I wish I had gone for the implant when I was younger. I totally agree with the analysis : "five years of super sex between age 45 and 50 is far more important than being able to maintain having sex between age 65 and 70."
I first was implanted when I was 56, and I asked my surgeon if I am an ideal candidate, He said, "yes, being 56 is a good age since you will likely get a good amount of use from the implant"
I thought that was a curious answer, since it implies that maybe he is a little disappointed when he implants men over sixty who perhaps do not use the implant with the frequency that a surgery as complicated and expensive as an implant should disserve.
ALSO, do realize that I think young women might really find getting f..ked by an implanted male more enjoyable and intriguing then older women since that level of rough sex can be hard on a vagina.
As evidence of this, you might want to read my thread back in the day here on franktalk titled :
"wife (she turns 60 this year) no longer likes sex -- it hurts (so getting an implant was a waste--maybe ?)"
https://www.franktalk.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=11738&p=131089&hilit=wife#p131089(fortunately for me, the wife got mona lisa vagina rejuvenating treatments....but you might not be so lucky)
So, if I had to do it over again, I would go for implant in my forties...you must realize that when women hot menopause (in there fifties), sex really changes. Yes, you might need replacement every 10 or fifteen years....but, that is really worth the trouble given how great reliable long lasting spontaneous sex can be