对子哈特 性徒会长: Thin end walls and a constricted entry

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.

Dimensions and material

The sample weighed 301.5g, measured 14.5cm overall and had a 13cm channel. Its projecting end was very thin and collapsed under light pressure, like an air pocket. Oil release was low, but contact felt dry and odor was pronounced. No body hardness number was given, and formulation versus storage time as the odor source was unresolved.

Conspicuous entry flash was documented on arrival. The unusual form and thin end made gripping unsatisfactory.

Channel and entry ring

Three simple sections have shallow relief and progressively weaker enclosure toward the rear. An added entry ring was rated around +2 in relative firmness, clearly firmer than the body. This is a subjective classification.

The reviewer reported an overly tight entry, difficult passage and occasional slipping back out. The ring further restricted an already narrow opening rather than providing good overall enclosure, complicating alignment and movement. Passage should not be forced or abnormal pressure sustained.

Air removal and observed feedback

Before air removal, trapped air dominated and texture was barely felt. Afterward, the entire rear collapsed, feeling like a thin sleeve without support. Thin walls, weak texture and a tight entry together made handling very awkward.

A comparison with same-brand samples used in 2024 suggested different tactile material, not a confirmed formulation change. Stock age or brand cannot establish the cause of problems. No long-term testing was supplied.

Rating

The source awarded 1 star overall, without category scores. Pronounced odor, dry contact, entry flash, a tight +2 ring, weak relief and collapse after air removal were the main drawbacks. Low oil release did not compensate for uneven structural support.