You can use your aerospace design background in determining the durability of the toys..... I dunno, maybe a 5 year lifespan, 25,000 masturbation hours and in or around 5,833 orgasm cycles.
Yes, I certainly will! But, I'm not alone. All
reputable manufacturers test their toys to know how long they will last under certain assumed operating conditions. Then, they redesign to either reduce the cost (because it lives too long) or make it meet the standard (because it dies too soon). The actual numbers totally matter. I don't know what other manufacturers assume for their useful life requirements. Using 25,000 hours would make the toys SUPER expensive. My estimation is that almost all toys today have a life measured in the hundreds of hours. For rechargeable toys, the limit is often as simple as the number of times you can charge it multiplied by the run time for a single charge. For most toys and most users, you would be thrilled to get 1000 hours from that battery equation. That sets the upper limit. Without actually testing, I would bet that VERY FEW of the toys on the market make it to 500 hours. Yes, the non-rechargeable Hitachi has a reputation for a reason. It is probably good for 1000 hrs+.
The manufacturers have figured out the correct number for mainstream users. A cheap piece of shit runs for maybe 100 hours and you feel like you got what you expected. On the other hand, a typical mainstream consumer who uses her "luxury" toy 3x a week for 1.5 hours = 4.5 hrs/week = 234 hours per year. She expects it to last more than a year, hopefully 2 or 3. And, that is what she gets. If she actually uses it 3x a week it lasts for a couple years. Since most mainstream users don't
actually use it that much, the "quality" toy typically lasts for 3+ years. It's beat up anyway and she's ready for a new one.
What about cam models, though? Using a toy for only 4.5 hours a week is a joke. Either the toy sucks or she just doesn't want to make money. So, that's why I asked the question. How many hours seems like "enough" for cam models. It's not the mainstream consumer number! If you assume 1000 hour life, how many weeks would that last?
He could also see how well the toy survives having a frozen chicken toss at it like they do to test the aircraft engines.
I'm glad you brought that up. Yes, they do fire chickens into jet engines during certification. In fact, the chickens are shot from an air cannon at like 400 mph to make the test realistic. Why? For YOUR SAFETY! Because that shit actually happens. Remember the
story of the plane that landed in the Hudson after it hit a flock of geese? Both engines were destroyed. Everybody lived. The pilot deserves a lot of credit. But, the only reason he had an airplane to fly was because of the
regulations that were utilized. In the chicken test, the regulation says, in effect: 'the engine can be destroyed, but it can't spew parts into the passenger cabin or other parts of the plane to cause further damage'. The fact that the designers planned for that event, and TESTED for that event, is what kept those people alive!
Why does this matter? Because sex toys are UNREGULATED! As far as I can tell, the only regulations that officially apply to sex toys involve radio interference when they have radios (like bluetooth or wi-fi). In my assessment, the industry has done a
fair job in self-regulating. Sort of like a C-. Reputable manufacturers
try to do the right thing. But, seriously, how absurd is it that we have
regulations for children's toys that are very specific about toxicity of materials and such but no such coverage for sex toys that people insert into their bodies? These standards exist and are relatively easy to follow for a company that has a culture of quality. How many are willing to unilaterally adopt/employ such standards to know that their toys are safe? Shouldn't this matter to models? Or, is everybody just feeling good that the Chinese factories (making the luxury toys) aren't occasionally buying the cheaper silicone and passing it off as the good stuff? I will know! I couldn't imagine doing it any other way.
