Thinnest AB Diaper

[Josh998]

Hay guys … what’s the thinnest, adult

Baby, disposable diaper on the market… 

So has to be either plain white or in adult baby design… non medical… disposable… and the thinnest/most discreet under jeans. 

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Why would you want a thin AB diaper? If thickness is not an issue for IRL babies, why should it be an issue for AB's. In about 1988, Tommy, noting how thick baby diapers were sad in the DPF/NL, "Now that's what we want" in his article introducing a DPF AB diaper

[Little Lindsey]

13 hours ago, Josh998 said:

Hay guys … what’s the thinnest, adult

Baby, disposable diaper on the market… 

So has to be either plain white or in adult baby design… non medical… disposable… and the thinnest/most discreet under jeans. 

I would say the most discreet abdl diaper i have tried is be the ABU Preschools. They aren't as bulky as the rest of the ABU styles and are available in both plastic-backed and cloth-like, the latter being the quieter option for added discretion. They're all white except a printed landing zone, 4 different designs in a package. Obviously being thinner they have less capacity than other abdl diapers, but if discretion is more important than capacity they might be a good option for you.

[Cute_Kitten]

I second the ABU preschools. Or the Supreme Lite colored from Northshore- it comes in green, blue, and purple. 

[MegaChar]

https://www.qttydiaper.com/product/dino-diaper/

 

Dont know if they still sell diapers but those are the thinnest I have seen but they hold better then anything at the store.

 

[square_duck]

As with everything, one must find balance. The best I had been able to find with regards to that are ABU products, balancing descretion, with functionality. I found that either the Kiddos or Super dry kids ( both rated at 4500 ml ) are descreet, yet hold a LOT! I also support the above referenced ABU preschools, they work well, are comfy and descreet. Down side is limited capacity, but if you can work with that, or even use a booster for added performance, awesome!! ??

If not, then there is always Depends....which are neither functional, or descreet!!!! ??

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

I think this is one area where AB and DL differ. As a Very Little Girl, I am not concerned about thinness, In fact, that detracts from the feel. In real life, little girls, when put in dipaers, were not in thin diapers. Being in dresses, they could be put in very thick or multiple diapers. Also, cloth diapers being what they were, and rubber panties, boys had to live with them. Also,d parents were not about to put themselves in a position to have to change the child every hour and a half. The baby or little did NOT choose what diapers will be worn. That was done by the parents, and convenience , a major property of which was the longest feasible time between changes, not discreetness, took precedence

Beyond that, unlike many DL's AB/Little, mor often than not,do not wear in public or 24/7. Rather it is in the context of being AB/Little

So a "good, thin AB diaper" is a contradiction in terms, like "dry water", "moist desert" or "liquid ice". In fact, in the days of DPF, bulk was a nearly defining characteristic of AB diapers and usually specifically  referenced in reviews

[Moochie]

Quality day time discreet yet absorbent print diapers I like are: NS Lite and Supreme (I wore a blue Supreme at work yesterday), Bare Bum, and Aww So Cute.

[tommyneedsdiapers90]

Rearz lil monsters get my vote. Super thin but do hold well

[SpiderBaby]

I think I have to go with ABU Dino diapers. I know it may NOT be thin, because honestly, I never look at that sort of thing when I choose my diapees but I think they're a pretty GOOD diaper all around. Plus they have dinosaurs on them, which is pretty cool! I LOVE dinos!!!!!!???♥️???♥️??????♥️???????

[Toddler Pampers]

On 5/27/2021 at 2:05 AM, Little BabyDoll Christine said:

I think this is one area where AB and DL differ. As a Very Little Girl, I am not concerned about thinness, In fact, that detracts from the feel. In real life, little girls, when put in dipaers, were not in thin diapers. Being in dresses, they could be put in very thick or multiple diapers. Also, cloth diapers being what they were, and rubber panties, boys had to live with them. Also,d parents were not about to put themselves in a position to have to change the child every hour and a half. The baby or little did NOT choose what diapers will be worn. That was done by the parents, and convenience , a major property of which was the longest feasible time between changes, not discreetness, took precedence

Beyond that, unlike many DL's AB/Little, mor often than not,do not wear in public or 24/7. Rather it is in the context of being AB/Little

So a "good, thin AB diaper" is a contradiction in terms, like "dry water", "moist desert" or "liquid ice". In fact, in the days of DPF, bulk was a nearly defining characteristic of AB diapers and usually specifically  referenced in reviews

I strongly agree.  Discreet diapers are for octogenarians, not babies.  Then again, if I’m wearing clothes, much less going out, I’m not diapered.  I want to see, hear, and feel my diaper, and it’s all I’ve got on, even around my vanilla wife, because then I know she knows and loves me anyway, the best feeling in the world!

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

10 hours ago, Toddler Pampers said:

I strongly agree.  Discreet diapers are for octogenarians, not babies.  Then again, if I’m wearing clothes, much less going out, I’m not diapered.  I want to see, hear, and feel my diaper, and it’s all I’ve got on, even around my vanilla wife, because then I know she knows and loves me anyway, the best feeling in the world!

This thread would be more at home in the Little Girls' forum since they were diapered at a later age than boys for a number of reasons, or the Generic "Adult Kids" section

If one is an octogenarian and not IC, one is not wearing  throw-aways because they are not part of what you were in as a baby/little. I am 78 so they were 14 years away from when I was last put in diapers, by which time I was 22. I do not go out en petite fille. What I used to be in during 1954 was very thick being a doubled version of this at night when I slept over at my friends' house

I was diapered, not as a baby, but as part of being a little girl when I was over there. That was often less about IC than other things. For examples, boys would roam and if needing to pee, could find an out of the way spot and go. Girls tended to stay at someone's house in groupes of 3 to 5 for the afternoon; about 4/1/4 hours If two of those girls were under 8 years old or did not show that they could hold it reliably for 2 hours, they were put in doapers. I would be in doubleed diapers at night because of the way the house was made. The bathroom was in the basement and you had to go out, around and in through the cellar door, not something I would be trusted doing at 3 AM if I needed to go and the youngest of the sisters was a night wetter so we were both diapered and slept in the bed with a rubber sheet

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Actually, looking at the title, there is a contradiction in terms. Why would thinness be a virtue in an AB diapers? It would not. If you are authentically simulating a baby diaper then absorbency and duration would be the two virtues. Do parents ever care how thick or show a baby diaper is? So a thin AB diaper would compromise authenticity and therefore would not be fully or truly babyish. I am in 12-hour little girl/bedwetter diapers when I am in diapers. They are thick all around with a bit extra between the legs and I cannot close my legs above the knee. When I was 7, at the home of two girs as a little girl. I was in the equivalent of such with one of the resident girls, so I know what it is and what I have is an authentic diaper. Since little girls in diapers would be in dresses with full-circle skirts, the thickness of the diaper did not matter and when one is in bed, the thickness does not matter. So, they were, like baby diapers, as thick as they needed to be to do the job of keeping things dry. In the case of the little girl diaper, it was for when she could not reliably hold it for two hours which was the average time for what would be a long car ride before the Interstate system was built and "hight-speed" was a two-lane with a speed limit of 45 MPH and those were few and far between: Fall River to Roxbury MA, 52 miles took about 2:15 in 1955 mostly done 138 MA

The point being that if you are talking about an AB/bedwetter/children's style diaper, thinness is not even on the table unless you are willing to sacrifce authenticity so "thinnest ab diaper" would be self-contradictory and nothing I would want

[Pelusban]

If you don't need absorbency, just the diaper feeling, separate the inner layer at the front or back on any adult diaper, then remove the absorbent fluff from the inside. Then you can use it with a thin booster pad or a baby diaper as a stuffer. But just why?!

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

The thing is, if it is AB/AK (since this is the AK forum) then you would not WANT a thin diaper, "Thin" would be a bad thing since it is not authentic. It would feel wrong between the legs and at the hips, especially if it is cloth. With cloth diapers, absorbency=thickness and Mommy wanted more absorbency so that she did not have to change you as often. That is why rubber panties are so poufy