COOLP 女仆 Soft: clear texture with limited midsection support
COOLP 女仆 Soft: clear texture with limited midsection support
Images were selected by position and quality; individual human review is pending.
This text passed automated basic checks only; it has not undergone model or human review.
Specifications and material
女仆 Soft is the softer version of the standard model, retaining its basic channel contours. It is not a dual-layer construction. The orange-red cylindrical body measures about 17.5 cm overall, with a roughly 14 cm interior and a narrow recessed entrance. Weight records conflict: the text gives 395 g, while the accompanying scale photo reads about 439.6 g. The available information does not explain the difference, so neither should be selected as a definitive specification.
Relative softness is around -2, not a standard hardness measurement. The sample had somewhat more oil seepage but no pronounced smell on opening, reportedly less than the firmer 鬼退治2. This does not establish a special deodorising process. The entrance was less prone to liquid leakage, and the surface finishing was neat.
Texture and support
Small bumps sit on relatively high ridges. Connections and edges were well formed, without widespread bubbles or missing sections. Although bump shapes varied, the soft material retained clear contours. Compared with the standard version's more direct, forceful feedback, Soft provided gentler, gradually unfolding variation rather than an absence of structure.
The main weakness is local thinness and uneven wall distribution. Support differs between the sides and the top/bottom, so holding orientation affects tightness. After holding the sample for a while, its sides were noticeably thicker; rotating it about 90° provided fuller support. This is a distribution issue in the surrounding body, not poor texture detail.
Assessment
Overall recommendation is 5 stars, emphasising the combination of soft material and complex texture. It does not mean support, oil seepage or thickness are faultless. Thin walls raise questions about long-term durability, but no full service-life test or separate durability score is provided. A specific use count or earlier failure than other products cannot be asserted.


Source and editorial note
This article is an edited translation of the linked original review, not a new hands-on test by voalice. Scores describe the original reviewer’s observations. Product names may retain their original spelling; translated names are descriptive, not verified official names.
Commercial links lead to iSexy Shop and KimochiLife. Availability is not verified here.
Editorial policy