User Guide
EVO Skeleton vs. Traditional Frame
Dec
Inside a sex doll, the internal frame determines how smoothly she moves, how well she holds a pose, and how stable the structure remains over time.Traditional skeletons rely on basic hinge joints, which restrict motion and tend to loosen with use.
By contrast, the EVO skeleton introduces upgraded joint mechanisms, allowing smoother articulation, stronger pose stability, and components that can be serviced or adjusted when required.
The sections below break down the main differences in a simple, easy-to-follow way.
1.Structural Architecture Comparison
| Feature | Traditional Skeleton | EVO Skeleton |
|---|---|---|
| Joint Type | Single-axis hinge joints | Bi-axial / tri-axial multi-directional joints |
| Shoulder Movement | Vertical lift only | Lift, forward rotation, shoulder-shrug |
| Spine Function | Fixed, minimal bending or rotation | Flexion, extension, lateral bend, axial rotation |
| Construction Style | Fully welded steel tubes and plates | Modular assemblies with dampers and gaskets |
| Load Distribution | Localized stress on hinge points | More even load distribution across joints |
2.Range of Motion (ROM)
| Body Area | Traditional Frame ROM | EVO Frame ROM |
|---|---|---|
| Elbows / Knees | Approx. 90° flexion | 120°–135° flexion |
| Shoulders | Limited rotation, mainly vertical lift | Elevation, forward rotation, micro-rotation, shoulder-shrug |
| Spine | Minimal bending, fixed alignment | Flexion, extension, lateral bending, controlled twist |
| Hips | Restricted flexion with more binding | Deeper flexion with reduced binding |
3.Joint Stability & Pose Retention
| Aspect | Traditional Frame | EVO Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Pose Retention | Friction-based joints loosen over time | Torque-controlled joints lock securely |
| Degradation Over Time | High wear on friction plates | Reduced wear with more consistent performance |
| Noise & Abrasion | Metal-on-metal contact | Rubber / polymer gaskets reduce noise & friction |
| Serviceability | Requires full frame replacement | Modular joints allow local repair / tightening |
4.Material Composition & Weight Distribution
| Area | Traditional Frame | EVO Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Materials | Stainless steel only | Steel + aluminum alloys + polymers |
| Weight Distribution | Heavier hinge clusters | Reduced inertia through strategic lightweighting |
| Motion Smoothness | Friction varies as joints wear | Controlled torque for smoother articulation |
5.Maintenance & Serviceability
- Traditional: fully welded, non-modular; repairs require dismantling or frame replacement
- EVO: modularized joints allow targeted repair (tightening, part replacement)
- Operational Benefit: significantly lower long-term maintenance cost and reduced structural downtime
For more practical care tips beyond the structural design, see:Doll Care for Beginners
6.Interaction with TPE/Silicone Outer Layer
Regardless of skeleton type:
- The outer material determines the safe motion limit.
- EVO’s wider ROM increases potential shear forces on TPE/silicone.
- Users should avoid overstretching or holding extreme poses for prolonged periods.
Guideline: Use full articulation only within manufacturer-approved ranges.
Conclusion
From a mechanical engineering perspective, the EVO skeleton delivers substantial improvements in articulation range, stability, load distribution, and serviceability. Traditional frames remain adequate for basic use, but EVO provides the most robust structural behavior for users requiring realistic posing or long-term mechanical consistency.