally capable heads.

In my judgment upon looking at the doll in real life, on the reality of the 161 sculpture the length of the neck didn't strike me as being an issue.


Were the neck to have been capable of annoying me and for it to be obvious enough to be annoying, I've done enough portraits of the 161 viewtopic.php?p=1419535#p1419535 to have had that opportunity were it to have been a serious reality.

Best wishes

Harem

[haremlover]

I have just had confirmation from David at Sino-Doll. He made an appropriate offer to Sandro a week ago on lines which in my opinion were not unfair.

In that context the continued and persistent apparent desire indicated by, and since, the post https://www.dollforum.com/forum/viewtop ... 7#p1422287 to trash this manufacturer looks either unhinged or like a vendetta.

Sino-Doll are a new brand clearly in the final stages of development and don't deserve the shit thrown at them in this thread.

They are as emerging from a chrysalis.

Their weight reduced doll will come through when it's ready. Sandro won't lose anything by reason of being able to sell the overweight 172 doll to anyone who might be wanting a good heavy sexdoll at an eye-wateringly bargain price without losing anything. Sandro gets his perfect doll and future customers get improved dolls at good value and with good and responsive customer service. Sandro gets to profit from good sales of good dolls.

Win-win-win all the way round.

At least Sino-doll did deliver something, and they are trying as good as they can to make things right. Also, no end customer was harmed. . . . .

Actually I do not want to start picking on Sino-doll anymore.

Sandro

Great!

Best wishes

Harem

[Dollstudio]

Hi,

once more my daily routine starts with checking the specs on http://www.sino-doll.com/goods.php?id=67 and http://www.sino-doll.com/goods.php?id=169.

Status as of today, Nov 24rd:

2018-11-24-161.jpg (131.54 KiB) Viewed 2461 times

2018-11-24-172.jpg (131.06 KiB) Viewed 2461 times

So there is some progress. The specified weight of the 172 cm doll now matches what the actually delivered product weights.

Though, the specs are still not reliable. Only the weight was changed, but - for example - not the foot length. So this is a superficial fix as obviously no real measurements were taken.

However, after a week, this is at least a start, and finally we can proceed to finding her a new home.

The doll will soon show up in TDF's For Sale section when the post was approved by the mod.
We will now see which value she really has and how much loss she makes.

Sandro

[Boobman]

You would think they would want to make it right. This is a new line from a doll maker in the business of doll manufacturing correct? I don't think by the crude seams & head to neck issues that the dolls are in a finished/polished state of manufacture. The feet if she will stand then they could say that is not hurting function or for photography. Those seams though are worse to me than even the poor fitting head. I do not have a dog in the fight with Sino-Doll. Harem likes his version, i trust him he does, just like i trust Sandro is not happy with his & the other things that were not disclosed accurately before & during the purchase process.

[Sino-doll]

Dear All,
Very sorry for all the unhappiness that caused.
We are still talking with Sandro for an appropriat offer;
Thanks for Sandro's detailed and professional review and suggestions.
The S172cm is the first model from our new line products,although with much progress in many aspects, also with some problems that Sandro has pointed out:
Such as seamlines,connector,neck,loose shoulder joint,big hands...
But luckily,all of these problems are controllable and can be fixed.
A new S172cm mold is being made,which will fix most of these problems and it will the true lightweight version,we'll check the actual weight then.
Give us some little more time.
Meanwhile,for the incoming new models,we are making them better and better.

[Dollstudio]

Hi,

it's time for a preliminary conclusion. It will be preliminary, because there is still so much work in progress involved, and because there is so much that did not go as expected.

Firstly, the Sino-doll lineup has a steep price tag. The MRP prices put these dolls automatically in the medium to upper medium range. In combination with the breathtaking announcements, I was hoping for a product with the potential to challenge Doll Sweet or at least to catch up with the (very few) medium to upper medium range Chinese silicone manufacturers in regard to manufacturing quality.

From my experience with other brands I know that medium range to high end dolls do not sell themself. To convice customers that the higher prices are really justified by better products, a lot of advocating is required. The benefits need to be explained over and over again, and photographic evidence is required to demonstrate that the better tech actually results in better dolls. To support this tedious advocating, manufacturers are required to disclose technical details most are very hesitant to even talk about. Credibility is crucial to convince customers to shell out more money.

This was my motivation to purchase a review sample. I wanted to see if the doll from the ambitious Sino-doll brand would compete with the breathtaking silicone newcomers from this year. And I wanted to have something in my hands to demonstrate the greatness I was hoping to find. I had planned to keep this doll for showcasing and photography. Finally - a managable life-sized doll for 'real' women's clothing and footwear! Yes, I was pretty excited about this doll.

None of this turned out how I expected. The first impresions were good, but with every closer look pretty much the opposite of what I was expecting showed up. What I found was neither as it was advertised now how it had been confirmed. The publicly announced weight reduction from September turned out to be fake news; instead of shoe size 34 (3.5 US) I got a doll with baby feet. Resulting from the high weight, small feet and inconsistently adjusted joints, the doll can not stand reliably. And I can still not make sense of how the shoulder joints respectively shrugging shoulders work; the complete shoulder girdle has loose joints that do not keep any pose, so on upright photos this doll has always handling shoulders.

The sheer amount of bits & pieces that were not as expected covered over that definitely not everything is bad on this doll. There are some potential improvements over the Z-Onedoll ancestors; e.g. the tanned skin tone is amazing, the body makeup appears to be permanent, and body makeup looks good. Also, for certain use cases the more loose joints are beneficial - they just don't make any sense in a doll with 'standing feet' option. And this leads me to what I see as the real problem with this doll and the Sino-doll brand as it currently is - credibility and trust.

Workers can be trained to adjust the joints with more precision and a sense how the skeleton is supposed to work as a whole; neck connectors can be re-designed or shortened; and a flawed mould can be repaired or replaced by a better one. All of this is possible - if there is a willingness to make real improvements, opposed to just make verbal promises.

After the - sadly - completely dishonest and misleading announcement about weight reductions - which by the way is still repeated unquestioned by all other vendors I have checkd in the past days - and the misleading confirmation of a weight of 36 kg before placing the order for this doll, the crucial question was how Sino-doll would deal with the ugly situation. What I expected was a very quick and determined response - take a doll in the factory, check all measurements, fix the English website and issue a memo to all vendors with the updated specs. None of this has happened so far. At least, this morning the weight specs were changed - after a whole week. The whole way Sino-doll was dealing with the whole situation did not convince me about this particular willingness to make real improvements I mentioned above.

However, I still hope for the best.

The facts I can state is that so far, Sino-doll primarily made breathtaking announcements while others demonstrated breathtaking real products. So far, Sino-doll did not keep the breathtaking promises while others have breathtaking products ready for sale - products which actually meet the advertised specs. I think it's now time for Sino-doll to sincerely contemplate what they want to be in half a year - yet another fradulent company trying to tear down ethical conventions and compete with East-asian business malpractices by fabricated product descriptions, or a honest and credible competitor, challenging the upper medium range brands by hard work and real products. One strategy would be targeted rather at the less critial low-end discounter segment, the other could put into ranks with Doll Sweet, 4woods and Orient Industry. The next months will show which patch Sino-doll chooses. If they decide for the latter, Sino-doll will have my full support on any step of their way, no matter what mess happened with this review sample.

But I need to be able to trust Sino-dolls announcements again, and I need to be able to verify good intentions by real actions. If Sino-dolls announces the next weight reduction, there needs to be an actual product matching the announcement. A weigh mismatch of more than 20% between advertising and real product should never happen again.

As far as improvements for the SI-172/H are concerned, this would be my (personal) priorities list for the essentials to be fixed:

1. Weight reduction as specified - crucial;
2. Proper shoulder joints that don't hang down;
3. Enable proper standing (will resolve itself with either correct joint adjustment and/or weight reduction and/or bigger feet).

Everything else - neck connector, seamlines, eye mechanism and so on - are (imho) subordinated to these issues. However, this would 'just' be the doll I expected to get. I think there is a market for tall dolls with managable weight, but it is not necessarily a bestseller.

The other route would be to just accept that the SI-172/H is and will be heavy, forget about standing and posing capabilities and market her as a mere sex doll. For this a variant, cleaner seamlines would be beneficial, and the interior of the body cavities should to be disclosed because of the cleaning issue raised by Aeron. There are probably other viable routes for Sino-doll to take as well, and the potential to suceed on one of these routes is there. Only the one most convenient route consisting of lying, misleading and spreading fake news should - IMHO - be taboo for Sino-doll, likewise for any other ambitious quality manufacturer.

I will update this post from time to time with updates and new developments, e.g. if there is interest for this SI-172/H in TDF's For Sale section.

Sandro

[Sino-Mike]

Hi Sandro ,

Here is my take on the issues with this doll.

The difference between the initial advertised weight and the actual one is quite significant and this is indeed not acceptable.

The long neck is something apparent on some photos and does detract attractiveness of the doll. The ugly gap between the head and neck may have something to do with it. Also, the position of the connector may be at fault. IMO, this could be easily solved by SinoDoll.

The shrugging shoulders and standing features are added cost options which are desirable, but do not work.

I understand this doll leaks oil. Is this temporary or permanent? Do all silicone dolls have this problem?

Thanks for your review. Any further comments you may have would be appreciated...

[Dollstudio]

@Sino-Mike: What we usualy (probably incorrectly) paraphrase as 'oil leakage' does not show up on all dolls. Neither fabric/plush dolls nor foam dolls like the EX-lite have this.

In TPE and silicone dolls, this oil leakage somehow correlates with softness. There are as well firm silicone as TPE blends with almost no noticable oil leakage, for silicone e.g. Doll Sweets blend before 2014, the old DDC blends and some Japanese blends like old 4woods and Orient Industry; for TPE, the original DH168 blend, the old JY Doll blend - all with minimal or no oil leakage.

For silicone, the softest blend with no noticable 'oil leakage' I know is Smooth-on's 'Dragon Skin FX' with Shore 2A hardness. This hardness/softness seems to be some kind of technical barrier; as soon as you blend for more softness, oil leakage starts. More ore less all current TPE and silicone dolls are way softer than this Shore 2A - typically deep in the Shore 00 scale.

A while ago I tried to figure out a method to compare oil leakage across materials: Doll [oil] leakage comparison. Sadly, Amazon stopped to package with my 'test strips' shortly after

As a rule of thumb one can say, the softer a TPE or silicone blend gets, the more '{mineral|silicone} oil' leakage the doll will have. As far as I can tell, no doll maker has cracked this yet. Though, only silicone offers - theoretically - solution by the possibility to encapsulate a softer silicone within a non-oily silicone. I have played around with this because I hate this oil stains on sheets and furniture, including wood, but nobody except Maidlee Doll uses this tech for a whole commercial doll.


Regarding adapters, Sino-doll told me that only the connector part in the head is removable. That limits the range of possible adapters, but some interesting types will work.

This is a DS Youyi head in LPink on the SI-172/H body:

DSC06312.JPG (576.88 KiB) Viewed 2561 times

Except for the skin tone mismatch it doesn't look to bad…

DSC06313.JPG (544.26 KiB) Viewed 2561 times

…until you bend her neck. You can check in the mirror where your own neck bends when you nod. I think it's a couple of vertebrae higher.

Bending sideways shows some gap around the neck, but no noticable gap between head and body.

This is interesting, this appears as if the DS heads with adapter fit better than the Sino-doll S4 head…

DSC06314.JPG (499.21 KiB) Viewed 2561 times

Aaahh, also spotted a (very minor) mistake for the first time - the tan lines end with the seamline on the front. There are no bikini lines on the back. Must be a strapless bikini or some new kind of trompe-l'œil style

Sandro

[Aeron]

In TPE and silicone dolls, this oil leakage somehow correlates with softness. There are as well firm silicone as TPE blends with almost no noticable oil leakage, for silicone e.g. Doll Sweets blend before 2014, the old DDC blends and some Japanese blends like old 4woods and Orient Industry; for TPE, the original DH168 blend, the old JY Doll blend - all with minimal or no oil leakage.

For silicone, the softest blend with no noticable 'oil leakage' I know is Smooth-on's 'Dragon Skin FX' with Shore 2A hardness. This hardness/softness seems to be some kind of technical barrier; as soon as you blend for more softness, oil leakage starts. More ore less all current TPE and silicone dolls are way softer than this Shore 2A - typically deep in the Shore 00 scale.

Silicon dolls leaking oil got me thinking... One of the main advantages of silicon dolls are that they are easier to keep clean (e.g. for fixed vaginas) because the material is non-porous.

However, if a silicon doll is leaking oil, doesn't that mean it's porous? If it was truly non-porous, there would be nowhere for the oil to leak out from.