No doggie possible with 166C :'(

BigTexDFW · Post by **BigTexDFW** » Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:38 pm

I just received a WM 166C which is an incredibly beautiful doll, but I am so far only able to do her missionary because in the doggie position, the love hole is recessed by several inches from the buttocks. So unless you are hung like a horse, you ain't getting that!

I've tried arching her back, changing her legs, but I just cant find a way to make it happen. Is there some secret to it?

LHP is a real thing, and I wish I would have paid more attention before I bought. Oh well, now I see how doll collections start!

dwaynel2 · Post by **dwaynel2** » Mon Feb 20, 2023 7:06 pm

Yeah..I've had to pass on a lot of otherwise stunning dolls because LHP is horrible and I'm not spending to have that problem again. Personally, i think a picture of doggy style should be a requirement for any doll for sale.

bauchmo · Post by **bauchmo** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 2:39 am

I had the same issue with the 166c which is one major factor that led to me eventually replace Sid's body with 159c, lots of other reasons too. I found the best you can do is to move her legs all the way up to her chest basically (they will spread on their own because of the way the legs bend) bend at the knees, turn her shins outward so her feet face outward (don't want to damager her feet), Arch her back all the way back, turn her over so her chest is laying on the floor, bed, surface whatever. This gives you the best possible access to her as it pushes her vagina up and back. It's not very natural looking because the bend is excessive but it does work somewhat.

I have a couple of pictures for visuals. You can see how far up her legs are and how arched her back is, in this scenario you would just bend her legs at the knee and spread them as far out as needed for the correct height to match you. When you are trying to straighten her out it may be difficult to get the legs back into position as they might be stiff, you need to sort of twist and turn not really just push straight.

: sidd01.jpg (2.41 MiB) Viewed 2304 times

: sidd02.jpg (2.42 MiB) Viewed 2304 times

Anyways hope this helps as I know the pain of this situation very well.

Maxwedge · Post by **Maxwedge** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 5:34 am

Bauchmo, I zoomed in on your pics and cannot see any vag or butt holes at all. Did you blurr them with photo shop or something?

bsc2 · Post by **bsc2** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 1:21 pm

How does that work to replace 166C with 160A which has fantastic butt?

159C i've heard a bit heavier than 160A / 166C so i favour 160A for doggy but haven't got one yet. My comment was just visual judgement. Anyone any real feedback could be very useful.

Siliconeman · Post by **Siliconeman** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 1:35 pm

BigTexDFW wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:38 pm I just received a WM 166C which is an incredibly beautiful doll, but I am so far only able to do her missionary because in the doggie position, the love hole is recessed by several inches from the buttocks. So unless you are hung like a horse, you ain't getting that!

I've tried arching her back, changing her legs, but I just cant find a way to make it happen. Is there some secret to it?

LHP is a real thing, and I wish I would have paid more attention before I bought. Oh well, now I see how doll collections start!

I am surprised to hear this. WM166C has always been regarded as one of the better WM Dolls.

Apparently WM is unable to get rid of the "recessed" vagina. All the new WM dolls have this same design. If you want to avoid this you do not buy WM Doll products.

Cheers!

Sili

MX-V · Post by **MX-V** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 1:48 pm

I've done Doggie with mine. Some pillows have to be involved.
Reverse Truckstop and Alabama Mudslide are possible too.
She didn't like the Rusty Trombone though...

bbgng8 · Post by **bbgng8** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 2:47 pm

Seriously, the 166C should be sold with a thick BAD LHP warning! I was also tempted by all those pretty pictures of her. One day I chopped mine into 20 pieces after 1/2 a year and got rid of her for good. I just hated her. I didn't made the mistake a second time and bought the 162F which is fantastic in every way. LHP is good enough for doggy, also with legs a bit closed I can get in.

I did managed doggy with the 166C by placing her on the top of a bench press in 45 degrees. I could get in (finally) but I didn't like the feeling.

bauchmo · Post by **bauchmo** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:58 pm

Maxwedge wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 5:34 am Bauchmo, I zoomed in on your pics and cannot see any vag or butt holes at all. Did you blurr them with photo shop or something?

No she's wearing pantyhose, I dont think I have any shots of her in doggy with her exposed like that. I was more so trying to explain the angle and position the legs and torso would have to be in. Even then it's not fantastic if you are short in length but it works ok. The 159c is much better for this position as the LHP isnt as far forward and the anus is placed in a much better position with angles as well. I didn't think a few inches would make a difference but it does.

You have to basically fold her in half to get access to the LHP without the buttcheeks being in the way, otherwise you just cant get in deep enough for it to matter. Well for a shorter length guy anyways.

Dolltopsy · Post by **Dolltopsy** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 7:45 pm

BigTexDFW wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:38 pm I just received a WM 166C which is an incredibly beautiful doll, but I am so far only able to do her missionary because in the doggie position, the love hole is recessed by several inches from the buttocks. So unless you are hung like a horse, you ain't getting that!

I've tried arching her back, changing her legs, but I just cant find a way to make it happen. Is there some secret to it?

LHP is a real thing, and I wish I would have paid more attention before I bought. Oh well, now I see how doll collections start!

What happens if you have her standing with legs apart shoulder width and bend her over basically in half like doing a Yoga “Standing Forward Bend” pose (google for references)?

If you can access the love hole then, I’d imagine it should just be a matter of positioning her in a doggy-style position (knees bent, back arched).

My first doll I was surprised how much I had to arch the back for Doggy Style. Basically A 90°angle at the back to then make the hip joints be as close to 180° like when in a Standing Forward Bend position.

Post by **setevoltas** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:56 pm

Siliconeman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 1:35 pm
BigTexDFW wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:38 pm I just received a WM 166C which is an incredibly beautiful doll, but I am so far only able to do her missionary because in the doggie position, the love hole is recessed by several inches from the buttocks. So unless you are hung like a horse, you ain't getting that!

I've tried arching her back, changing her legs, but I just cant find a way to make it happen. Is there some secret to it?

LHP is a real thing, and I wish I would have paid more attention before I bought. Oh well, now I see how doll collections start!
I am surprised to hear this. WM166C has always been regarded as one of the better WM Dolls.

Apparently WM is unable to get rid of the "recessed" vagina. All the new WM dolls have this same design. If you want to avoid this you do not buy WM Doll products.

Cheers!

Sili

Note that there is a big difference between "recessed" and "inaccessible". S-man is correct that to date, even LHP correct WM dolls are not built for standing vag penetration from behind (though we have a standing... knee slap... disagreement over the 174G. I think she's completely smashable from behind.) Hence "recessed", compared to a doll like the 6YE 161J.

"Inaccessible" dolls include the 166C, 156B, 163H, the old 170s, the 152H, and sadly the 173H. Along with just about every other WM designed before 2019/ 2020.

I have zero problem getting at the vag in doggy style with the 167 fitness, the 159D, or the 156H. Bent over with back arch would also work fine.

In short, not "all" WMs have this problem, let alone as bad as the 166C. You've just got to do your research.

Post by **setevoltas** » Tue Feb 21, 2023 9:30 pm

Because pics or stfu right?

: 174G.jpg (5.9 MiB) Viewed 1942 times

: 159D.jpg (2.45 MiB) Viewed 1942 times

: 156H.jpg (5.58 MiB) Viewed 1942 times

Maxwedge · Post by **Maxwedge** » Wed Feb 22, 2023 8:25 am

Setevoltas, that doll looks great and totally do-able from the rear. I have had a couple dolls that were difficult for vaginal penetration, though, so I feel OP's pain (a WM and a CLM I think).

On those dolls it seemed that the vag was too far up, and just barely under the skin. So while the Anusara was comfortable from any angle, the vag was only usable in missionary and wasn't all that great at that. It's disappointing to spend so much time and money getting that "perfect" girl, and risk being disappointed by the intercourse.

Post by **setevoltas** » Wed Feb 22, 2023 5:47 pm

Maxwedge wrote: ↑Wed Feb 22, 2023 8:25 am Setevoltas, that doll looks great and totally do-able from the rear. I have had a couple dolls that were difficult for vaginal penetration, though, so I feel OP's pain (a WM and a CLM I think).

On those dolls it seemed that the vag was too far up, and just barely under the skin. So while the Anusara was comfortable from any angle, the vag was only usable in missionary and wasn't all that great at that. It's disappointing to spend so much time and money getting that "perfect" girl, and risk being disappointed by the intercourse.

I know exactly what you mean, and it's why some of us have been vocal about the problem. It's one thing if you know about LHP going in and don't care, it's another thing to be blindsided by it after dropping $2K.

curious_person · Post by **curious_person** » Wed Feb 22, 2023 6:31 pm

setevoltas wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:56 pm
Note that there is a big difference between "recessed" and "inaccessible". S-man is correct that to date, even LHP correct WM dolls are not built for standing vag penetration from behind (though we have a standing... knee slap... disagreement over the 174G. I think she's completely smashable from behind.) Hence "recessed", compared to a doll like the 6YE 161J.

I must also chime in to defend the honor of the WM174G

she's working fine for me aswell from behind, and prone. but, by contrast , I find her unusable any other way, and I worry too much about squashing the boobs.

It depends heavily on the user.

I can also get into the Wm172D (one of their worst LHPs) prone+doggy.

I have the opposite problem , i.e. i can't use any of these dolls lying on their backs with the legs posed at all, they have to stay flat.

there'd probably no other way to figure this all out than to 'try before you buy'. they'd have to show cross sections of the doll posed or something in the spec sheet.

What you should be warned about is that no one doll can be all things to all people. It would probably raise the price beyond 2 dolls to produce some kind of internal structure that actually worked like a real body.

If you find the 166C body appealing, you could also consider the AK173C and WM175D, they're both similar bodies, a bit taller, not so recessed but in a more neutral position.. but look into other brands first.

(personally, I like WM's body sculpts the most)