Forsite AM/PM Adult Diaper Review

 *For more information on how I do reviews see Diaper Test Methodology

Summary

The Forsite AM/PM diaper is a premium full featured diaper imported by the Canadian company Forsite Health Inc. It comes in 3 different styles including plain white, grey with stripes and purple with stars. For what it's worth, this diaper is made in China, though appears to be made of wood pulp originating in the USA and seems to be FDA approved. This differentiates it from the Forsite Under The Sea or Mary Jane Max diapers as well as those of other ABDL/premium importers from China like Rearz or Bambino where there’s little-to-no info on material sourcing or FDA status (as of the current time).
 

This diaper comes with the most expensive unit price of those tested thus far, though it is still a little cheaper than other Chinese imports by ABDL-focused companies. In testing, it demonstrated an amazing amount of absorbency with a soft comfortable padding. The main downsides had to do with its tendency for surface dampness and bunch of padding between the legs due to its width. As a Canadian company I wish they made this in Canada, I’m not a fan of the “made in China” tag on something that could just as easily be made locally like many of our local Tena products. In terms of pricing it tends to run more expensive than BetterDry/Crinklz and in terms of performance I generally would recommend that diaper over this one, but it may be worth a try if you can get a good deal.

Key Features:

• Plastic backsheet
• Repositionable tapes
  
• Dual waistbands
• High grade USA fluff core
• Standing inner leak barriers

Pros:

• Highly absorbent
• Soft padding
• Good odor reduction
  
• Snug fit
  

Cons:

• Surface dampness
• Very expensive unit price
• Noisy backsheet
  

Product Details

For the purpose of this post I will be reviewing and referring to the medium-sized Forsite AM/PM Adult Diaper. However, other available sizes are listed below:

Packaging

Brand: Forsite AM/PM (by Forsite Health Inc.)
Manufacturer: Weifang Mimosa Personalcare Technology
Origin: China
Units Per Bag: 12
Cost Per Unit: $$$
Dimensions (L x W x H): 38 cm (15") x 19 cm (7.5") x 25 cm (9.8")
Weight: 2.53 kg (5.57 lbs)
Available Sizes: M, L
Advertised Absorbency: Maximum (5000 ml)

1.1 Forsite AM/PM Packaging

Diaper

Backsheet: Plastic (Poly)
Wetness Indicator: Yes (yellow line down middle, blue/faded when wet)
Standing Inner Leak Guards: Yes
Leg Gathers: Yes
Product Style: Tab-Style Brief
Refastenable Tabs: Yes
Number of Tapes: 2
Repositionable Tabs: Yes
Outer Color: White
Inner Color: White (blue rectangle in middle padding)
Front Waistband: Yes
Rear Waistband: Yes
Folded Thickness: 3 cm (1.2")
Folded Length: 24 cm (9.5")
Dry Weight: 208 g (7.34 oz)
Fragrance: None
Diaper Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 78 cm (30.7") x 62 cm (24.4") x 31 cm (12.2") x 60 cm (23.6")
Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, Rectangular
Padding Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 66.5 cm (26.2") x 29 cm (11.4") x 20 cm (7.9") x 39 cm (15.4")
Padding Wing Dimensions (fPW x fPH x bPW x bPH): 4.5 cm (1.8") x 13 cm (5.1") x 9.5 cm (3.7") x 19 cm (7.5")
Padding Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Semicircle, Semicircle
Total Padding Area: 1808 cm² (280 in²)
Tape Spacing (t1 x t2): 3 cm (1.2") x 12 cm (4.7")
Tape (W x L): 4 cm (1.6") x 4 cm (1.6")

1.2 Forsite AM/PM Diaper

Laboratory Absorbency Tests

Total Absorption Volume (after press out): 1867 ml (65.9 oz)
Total Absorption Volume (before press out): 1942 ml (68.5 oz)
Time to Absorb Wettings (first to last): (50 s, 44 s, 53 s, 66 s, 57 s, 59 s, 77 s, 69 s)
Wet Folded Thickness: 6 cm (2.4")
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 71%
Total Padding to Absorbency Ratio: 1.03 ml / cm² (0.23 oz / in²)
Press Out Volume: 75 ml (2.7 oz)

Surface Dampness Rating: 4
The Forsite AM/PM diaper had disappointing performance when it came to surface dampness. There was noticeable dampness after the first wetting. By the second wetting it had the dampness resembling saturation. I found it similar to the Abena M4 in this regard. In real world testing the dampness was still noticeable but it wasn’t among the worst performers in this regard.

2.1 Wet vs Dry Diaper After Capacity Test

2.2 Used vs Unused Padding After Capacity Test

"Real World" Absorbency Tests

Posture Tests

Standing-Sitting

Total Absorbed Volume: 1442 ml (50.9 oz)
Total Wettings: (1 standing, 3 sitting)
Leaked After Sitting: No
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 72%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.80 ml / cm² (0.18 oz / in²)

Standing-Sitting Rating: 9
The Forsite AM/PM diaper was among the top performers when it came to the standing sitting test. The first wetting while standing was easily absorbed, though with a brief period of noticeable dampness. There were no signs of leakage upon sitting. The second wetting was again easily absorbed while seated. The dampness lasted slightly longer on this wetting but it didn’t take away much from the comfort of this diaper. There was considerably more dampness on the third wetting, though the diaper remained fairly comfortable. On the 4th wetting there was a significant leak through the rear leg gather and I called the test at that. The diaper felt very damp and clammy at that point, but it was mostly up the front and mid-section. There was a large area of unused padding at the rear of the diaper. I feel it would be hard to use this diaper up to its full capacity because of the tendency to leak with large sections of unused padding. It should be able to hold 3~4 wettings during daily wear but any more than that may be pushing it. This puts it far off the BetterDry/Crinklz diaper in this respect, but similar to the Confidry 24/7, albeit with a bit more surface dampness.

Lying Down

Total Absorbed Volume: 1517 ml (53.5 oz)
Total Wettings: 5
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 72%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.84 ml / cm² (0.19 oz / in²)

Lying Down Rating: 9
The Forsite AM/PM diaper performed very well when tested while lying down. The first two wettings were absorbed quickly without any sign of leakage. The diaper felt a little damp after the second wetting but mostly in the mid-section. The third wetting was also easily absorbed although the dampness increased slightly. The fourth wetting again showed no signs of leakage and I was seriously wondering how much more it could take. Finally on the fifth wetting there was a small amount of leakage through the rear leg gathers. It seems the plastic-backed design was very helpful in containing leakage much like the BetterDry/Crinklz diaper, which also strongly resists leaks. The diaper felt very saturated in the midsection on the fifth wetting, but surprisingly there was still a fair amount of unused padding at the front/rear. Overall, I feel this diaper could comfortably take 3~4 wettings while lying down before leakage would become a concern.

2.3 Pattern of Used vs Unused Padding Test Stand/Sit (right) Lying Down (left)

Daily Wear and Bedwetting

The Forsite AM/PM diaper was among the top performers for daily and overnight wear absorbency. It wasn’t among the most comfortable diapers on the market but its padding is very soft and there’s not much to complain about in that regard. It does feature a very wide design, which can cause it to bunch inward or cause a diaper bulge between the legs. This can be a bit of a problem when it comes to absorbency because moisture may be redirected outwards and cause leaks well before the diaper hits capacity. This happened several times when testing during bedwetting episodes with moisture making it out of the rear well before saturation. I also found the padding wasn’t particularly effective when it came to wicking, at least not compared to the BetterDry/Crinkz or ConfiDry 24/7 diapers. In most cases there were still large areas of unused padding before leakage occurred. This diaper was also similar to the Abena M4 in that it absorbed a lot but also had a lot of surface dampness from early wettings onward. Even so, I didn’t find it to be very prone to skin irritation or odors. Even with its flaws, during overnight wear I found it could consistently take 2~3 wettings before leakage might be a concern, or up to 4 if you have the padding bunched outwards. In terms of daily wear this diaper was a little more consistent at 3~4 wettings as it was easier to catch when the padding was poorly adjusted. However, because this diaper is so wide it can be difficult to walk and I wouldn’t recommend it for activities requiring a lot of movement. It can also be quite loud, which may make daily wear difficult. Yet, changes would be easy with the wide landing strip design.

Suitability for Bowel Incontinence: 10

The Forsite AM/PM is a full featured diaper with front/rear waistbands to reduce odors and strong tapes. This diaper features high inner leak guards and has a lot of space to contain bowel movements. It also has a large area of rear padding coverage. I can’t find any significant faults in this diaper in this regard other than it could possibly suffer due to its surface dampness issues.

Wear & Tear Tests

Fitting

The Forsite AM/PM is similar to most Asian manufactured diapers with a plastic landing zone and refastenable tapes. This diaper features two large tapes per side with a strong grip. It also has a front and rear waistband to assist with the fitting.

3.1 Forsite AM/PM Fastener

Ease-of-Use Rating: 9

The Forsite AM/PM diaper is easy to attach / re-attach with its repositionable tapes. Its wetness indicator is a bit low, which could be an issue for some but I didn’t weigh that against it. The trickiest part is getting a fit that doesn’t feel too loose because this diaper is very wide at its mid-section. Removing this diaper is also a breeze, this puts it up there with similar diapers featuring a landing zone for ease-of-use, with it being very similar to the Carnation Adult Diaper in that regard.

3.2 Forsite AM/PM Diaper Fit

Comfort

Comfort Rating (dry): 8
The Forsite AM/PM is quite comfortable when dry with both front and rear waistbands, though I had trouble getting as snug a fit as with the BetterDry diaper. The padding is soft, as is the inside of the backsheet. The outer backsheet is fairly soft, though not as much as the Attends Slip Regular Plus or Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi. One of the main downsides of this diaper is that it runs very wide between the legs which can impair walking or make sitting in certain positions uncomfortable. I find it can also feel a bit loose at the rear, even with the waistband. In that respect, this diaper may be most comfortable for overnight wear.

Comfort Rating (wet): 7
I rank the Forsite AM/PM diaper similar to the Abena M4 when it comes to comfort when wet. Both suffer in terms of surface dampness but still provide a reasonable level of comfort when wet. This diaper does have a tendency to sag a bit because it is so wide, but the tapes hold well and it won’t come off easily. It also produced little in the way of clumping or tearing of the padding.

3.3 Forsite AM/PM Topsheet and Backsheet

Durability

Dry Padding Deterioration Proportion: 7.8% (topsheet), 4.7% (backsheet)
Shake Deterioration Test: 2 shakes to deterioration

Durability Rating (dry): 9
The Forsite AM/PM diaper was very durable during the dry durability test when worn for over 10 hours. At the end of the test there were no signs of significant padding clumping or tearing and the wetness indicator was barely affected. The only considerable area of deterioration was the collapsing of padding at the diapers med-section. Yet, due to its very wide size this was pretty much unavoidable. Other than that its tapes held out perfectly and didn’t lose much stickiness with multiple re-attachments.

Durability Rating (wet): 9
The Forsite AM/PM didn’t perform particularly well on the wet diaper shake test; however, in real world use it held up remarkably well. The diaper did tend to sag when wet but the tapes did a great job at holding it in place. The padding stayed strong through testing with no obvious clumping or tearing and it ended up very similar to its dry state, with a slight collapsing of padding between the legs. With that in mind this diaper is not well suited for active wear as it is very large and will inhibit some types of movement.

3.4 Forsite AM/PM Dry Test Deterioration

Discretion Tests

Profile

Front Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 3.0 cm (1.2"), 4.0 cm (1.6")
Back Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 5.0 cm (2"), 4 cm (1.6")
Side Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 4.0 cm (1.6"), 4.0 cm (1.6")

Profile Discretion Rating: 4
The Forsite AM/PM diaper was similar to the Confidry 24/7 in terms of profile discretion. It’s a very bulky diaper and will stand out under most clothes but it has a relatively low rise above the pant line. The width of the diaper causes it to bulge a bit more around the crotch where it can fold inwards.

4.1 Forsite AM/PM Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)

4.2 Forsite AM/PM Sweats Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)

Noise

Noise Rating: 5
The Forsite AM/PM diaper produces a substantial amount of noise as a result of the thick plastic landing zone. The backsheet itself only produces a slight crinkling noise similar to diapers like the Northshore Supreme or Drylife SlipSuper, so if it weren’t for the landing zone it would be a lot quieter. This is not a diaper that will be easy to conceal.

4.3 Forsite AM/PM Noise Profile

Odor Reduction

Odor Reduction Rating: 8
The Forsite AM/PM diaper does a good job at neutralizing odors in spite of its apparent surface dampness issues. I rarely noticed any odors from this diaper during testing. The padding seems quite odor resistant but it may also benefit from the waistbands, though the rear waistband can sometimes feel a bit loose.

Want to give the Forsite AM PM a try?

Help us continue to produce quality reviews by making a purchase through our Forsite AM PM Medium or Forsite AM PM Large affiliate link. With every purchase this blog will earn a small amount of commission at no extra cost to the purchaser.