DogFart (0)
|
|
Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
Pros: |
-Epoch and CCBill are the billers. Epoch is not reliable.
-Discount through PU. However, If you look under Customer Support on the bottom of the preview page, there is a link for a 19.99 join price.
-Active comments system for each video
-Great selection of A list American models
-Includes access to the Dogfart Network of 23 interracial websites
-High production quality |
Cons: |
-Very abbreviated preview pages
-Very poor update schedule
-4k downloads are available at 99 cents each
-The members sign in link is in a place that is not obvious, the bottom left of the preview page in small print. |
Bottom Line: |
This poorly named network advertises itself as “The Kings Of Interracial Porn Since 1996!” They also state that they have 1,509 models, 5,284 scenes and 859,130 pictures.
They proudly let you know that the network has won a total of 12 AVN awards for best membership site, most clever title of the year, best series site, best interracial series several times as well as best interracial site. They won awards in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015, and 2018.
The Best Porn rates this worthy of a score of 91 and Rabbits Reviews has given it an 89. On PU two of our most respected reviewers also checked out the network. Pat362 gave it a 95 and Exotics a 90. All these reviews state that this is one of the better networks available today. I most certainly agree that this high quality network is well worth the join price that PU offers at a discount.
As is standard in porn, their definition of interracial is only the two races, black and white. More than half the site is black male, white woman. This is not hard to find on other sites. Some sites are no longer updating and/or are older with non HD quality.
Some sites are of themes that are a lot rarer than black on white. I wrote a separate review for Zebra Girls, lesbian black on white. In addition, there are two black/white gay sites that did not interest me.
I did not have these sites in mind when I joined. I was looking for the niche black women with white male. There are three such sites here:
Gloryhole Initiations-324 scenes, one update for 2019, only five for 2018.
Cum Bang- 89 scenes, one update for 2019, seventeen for 2018.
We Fuck Black Girls- 92 scenes, five updates for 2019, three for 2018.
I loved all of them. If this niche interests you this is the true mother load, both for quality and quantity. Although the older material is of low video quality, these sites have some truly hot scenes. Often, these are well produced, very professionally done and feature the cream of the crop of black women pornstars. I would recommend this as this is a great treasure trove of a rather rare niche.
The sex is not all that extreme and anal is not common. This is not circus porn or even mild bdsm, but there are many scenes that are gangbangs, blowbangs, blowbangs with some vaginal or small groups such as threesomes or foursomes. Pretty much it is gonzo in style, meaning just sex or sometimes with an opening premise.
They have been offering full HD for a few years now and before that lesser quality HD. Previous to that the videos are so so quality standard definition. The full HD videos also have an option at an additional 99 cents each for 4K. There is no option for a higher grade membership so that you can get 4K included. The site is easy enough to navigate and there is no advertising. There is a photo set for each video. I found no broken links. There is a download limit, but I don’t know any details. I downloaded a serious amount, more than 50GB per day, before I hit it. I emailed customer service for an explanation of how the limits work, but no answer.
Another negative is that they don’t seem to be updating on any schedule. The total updates for these three sites added together for 2019 is only an abysmally low seven. I would join for the archive, but it is not worthy of a multimonth membership without a lot more updates. My score recognizes that this is my major gripe, but not much else is worth deducting for. |
Reply To Review Review in Favorites!
|