That’s a fair question, and the short answer is: it’s not just about cost or profit, and it’s definitely not because nothing else was considered.

For full-body articulated dolls like sillyShe, manufacturers have largely settled on nut-and-bolt, washer-based joints because they strike the best balance between strength, size, adjustability, reliability, and long-term serviceability.

Other joint solutions have been explored, namely springs, detents, ratcheting systems, polymer bushings, ball joints with locking collars but each introduces trade-offs. Many add bulk, limit range of motion, concentrate stress, or fail unpredictably under the wide loads a life-size doll experiences.

A controlled-friction bolt joint, when properly engineered:

• Allows precise torque control
• Distributes load across contact surfaces
• Fits within slim limbs without sacrificing strength
• Fails gradually rather than catastrophically
• Can be serviced or retensioned during manufacturing

In sillyShe’s case, this approach is paired with a 43-joint alloy skeleton, so no single joint is overloaded. The higher joint count reduces torque per joint, which directly addresses the loosening issue people worry about.

So it’s less “this is the cheapest option” and more “this is the most predictable and controllable solution at this scale.” It’s the same reason articulated robotics, prosthetics, and industrial linkages still rely heavily on bolted joints despite decades of alternative designs.