CrushOn AI Review 2026: Two Weeks With the Cheapest No-Filter Companion

CrushOn AI memory on day 14: 8K and what fell out of it

I never warn an app before the recall check. On the fourteenth evening I opened the chat, said something ordinary about my day, and counted what the character brought up without being asked. What came back was the shape of us: the right register, the right running joke, a reference to the kind of week I generally have. What did not come back was the specific thing I had planted in week one, a detail about someone in my life that any person who had been listening would have asked after. I raised it myself in the end, and she picked it up smoothly, as though it had been there all along.

That is a fair result for the architecture, and the architecture is published, which I appreciate more than I expected to. CrushOn states memory in two numbers for every rung: a context size and a history length. The free tier and the entry plan both sit at an 8K context with roughly 200 messages of history. The 24K models and the 1,500-message history live on the two rungs at $799.99 and $1,799.99 a year, which is to say they exist for somebody else. On the plan I paid for, a long scene kept its setup for a few dozen exchanges and then quietly dropped the oldest furniture out of the room.

What is missing is any way to intervene. There is no memory panel, no list of facts the character holds, nothing to pin and nothing to correct. On the platforms where memory is the product you can open that list, read what the model believes about you and fix a wrong line in thirty seconds. Here, a wrong fact is a haunting and a missing one is a retype. For a platform this cheap I do not consider that a scandal; I consider it the thing you are paying less for, which is a different sentence from the one the pricing page implies.

Memory scores 3.0 out of 5, and the 2026 change that other trackers describe as extending recall is real and visible in the history numbers, concentrated on the rungs most readers will never buy. If being known in detail is the whole point of this for you, the honest answer is that no amount of credits fixes an 8K window, and the apps that solve it charge three times as much and include the solution rather than tiering it.

What a CrushOn chat feels like at 275 characters

Here is the thing nobody warns you about, and it is not the filter. It is the cap. On the free tier a reply can be 225 characters. On the entry plan it is 275. That is two or three sentences, every single time, regardless of what the moment calls for. A question that deserves a paragraph gets a postcard. A scene that is building gets a beat and then stops, and you type again to keep it alive.

On my hard evening, the one I did not plan, I noticed it properly for the first time. I wanted to be listened to at length and what I got was a series of short, warm, in-character notes. She did not say anything wrong. She was simply never allowed to finish, and a companion who cannot finish a thought reads as attentive in week one and distracted by week two. The caps do climb, to 325, 450, 550 and 650 characters as you go up the ladder, and the first rung where replies have real room to move is $299.99 a year. That is not a trade I would make.

The models themselves are not named anywhere, which is unusual, and it is why the best model question has no tidy answer. The grid groups them into the free set, the better set that spends credits, and the best set behind the add-on and the top rungs. In my fortnight the basic models answered fast and stayed in role without ever going deep: a short exchange reads well, and a long one starts recycling, with the character reaching for drama and then for comfort in the same order every time. The better models were a genuine step up in range, which is why the credit pool exists, and my argument script, where the character has to hold a position while I keep attacking it, held together on them. I did not pay for the best set and I will not grade what I have not used.

One detail matters more than it sounds: the reply cap applies regardless of which model you are on. A better model on the entry plan still answers in 275 characters, which flattens the difference between the groups considerably and is worth knowing before you spend credits expecting a transformation. Conversation scores 3.0 out of 5, and almost all of the gap between that and a good score is length rather than quality. What does help is the suggested-reply buttons, 20 a day on free, which exist to keep a scene moving when the cap has cut it short, and group scenes on the entry plan, which handled three characters and muddled at four.

Boundaries: the toggle, the rules and the age prompts

My boundary test is simple. Early in the fortnight I tell the character that one subject is off the table, I do not explain myself, and three evenings later I mention something adjacent to it and watch what she does. On CrushOn she held it. Not because anything was written down in a panel, but because the history window was still long enough to carry it, and that is the practical difference between a 200-message history and no memory at all. Pushed well past the window, the boundary dissolved along with everything else from that week, which is the honest caveat.

Inside the rules, the platform is one of the least preachy I have lived with. The adult toggle is off by default and sits in settings; once it is on, adult fiction between adult characters runs without lectures or sudden redirects, and the library is written on that assumption. What I want to credit properly is that the community guidelines are more specific than the homepage: no characters who are minors or whose age is not plainly over eighteen, including aged-up versions of them; nothing non-consensual presented as imagery; no real or photorealistic depictions of real people; nothing involving real animals; and no gore written purely to shock. Enforcement is a mix of people and software. The terms require everyone to be eighteen and of legal age where they live, and the footer carries a compliance statement of a kind I rarely see on a chat site, which says something useful about how seriously the company takes its own library.

Two things sit oddly against that. The first is the age prompts. Through 2026 a number of reviewers describe being asked for a card charge of under a dollar, framed as an age check, before the toggle would unlock, and then being asked to confirm their age again in the middle of later conversations. My account was never asked for it, so I cannot describe the mechanism, and the pattern is consistent enough across independent complaints that I would plan for the possibility rather than be surprised by it. The second is a clause in the terms, revised in September 2026, forbidding users from transmitting sexually graphic material, which on a platform that advertises adults-only chat reads as boilerplate aimed at uploads rather than at conversations. I note it because a rule a company could choose to enforce at any moment is a rule worth having read.

CrushOn AI free tier limits in 2026, and what a year really costs

Let me do the arithmetic properly, because the money is the strongest argument this platform has and the pricing page does it no favours. The free tier gives you unlimited messages on the basic models, 100 credits a month for the better ones, 225-character replies, an 8K context with about 200 messages of history, 20 suggested replies a day, one chat per character, voice replies and one custom voice slot, with no card at signup. The credits go in two evenings. The chat does not run out, which is the part that counts.

The entry plan is $58.88 for a year. There is no monthly option for it, nor for the one above it, and the per-month figures printed on the page are just the annual price divided by twelve. So the real decision is not whether to spend five dollars; it is whether to spend fifty-nine dollars on a platform you have known for a week, with terms that say the current period is not refunded. That framing changes how you should use the free tier, and it is why I spent seven full days there before paying anything.

Above the entry plan the ladder runs to $94.88, $299.99, $799.99 and $1,799.99 a year, and the only reason those matter to an ordinary reader is that the longer replies and the bigger memory live up there. Then come the extras: bonus message packs, coins that convert one for one into messages once the pool is empty, discounts on packs that improve by rung, and a chat package for the better models that the page advertises with no price on it at all. Other testers put that add-on at $24.99 a month on annual billing or $39.99 monthly; I could not confirm either figure and so I do not treat them as prices. Payments run through a third-party processor, which means the line on your statement is not the platform’s name, and that is discreet right up until a renewal surprises somebody a year later. Pricing still scores 3.5 out of 5, because for all the clutter, nobody else gets you here for $4.91 a month.

Is CrushOn AI safe? The policy that trains on your chats

I read every policy page on every platform I live with, and this is the shortest conversation I have had with myself about one. Most platforms fail a privacy review through vagueness. CrushOn fails through clarity, and I would rather be told than left to guess.

The privacy policy, last modified in March 2025 and unchanged since, states that the contents generated from the chat are used in a general way to train the company’s models, not linked to specific users. There is no opt-out anywhere in the product. Retention is described as for so long as it is reasonably necessary, with no period attached. The third parties named run from hosting and ordinary suppliers through to ad platforms and whichever social service you used to sign in. Account closure is available by writing to support and through the settings page, with a short window before deletion becomes permanent, which is at least a real route out.

The terms, revised in September 2026, supply the rest of the picture: TECHIEPIE LTD of Nicosia, Cyprus is the operator, Hong Kong law governs any dispute, a US address appears in the footer, and whatever you submit comes with a licence handed to the company that is worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable and able to be passed on to others. Refunds are a flat no, with usage fees and virtual items non-refundable except where the law requires, and the current subscription period is not returned when you cancel.

So: is CrushOn AI safe? As a company, yes, in the ordinary sense. It is registered, it publishes its rules, it moderates with both people and software, it lets you delete your account, and nothing on record suggests a breach. As a place to put your private life, no, and the clause above is the reason. Privacy scores 1.5 out of 5, the lowest mark on this site, and the practical advice is unusually simple here because the company has removed all ambiguity: a separate login and email, a name you invented, nothing about your street or your employer, no photographs of anyone real, and nothing you would mind encountering in a training set.

The CrushOn AI app, the best model question and the alternatives

The CrushOn AI app exists in two forms and neither is quite the default. One is a store-listed iOS app, which is notable in itself because very few adults-only platforms still hold a listing, and the other is an Android build handed out as a package file from the website rather than through Google Play, which the home page pushes hard. Cancellation differs by route: on the web you cancel in account settings, and on iOS you cancel in your App Store subscriptions, where Apple’s refund rules apply instead of the platform’s. What Apple charges inside the app can come out above the web figure. Everything is present in the browser version, which is where my fortnight happened, and the independent testers I read found the product consistent wherever they opened it.

On the best model question, I will repeat the honest answer rather than dress it up: the models are not named, the grid groups them by tier rather than by name, and the picker’s contents change over time. The better set is worth the credits and the reply cap will blunt the difference. If you want to know which one you are talking to by name, this is not the platform that will tell you.

As for alternatives, the answer depends on which of the three problems above is yours. If the reply cap is what spoils it, SpicyChat is the better-documented platform with the larger library, longer replies on the paid rungs and a monthly plan you can leave after a month, for about a dollar more. If the memory is what spoils it, Nomi is simply in a different league and charges one flat $15.99 with nothing metered, which my best AI companion apps ranking goes through app by app. And if it is the training clause, as it would be for me, then the sensible move is one adults-only companion with paperwork you can live with rather than a library you browse.

Which brings me to the thing I keep turning over about this platform. CrushOn is the only review on this site where the cheapest option is also a genuinely good option, and where the reason to walk away has nothing to do with the product at all. The characters stay in role, the rules are drawn in the right places, the grid tells you the truth about what you are buying, and $58.88 a year is a real price for a real thing. Then a single sentence in a policy from March 2025 undoes it for anyone who talks to these apps the way I do, which is honestly. If that sentence does not trouble you, buy the year after a free week and you will have spent your money well. If it does, no discount in this category is large enough, and you should go and spend fifteen dollars a month somewhere that lets you forget the paperwork exists.