WM163H Weight Reduction - Review

PaulDenton2001 · Post by **PaulDenton2001** » Sat May 27, 2023 10:55 am

Sup peeps,

I've had this WM 163H weight reduced model for about a month now and finally got around to giving my thoughts. I will give a quick summary here, but Samantha has created a video in which she reads out my review (attached):

WM163H Weight Reduction - Review.mp4: (19.29 MiB) Downloaded 217 times

* Very firm - similar to old Silicone dolls - exception are the boobs, belly and pussy
* It has a solid foam core inside (i think) and a thin layer of TPE over it
* TPE has to be the normal blend when ordered in conjunction with weight reduction
* Due to this model's bad LHP and the firmness of her arse, anal is the only realistic option when doing doggy
* Large folds of TPE form around her hips when her legs are bent 90 degrees, which can look unsightly
* I can't confirm the weight but I'm guessing she's around 35-37Kgs with her head on
* Despite her firmness she's still great for kissing and cuddling (standing) and trust me, she definitely fools my lizard brain into thinking she's real!

I would like to see WM provide super soft TPE with the weight reduction and also increase the amount of TPE on her arse. Considering my experience with this doll I would definitely consider getting the 173H weight reduced. Just as long as you have an expectation that sex is not the primary purpose of these weight reduced models, more of a companion doll.

Some pics below (edited with face app):

: Sam-163H-Front-Low.jpg (1.15 MiB) Viewed 1741 times

: Sam-163H-Front-High2.jpg (708.36 KiB) Viewed 1741 times

: Sam-163H-Front-High.jpg (612.71 KiB) Viewed 1741 times

: Side.jpg (2.47 MiB) Viewed 1741 times

schmoll42 · Post by **schmoll42** » Sat May 27, 2023 2:16 pm

That's a very interesting review. It seems that the firmness is a typical outcome with weight reduced dolls. Maybe they used standard TPE to limit tearing.
May I ask where you found the weight reduction option for WM dolls? I haven't seen it anywhere yet.

Anyway, I've always been wondering why manufacturers aren't offering semi-reduced dolls for people whose primary usage is sex.
Semi-reduced dolls could offer a trade-off where critical parts are not - or less - weight reduced (thighs, butt, etc.), but some other less crititical parts do have weight reduction (rib cage, arms, calf, etc.).
Instead having a -10 kg in weight reduction, one might accomodate a -4 kg on some dolls in the 33 kg range (which would make them a tad more manageable w/o discomfort during play time).

thunderkiss69 · Post by **thunderkiss69** » Sat May 27, 2023 2:23 pm

She's cute! For me, I'm a flopper and shaker and hanger type of guy. I love ther super big boobs but only if they pancake when supine and flop on top or bent over. If Tiddy Shop could somehow work with WM or another doll manufacturers...

PaulDenton2001 · Post by **PaulDenton2001** » Sun Jun 11, 2023 9:36 am

Sam at the club - can't help but smile when I see her

: wp7656419.jpg (582.03 KiB) Viewed 1391 times

The Doll Advocate · Post by **The Doll Advocate** » Sun Jun 11, 2023 2:30 pm

: 20230430_113159.jpg (981.99 KiB) Viewed 1345 times

She's definitely gorgeous, but I don't think the reduced weight would be worth the loss of squishiness.
In my opinion.

PaulDenton2001 · Post by **PaulDenton2001** » Sun Feb 18, 2024 8:05 am

The Doll Advocate wrote: ↑Sun Jun 11, 2023 2:30 pm She's definitely gorgeous, but I don't think the reduced weight would be worth the loss of squishiness.
In my opinion.

If she were squishy and soft that would indeed be amazing but we all have to work within our limits.

Another pic: