Author Topic: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P  (Read 7025 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DanTheMan

  • **
  • Posts: 35
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't hold yourself back.
Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« on: May 11, 2014, 08:47:01 am »
Review Mr.Limpy 6"/Medium

Here's my review on the Mr.Limpy, I've been wearing it since I was 15.8/16 years old and right now i'm 18 (turning 19 in september).
And i've been wearing it every day, in a pocket in my boxers (not against my skin) I tried that but it feels yucky because it doesn't feel natural.
But... for just packing it is a great starter packer!

[/b]It's 15cm aka 6"[/b](I think it's the medium)
I wanted the small first but that one doesn't lay flat so it looked like an awkward small boner in my pants.
My height is 1.75/1.76cm (about 5.9 (not sure if the calculator was correct)) so I thought a medium would look pretty accurate.

It's not realistic but it does have a head so it would really pass the grab test, however I don't grab penises, but as far as i've heard from mates it does pass :)

Pro's
-It's cheap
-Passes grab test
-Durabillity

Cons
-Too stretchy (could skip rope with it, nah just kidding but it doesn't stretch unnaturally)
-2D balls
-No details
-Too light, you wont notice you have a packer or not (could be a pro)

Overal it's a fine packer, but once you get into another phase of your life (depends on person) something more realistic might be more satisfying.

New packer P&P

Hey guys! So I've recently posted asking about a realistic packer, after snooping through the forums I came across a dilemma..
I want to purchase the basic packer from Realmagik.com but I also want to buy a painted one with a flex rod,
I want it to be as realistic as possible as in, what goes well with my height? I have no clue how bio guys and their penises are lol.
So my height (as said above) is 5.9/175/176cm.

As alot of you guys already said on the forums 4.5 is too small and 6 too big..
I've also read that the 6" one causes a weird boner look whilst wearing pants(maybe because of the flex rod?), is this true? Because it's the same size as my Mr.Limpy and that looks fine.
Now my main question:
Which one is better to go for? Do bio guys of my height a 4.5 or are they more leaning towards a 6?

Sorry if any of my questions are weird, I did not mean to offend anyone or make anyone feel uncomfortable :S
Thanks in advance!

Dan


On T since 1 december 2011!

Offline aleon515

  • FTM non-binary dude
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,390
  • Reputation: +37/-0
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2014, 04:29:20 pm »
Cis guys average about 3.5 inches, that makes 4.5 quite well-endowed, though I think the shaft length on RM might be less. If you are talking use in sex ,well even then you aren't going to be that tiny. I think average might be 5". I've heard guys say they *cannot* pack at 6". Depends on which is more important. I think some people do find 4 1/2" is too short for some people and you would likely need to change positions for sex.

It suggest if you want to get the actual prosthetic that you get the RM basic packer, I think you are talking basic *prosthetic* if you are talking flex rod. You still can't use it for sex, but you might find the weight too heavy for you (I think it's a complaint people have). You spend $100 vs being unhappy with $500+. You can also find out pretty quickly. The shape and so on are the same, but obviously the realism isn't the same level.



--Jay

Offline Carbonated

  • Neighbor
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2014, 05:07:41 pm »
I just switched from the masho (similar to mr limpy) to the new RM basic packer, and while it feels great the balls are huge compared to mr limpy and masho. Also it's much more dense, wich makes it feel even bigger since it doesn't "squish" together when you move or when you wear tight pants. In my opinion the balls are to hard for it to pass the grab test. I'm also 5'9 and the 4.5 is a little bit to big for me, mostly due to the density of the balls. However, you might feel this is a good size for you, or even too small. :)

My advice is, buy the basic packer first and see how you like the size and feel of it, you will only know for shure once you try it out. I definitly recomend the rm, it feels much more realistic than cyberskin and the quality is great!

Offline Bimmer Guy

  • *
  • Posts: 2,222
  • Reputation: +22/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2014, 09:03:38 pm »
Cis guys average about 3.5 inches, that makes 4.5 quite well-endowed, though I think the shaft length on RM might be less. If you are talking use in sex ,well even then you aren't going to be that tiny. I think average might be 5". I've heard guys say they *cannot* pack at 6". Depends on which is more important. I think some people do find 4 1/2" is too short for some people and you would likely need to change positions for sex.

It suggest if you want to get the actual prosthetic that you get the RM basic packer, I think you are talking basic *prosthetic* if you are talking flex rod. You still can't use it for sex, but you might find the weight too heavy for you (I think it's a complaint people have). You spend $100 vs being unhappy with $500+. You can also find out pretty quickly. The shape and so on are the same, but obviously the realism isn't the same level.



--Jay

Yes, 3.0-3.5 is the average male penis.  Realmagik is 4.5.

Average erection is close to 6 inches.

My Mr. Limpy never stuck out, but I wear it in a jock strap or inside a pocket in underwear (rare), so it is pushed down, I suppose.

Reelmagik is way to heavy for me.  I dream of an Emisil 3.5 without a tab with a more prominent head than is available.

Back to the OP..ha!

i would suggest trying the Reelmagik basic packer.  If you like it, consider a more expensive one.  The basic packer and the prosthetic weigh the same.  There is a BIG difference in weight between the Mr. Limpy and the Reelmagik.  I have worn Mr. Limpy for eons, which might be one of the reasons why the heft of the Reelmagik displeased me so.

I would strongly suggest you get the basic and don't put out the big money until you are sure you like it.
Top Surgery: 10/10/13 (Garramone)
Testosterone: 9/9/14
Hysto: 10/1/15
Stage 1 Meta: 3/2/16 (including UL, Vaginectomy, Scrotoplasty), (Crane, CA)
Stage 2 Meta: 11/11/16 Testicular implants, phallus and scrotum lift, v-nectomy revision.  Additional: Chest revision (Crane, TX)
Fistula Repair 12/21/17 (UPenn Hospital,unsuccessful)
Fistula Repair 6/7/18 (Nikolavsky, successful)
Revision: 3/29/19 Monsplasty, Buried penis repair, scrotum lift (Santucci, Austin, TX) (Crane Center for Transgender Surgery)




Offline SX0877

  • Friend
  • ****
  • Posts: 101
  • Reputation: +0/-0
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2014, 09:16:51 pm »
My first packer too, but I have not been using it since I got other alternatives, and one day, I was so surprised that it melted.
I looked up online and found other people had the same experience and the possible reason is that packers rubbing against each other and dissolve each other because they are similar material? I did keep all my packers in one bag, so just a reminder that keep your packers separately...

Offline aleon515

  • FTM non-binary dude
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,390
  • Reputation: +37/-0
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2014, 10:26:32 pm »

i would suggest trying the Reelmagik basic packer.  If you like it, consider a more expensive one.  The basic packer and the prosthetic weigh the same.  There is a BIG difference in weight between the Mr. Limpy and the Reelmagik.  I have worn Mr. Limpy for eons, which might be one of the reasons why the heft of the Reelmagik displeased me so.


The clones (clowns?) are of one mind *again*. :)

--Jay

Offline DanTheMan

  • **
  • Posts: 35
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't hold yourself back.
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2014, 10:14:27 am »
Thanks again guys!
I've already purchased the RM basic packer a few hours ago, I was thinking of buying the 6" (after trying out their basic packer for a while like you guys said :) ) because the balls seem smaller but the penis might be too big,
and I was indeed thinking of having possible sex with it in the future.
I've been researching Emisil prosthetics but they seem kinda off, they look fantastic but less detail etc, the Emisil ones seem to weigh more too, RM (4.5")weighs 9.2 oz/280 gram and the Emisil ones weigh 11oz/ 330gram.

Struggles, it's not easy to shop for a penis.  :laugh:
On T since 1 december 2011!

Offline Bimmer Guy

  • *
  • Posts: 2,222
  • Reputation: +22/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2014, 09:38:52 pm »
Thanks again guys!
I've already purchased the RM basic packer a few hours ago, I was thinking of buying the 6" (after trying out their basic packer for a while like you guys said :) ) because the balls seem smaller but the penis might be too big,
and I was indeed thinking of having possible sex with it in the future.
I've been researching Emisil prosthetics but they seem kinda off, they look fantastic but less detail etc, the Emisil ones seem to weigh more too, RM (4.5")weighs 9.2 oz/280 gram and the Emisil ones weigh 11oz/ 330gram.

Struggles, it's not easy to shop for a penis.  :laugh:

Emisil flaccids are:

6.35 ozs/180 grams

and

7.6 ozs/215 grams
Top Surgery: 10/10/13 (Garramone)
Testosterone: 9/9/14
Hysto: 10/1/15
Stage 1 Meta: 3/2/16 (including UL, Vaginectomy, Scrotoplasty), (Crane, CA)
Stage 2 Meta: 11/11/16 Testicular implants, phallus and scrotum lift, v-nectomy revision.  Additional: Chest revision (Crane, TX)
Fistula Repair 12/21/17 (UPenn Hospital,unsuccessful)
Fistula Repair 6/7/18 (Nikolavsky, successful)
Revision: 3/29/19 Monsplasty, Buried penis repair, scrotum lift (Santucci, Austin, TX) (Crane Center for Transgender Surgery)




Offline aleon515

  • FTM non-binary dude
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,390
  • Reputation: +37/-0
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2014, 11:36:48 pm »
Weight is a problem with silicone packers in general. To get rid of that you have to start making it hollow, which has some problems too. I have a "Pacman" which I got with the idea of using in the gym (as I was thinking about that) or swimming. I just think it is way way too heavy and very close to the weight of RM, without being anywhere near as nice. TSW packers are also heavy. I got the mini gecko, which is tiny so I it isn't so bad. So I got a teenie weenie. LOL

--Jay

Offline Maleth

  • Traveler
  • ****
  • Posts: 472
  • Reputation: +4/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #9 on: May 13, 2014, 07:29:57 pm »
I have bought the RM Basic Packer and found out that it simply wasn't effective to use for me due to its size and (especially) the weight of it, so it's slightly changed my perception on whether or not I should get a prosthetic from RM. Even if their quality is absolutely fantastic, the sheer weight of the packer itself was somewhat of a hurdle to get over when packing with it, and it also made me take that as a note when I am further in my transition and wanting to get a high quality prosthetic.
~Maleth

Offline DanTheMan

  • **
  • Posts: 35
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't hold yourself back.
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #10 on: May 14, 2014, 12:28:55 pm »
Weight is a problem with silicone packers in general. To get rid of that you have to start making it hollow, which has some problems too. I have a "Pacman" which I got with the idea of using in the gym (as I was thinking about that) or swimming. I just think it is way way too heavy and very close to the weight of RM, without being anywhere near as nice. TSW packers are also heavy. I got the mini gecko, which is tiny so I it isn't so bad. So I got a teenie weenie. LOL

--Jay

LOL.
I took some stuff to kinda feel how heavy it is, I thought it would be a bowlingball lol, I agree it is heavy but not as bad as I expected I guess, i'm gonna about it :)
Thanks
On T since 1 december 2011!

Offline DanTheMan

  • **
  • Posts: 35
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't hold yourself back.
Re: Review on Mr.Limpy & new packer/P&P
« Reply #11 on: May 14, 2014, 12:30:56 pm »
I have bought the RM Basic Packer and found out that it simply wasn't effective to use for me due to its size and (especially) the weight of it, so it's slightly changed my perception on whether or not I should get a prosthetic from RM. Even if their quality is absolutely fantastic, the sheer weight of the packer itself was somewhat of a hurdle to get over when packing with it, and it also made me take that as a note when I am further in my transition and wanting to get a high quality prosthetic.

I've heard that the balls are massive, man stuffs difficult lol, I really want to purchase a realistic prostethic, guess i'll have to put lead in my pants to try to get used to that weight before purchasing an expensive one lol.
On T since 1 december 2011!