Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Review A review of the site and any replies from other users.

Visit 18 Only Girls

18 Only Girls (0)

lk2fireone (196) 06-11-12  09:08pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (72), NO (1)
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Long interval before site timeout. Useful if you want to browse site, or download files, and you pause between downloads.
-Tiny, unobtrusive watermark occasionally appears in videos at bottom right corner.
-Tiny, unobtrusive watermark at bottom right corner of some photos. The watermark is so small, you have to examine each photo, to see if it's there or not.
-Soundtrack on most videos, especially the recent ones, is clean, without a lot of extraneous sounds.
-The video quality is some of the best I've seen: great focus, crystal-sharp video, good tracking of the sex action, professional lighting, excellent colors: skin tones, etc.
-There is an alphabetical listing of the models, with a nice-sized thumbnail to show what each model looks like. A really helpful feature that makes searching through the model list so nuch easier.
-Easy site navigation. Helpful, useful hot links to get a model's appearances (videos and photosets).
-The member pages are clean, with no ads.
-No DRM.
Cons: -The cons are basically minor.
-No model biography.
-Occasionally they change the name of a model, but forget to change the title of the video or photoset she appears in. For example, the photoset named "Beata and the mirror", features the model currently named Belka, who was, evidently, named Beata earlier.
-When the models speak in a foreign language, there are no subtitles to translate. But the words spoken don't have a lot of value, anyway. The sex is what counts.
-If you post a comment, I don't see any way to edit it, for typos or whatever.
-The high-quality file size can be large. A video with a runtime of 23 minutes 12 seconds has a high-quality (1080p) size of 1.6 GB in MP4, and
1.9 GB in WMV. So you need a lot of hard drive space if you want to keep the high-quality files.
-The model page is clean, with no ads. But it would be even better if they simplified the layout. Don't post 2 different thumbnails of the model's last appearance. That's just confusing.
Bottom Line: CONS (CONTINUED):
A single listing of each appearance would be more intuitive and easier to understand. Also, don't put two hot links for posting a comment on tha model page. Keep the comment link at the bottom of the page, but don't put a second comment link near the top of the page: it's not needed, and just gets in the way. Keep the model page simple.

-Some of the photosets and videos may be at other networks. 2 photosets and 1 video from Nubiles were posted at 18OnlyGirls in some sort of cross-
advertising deal.

Also, some photos and videos at 18OnlyGirls were posted earlier at the Teen Mega World network. This is not cross-advertising, but 2 different networks buying the same content from the same supplier.

The video titled "Waiting To Be Ravaged", featuring Anisiya, was posted 2012-06-10 at 18OnlyGirls. The same video was posted on 2011-02-17 at teensexmovs, a Teen Mega World site. At teensexmovs the video is titled "Anisiya". The video at 18OnlyGirls has more definition choices for download, and the runtime was chopped from 24:46 to 23:12 minutes:seconds.

But the video is basically the same.

However, the model is so cute, and the scene is so hot, that I didn't mind getting a higher-definition version of the same video. And they also made the 18OnlyGirls video have better lighting, better colors, in addition to the higher definition.

So I don't think the duplicated content is bad, especially when the content at 18OnlyGirls is better quality.


Site statistics:
Number of videos: 1032
Number of photosets: 1278
Number of models: hundreds

The site preview gives the following statistics:
Number of films: 8,545
Number of images: 384,314
Number of models: 507

I don't know where the site preview is getting it's figures, because I counted the number of videos (movies), and it's far smaller. Also, based on the number of photosets, and the average number of photos in the ones I counted, the number of photos at the site in photosets is far smaller.

Having said that, you still get 1,032 videos, and 1,278 phosets.

-There are two types of live shows: "Diesel Girls Live", and "24/7 Live Channel".
"Diesel Girls Live" features Diesel models who put on a live show. The show is free, and worth watching. Only a few of the Diesel models participate, each show lasts 2 hours, and you get 1, 2 or 3 shows per day.
The "24/7 Live Channel" is a link to models who chat in both public (free) and private mode (paid). The public or free mode is basically worthless. The private (paid) mode is expensive. It's probably cheaper to go to a strip club than to pay for the private shows.

-This is a hardcore teen site. Many of the models are as cute, attractive, even lovely, as you will find anywhere. In the last few years, they have
offered excellent quality videos. The older photosets were not excellent, even when the models were attractive or cute. But the photos I've seen recently are really outstanding, and compare to what you get at Metart or MPL Studios, two sites that specialize in high-quality photos. This is mainly a video site. But if they can post outstanding photosets in the future, as they seem to be doing now, this will be a photo site as well.

I'm giving the site a score of 95. You have some of the most attractive teen models you can find. You have outstanding quality videos. The recent
photosets have improved greatly. The site is easy to navigate. You have fast download speeds. And you don't have to wade through a bunch of junk
to find the worthwhile content: you have great videos and photosets of lovely girls all over the site.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (13)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date


Cybertoad (Disabled) Simply and amazing review, does not get much better then this. WELL DONE!
06-11-12  11:06pm

Reply To Message


xexbot (36) A most excellent review. Very thorough. I have thought about joining this site before, now I may go ahead and do it. Thanks.
06-11-12  11:16pm

Reply To Message


Marcus (47) Great review, and really good to see such constructive 'cons' - hopefully if the webmaster reads your review they'll realise just a few tweeks will make this a 100/100 website
06-12-12  12:26am

Reply To Message


lk2fireone (196) REPLY TO #1 - Cybertoad :

Thanks for the kind words, guys. Appreciate it.
06-12-12  12:44am

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
Excellent review, giving a clear view of how you felt about the site. Particularly interesting to me because I know you have always been more of a pix than vids guy.

I want to ask a couple of questions about the pics because I was hugely disappointed with this site when I was a member in January of this year, owing to its heavy bias towards video.

You say the newer pics compare to MET or MPL. Are they similar in style to those sites then? I would characterise those sites as very polished, professionally posed, emphasising beauty more than sexuality. I tend to find their images beautiful but not very exciting and look at hardly anything I downloaded from MPL. Are the later pics on this site in a similar style to those or are they more "amateur" towards the Karups, ATK style?

Are they doing multiple photo sets per girl or is it more of a one or two sets per girl kind of a site (like Pretty4Ever)?

Do photo sets tend to have toys/masturbation themes?

I realise it may be too soon to answer these questions. In January, I found it had almost nothing to offer for my photo tastes but it is definitely a site to watch and perhaps tentatively join in 6 months to a year if it continues to improve its photo content.

06-12-12  06:53am

Reply To Message


lk2fireone (196) REPLY TO #5 - Claypaws :

You're absolutely right, I was always more into pics than vids. There are several reasons for that, which I've mentioned before.
-Pics take less space than vids.
-It's far easier to make an excellent pic than an excellent vid, because there are far fewer factors to control in a pic than a vid.
-Therefor, excellent pics are far more common and easier to find than an excellent vid.
-Also, the time you spend looking at a pic and deciding if good or bad is a fraction of the time needed to do the same for a vid.
-I'm sure there are other considerations, as well, such as the time and money spent looking for sites that you think are worthwhile.

Anyway, I'm simply repeating things you already know.

But it's still worthwhile saying them, I believe.

Personal taste varies widely. What I like can be bland or boring or a waste of time to someone else.

I think Metart is the best site out there, for softcore teen photos. In terms of lovely teen models, quality of the photos, amount of content, and the low price you pay for that content.

Their videos, in contrast, are a waste of time. Boring, in spite of the lovely models.

I can't emphasize enough how much personal taste controls or affects what you like.

I looks at photosets from Femjoy, and I don't like them anywhere near as much Metart photosets. Other PU members have said they prefer the Femjoy approach over Metart, in the photosets. I think Metart uses more photoshopping, and cosmetics, to present the models more attractively. For the same model, who has photosets at Metart and at Femjoy, I will normally enjoy the Metart photosts more. But some PU members have said the Femjoy approach emphasizes the natural beauty of the model.

The Metart videos are boring. Femjoy videos are slighly better, but not by much.

Young Legal Porn and 18 Only Girls are two Diesel network sites with the same site structure, and the content has the same style. The photosets and vids and models could appear at either site. They have two sites, instead of one, for marketing purposes, to make more money.

The two sites have always had models that I thought were attractive. The videos have improved over time, and for years now, have been excellent in terms of definition and other factors.

The photosets had far less value. But over time (years), the photos were improving. And the photosets they are posting now are really nice. So as I said in my review, if they can keep up the quality in the future, these sites will be excellent photo sites in addition to their excellent videos.

Here's what I wrote in an earlier review of 18 Only Girls, dated 2011-01-23:

06-12-12  03:16pm

Reply To Message


lk2fireone (196) REPLY TO #5 - Claypaws :

"I don't know why the the photosets at 18 Only Girls are so unsatisfying.
The quality of the photosets is far below what you find at a glamor-style site like Met-art or MPL Studios, in terms of definition, appeal, etc. The style of the photosets is like what is shown at sites like Teen Stars Magazine (an archive site) or My Precious Virgins. Except that what
is shown at Teen Stars Magazine and My Precious Virgins is done much better. The photosets at 18 Only Girls are like a pale imitation of themuch better photosets at the other two sites. And compared to glamor photo sites like Met-art or MPL Studios, the photosets at 18 Only Girls are almost worthless. The photosets are like snapshots from the 1960s or 1970s. Even though they are nude photosets, the 18 Only Girls photosets lack sexiness. My guess is that the lack of sexual appeal is due to the washed-out appearance of the colors in the photos."

There are a lot of things I like about Diesel. I like their videos, with the option of downloading in several definitions. And the newer photosets have multiple choices for definition, as well.

As far as theme: this is a teen site. But there is a wide range of sexual activity shown. Single girl, lesbian with two or more girls, boy-girl, boy with two or more girls. Some use of toys, but not a heavy emphasis of toys. The toys could be in a single girl masturbating, two or more girls, boy-girl, one boy with two or more girls.

The sets don't emphasize any themes, except for being teens.

"Are they doing multiple photo sets per girl or is it more of a one or two sets per girl kind of a site (like Pretty4Ever)?"

The number of sets a girl might have is completely random. A lot of girls have only 1 or 2 appearances. The model Maria has 7 videos and 10 photo sets. Katie has 13 videos and 13 photo sets. The model Mia has 56 videos and 27 photo sets.

Those figures are for 18 Only Girls. If a model appears at this site, she might be found at the sister site, Young Legal Porn, with additional sets.

As far as style, I would say the recent photosets are like Met-art, in that they are glossy photos, with high definition, professionally photographed. The difference is that Met-art, until recently, was nude softcore, but no overt sex. The models did not touch themselves sexually. If there were two female models in a scene, the most overt thing was the two models might kiss on the lips. No boys in the sets ever.

At Diesel, the girls are shown having sex, whether by themselves, with one or more girls, or with a boy and one or more girls.

I am far less technically inclined than you, and I don't apply the same expertise to judging a photo or video.

In your review of ATK Premium, dated 2012-06-04, you write:

"As I am not interested in bg, gg or video, it is hard for me to evaluate the quality of that content."

06-12-12  03:19pm

Reply To Message


lk2fireone (196) REPLY TO #5 - Claypaws :

If that is true, most of the content at 18 Only Girls and Young Legal Porn would have little value for you.

I just re-read the three reviews you have posted. All I can say is, wow, your reviews are great, you put a lot of thought and intelligence and details into them.

Diesel is not a photo site that features a variety of professional photographers. The early photosets were amateurish, poor colors, not high definition, a wasted opportunity of attractive teens.

Recent photos are more professionally photographed.

One content provider for the Diesel network and Teen Mega World network is:


Browse the samples from that site. If the photosets appeal to you, then you might join Diesel after giving them time to build up content that you might like.

The quality at Diesel is far superior to what you get at Teen Mega World. Teen Mega Word is a video site. They have tons of photosets, but I assume the photos (and the videos) would not appeal to you.

In one review you wrote:

"What I want is for the model to look like she wants to rip my clothes off. Alas, with these photographers, few models look like they are thinking about sex at all, even though there are plenty of open leg poses and some mild finger spreading too. 'You can look but don't touch'. "

At the moment, I can't think of any sites that cater to your preference.

06-12-12  03:21pm

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #6 - lk2fireone :

Wow,wow,wow! Your reply to my questions is a review in itself. And it tells me exactly what I wanted to know in more detail than I could have reasonably expected. You are a star for going to so much trouble and I thank you warmly.

There is another reason videos do nothing for me and it is more important than all the ones you mention, though I agree with all of those too.

The main reason is that, in a video, I have no control over what view to linger on and no way to exclude the views that get in the way of enjoyment. It is not just a matter of pace but that is part of it too. In a photo series, I can delete the images I do not like, view a series as a slide show, pause on favourite shots.

I love open leg pink shots with finger spreading but I must have the face in view and in focus at the same time. Once the camera zooms to a body part and loses the face, I lose interest. I delete all the zoom shots from photo series but it is a real pain to go through a video editing all those out! And once I see a spread shot photo with a facial expression I like, I will want to view it for minutes at a time. Video pauses do not work well.

Hence, however good a video is, it simply cannot please me like a photo series.

I like MetArt and Femjoy though, for me, the best site is ATK Galleria, by quite some margin, so I would score MetArt and Galleria both in the mid to high 90s. I find the shoots on MetArt do not have the model sufficiently engaged, involved, aroused. Similarly for Femjoy but both sites have some gems. Rosalia on Femjoy (=Polly A on MetArt) and Sarah on Femjoy each justify a membership all by themselves. But it is on ATK Galleria that I find the most consistent chance of encountering models who look sexy and not merely beautiful.

All the photos I saw on Diesel had models looking like in snapshots, as you say. I shall comment more in my reply to your Msg #7, where you go into more detail regarding the Diesel photo style.

It also did rather irritate me how 18OnlyGirls and YoungLegalPorn are basically one site split into two for no obvious reason other than revenue. At least networks like Karups and ATK have divided their content between sites in a manner which is logical and comprehensible and they are large enough to have no problem justifying a split. Galleria, for example, is bigger than MET and Nubiles combined.

06-13-12  05:00am

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #7 - lk2fireone :

That quote from your earlier review is a good summary of why I found the Diesel photos so boring when I was a member in January 2012. I think a lot of the lack of sex appeal is because the photographer seemed to have no idea of how to engage and commit the model. So they just looked like they were going about their daily life (with or without clothes on)or simply being goofy. I was hoping for better things in the material added in the last few months.

I have had memberships to MyPreciousVirgins (by which time MPV included all the TeenStarsMagazine content). MPV has some good photos but so few that you can find all of them within a week of joining. The model they call Mickey is a favourite of mine. She is Natasha (not Nata) at Averotica.

You have clarified that the girls at Diesel are mainly "doing things", I think. Remember I was a member myself of the whole Diesel network in January this year, so really I was wondering if there were any significant changes since then. Seems like the girls are still "doing things". "Doing things" means stuffing fingers or toys in their pussies or playing around with other girls, or boys, none of which appeals to me. Neither does the METArt style of looking vacant while not touching themselves sexually. I was hoping for some explicit pink shots (using fingers to spread pussy but without insertions). Photographers call that "US Magazine level" in distinction from "UK Magazine level", which has open leg but not pink shots, and from "Continental level", which includes insertions and masturbation.

I looked carefully for US Magazine level shots on Diesel but found almost nothing. I do not really want glossy photos or girls "doing things". Sometimes, in a photo set of a girl "doing things", the first half of the photo set, before she inserts anything, can still be great. SuburbanAmateurs are good at that.

06-13-12  05:30am

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #8 - lk2fireone :

Thank you for the approval of my three reviews. I shall shortly be adding reviews of KarupsHA and ATKGalleria as I now have current memberships to both.

I noticed the AdultLabs content at Diesel. I was already very familiar with AdultLabs content and their site. TeenDreams have a lot of AdultLabs content, including all that I later saw on Diesel. As content providers go, I think AdultLabs are pretty good but I already have it from TeenDreams!

As for my preference - "What I want is for the model to look like she wants to rip my clothes off." - well there is plenty of that on ATK, Karups and SuburbanAmateurs. I keep returning to ATK and Karups as they keep delivering. I love the Russian and Eastern European models. ATK do not get many of them. Karups get hardly more than ATK. Nubiles get some but they are "doing things". WeAreHairy have a few too.

I was hoping Diesel might offer a good source of those Russian/Ukrainian hotties in high quality but non glossy style but not doing things. Perhaps part of my problem is that I have joined so many sites that I have seen a lot of their models before and the Diesel content was no better. If I had never seen them, and wanted video, there is probably no better site on the net for collecting them all together.

I think Diesel could help themselves by giving access to their whole model directory in their tour, rather than a one page teaser with every alphabet letter link going straight to a join page. Also, if they claim such great pictures, how about some full size samples in the tour?

It is only through the great review and answers to questions that you have just done that we can find out anything significant about the Diesel network. Their tour is nothing but empty hype. In fact, if it had not been for the favourable reviews on PU, I would have run a mile from that tour. I am not saying the Diesel sites are empty, just that the tour has no content (for a photo enthusiast). It is not unique in having an empty tour and there are very many with worse ones too. But it is the sort of tour that makes me very suspicious of finding anything worthwhile inside.

In summary, I would still be prepared to give Diesel another chance by signing up in 6 months to a year from now. I would go in with open eyes, expecting to be very disappointed again but still probably worth a punt of a month's subscription.

I would not argue with your score. It would be justified by the video content, especially if Diesel stopped claiming to be anything other than a video network until they have a substantial amount of photo content. Or they could offer a cheap membership giving access only to photos. I would sign up for that. I do not expect a site to be best in all areas. What irritates me is when it claims to be so but only delivers in one.

06-13-12  06:11am

Reply To Message


lk2fireone (196) REPLY TO #11 - Claypaws :

I think, if you wanted to re-write your responses, it would make a great review of the Diesel network, or one of their main sites.

I honestly believe, because of your greater writing skills and other factors, that your reviews are outstanding. Far beyond anything I have written. Toadsith hasn't written any reviews in almost 4 years, but his reviews, like yours, are some of the best at PU.

I'm glad that you are finding some sites that you like. I thought, after re-reading your reviews, that your tastes were too specialized to finding sites you might think worthwhile:

"As I am not interested in bg, gg or video, it is hard for me to evaluate the quality of that content."

You say you like Metart, and would score it in the mid to high 90s. But you also say: "I tend to find their images beautiful but not very exciting..."

So when you give Metart a 90s score, do you mean that represents your personal satisfaction with the site? Or do you mean, instead, that is your "professional reviewer's" opinion of the site, apart from your own enjoyment?

When we write reviews for PU, we are supposed to score a site based on some objective criteria, apart from our own personal satisfaction. Which I find hard to do.

However, you say you like MetArt and Femjoy, but most especially ATK Galleria and Karups (and SuburbanAmateurs?).

My tastes are different from yours, but you've talked me into a ATK Galleria membership in the near future.

You write that MyPreciousVirgins "has some good photos but so few that you can find all of them within a week of joining."

I don't think MyPreciousVirgins is a mega site, but it has a large number of models and photosets. So if you could only find a week's worth of content worth keeping, then it seems that it would take years before 18 Only Girls or Young Legal Porn would build up enough photosets that would appeal to you. Because most of the photos they post (and all of the videos) would seem to be outside your interest, even if they improve their photography.

I am looking forward to reading your future reviews.

06-13-12  06:43pm

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #12 - lk2fireone :

First, thank you for that huge compliment regarding my reviews. It is particularly gratifying coming from you, who have so many well argued and balanced contributions on PU.

I would be prepared to write a review of any Diesel site but I think it would be unfair to do it now and base it around a rewrite of my current comments. This is because my actual membership was in January and so is nearly five months ago. This is within the time limit allowed by the rules but the webmaster says (in his posted replies on PU) he has made and is making improvements to the still photography, having recognised its present shortcomings. I think that before I write a formal review with a score in its headline, it is only fair to give him a chance to deliver on that. Based on what you describe here, I am sceptical of the likelihood of that but I feel that allowing a further six months or so for it to occur would be fairer and more useful than my jumping in now. I agree that, given my tastes, it is likely that any Diesel site would take a very long time to build up much photo content that pleases me. Of course, that means potentially being disappointed with what I get for my membership fee but I would feel even more reluctant to sign up now, when I think I could almost guarantee disappointment. In any case, I would be likely to score the site above its personal worth to me. And I would do that to a greater degree if the webmaster were to modify his tour so that it better represented the content in a less extravagant manner.

You ask: "So when you give Metart a 90s score, do you mean that represents your personal satisfaction with the site? Or do you mean, instead, that is your "professional reviewer's" opinion of the site, apart from your own enjoyment?"

I mean the latter. MetArt is absolutely clear in its aims; and its style is abundantly clear before signup. It has a tour which shows every cover they have on the site. It has glossy and professional photography which is amongst the best in its niche and it is a large site with no download restrictions and full download manager support. So I feel I could not deny it a 90s rating even though glossy and professional is not what I want, so that its content is worth closer to around 82 for me personally.

Like you, I also find it hard to achieve this objective scoring. I think it is actually impossible completely to override personal satisfaction. If this were feasible, there would be no need for more than one review in order to establish a score.

You say: "My tastes are different from yours, but you've talked me into a ATK Galleria membership in the near future."

That is fine and I think you would enjoy it but I was not trying to talk you into it, despite my enthusiasm.

You say: "I am looking forward to reading your future reviews."

Thank you. One of those reviews will be for ATK Galleria in the next two weeks. I am hoping to do KarupsHA too around the same time.

06-14-12  03:32pm

Reply To Message

*Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies.

Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Porn Review - Webmasters

Protecting Minors
We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.


To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.

Loaded in 0.02 seconds.