Thunder's Place

The big penis and mens' sexual health source, increasing penis size around the world.

Penis Size: The True Average

Penis Size: The True Average

Many men here want to know the size of the average human penis. The aim of this post will be to provide an objective answer. A PubMed search and some Googling turned up several studies in which the penis was measured by medical personnel. In the following list, I will report averages for erect and flaccid stretched measurements. For newbies unfamiliar with the acronyms, please see the glossary. When I do not indicate BP or NBP, this is because the study abstract failed to specify such.

Group 1: Studies specifically aimed at determining average penis size

Study 1 - 80 American men:

NBPEL (100% erection induced by drug injection) = 5.08”. FSL = 4.88”.

UPDATE (07/18/2005): It appears (from reading another source) that the 5.08” figure is non-bone pressed.

Study 2 - 300 men, “college-aged”:

NBPEL = 5.88”. EG (midshaft) = 4.97”.

Study 3 - 3,300 Italian men, 17-19 years old:

FSL = 4.92”.

Study 4 (added 01/02/2007 - not included in calculations or discussion below) - 271 Jordanian men:

FSL = 5.31”.

Study 5 (added 05/22/2007 - not included in calculations or discussion below) - 1500 Iranian men, 20-40 years old:

FSL = 4.56”.

Study 6 (added 03/11/2008 - not included in calculations or discussion below) - 52 Greek men, 19-38 years old:

FSL = 4.80”.

Study 7 (added 03/11/2008 - not included in calculations or discussion below) - 301 Indian men:

FSL = 4.28”.

A subset of 93 of these men were measured erect, and the average was 5.12”.

Study 8 (added 03/03/2009) - not included in calculations or discussion below) - 84 Brazilian men, 18 years old:

BPFSL = 5.71”.

The 90th percentile for BPFSL among these 18-year-old men was approximately 6.61”.

Group 2: Studies in which average penis size was not the primary goal of investigation (Some guys have expressed concern that doctors fake data in penis-size studies in order to relieve men’s insecurities. The following studies should not be prone to this criticism.)

Study 9 - 55 Israeli men, 21-78 years old:

BPEL (100% erection induced by drug injection) = 5.35”. EG (base) = 4.29”. BPFSL = 4.92”.

Study 10 - 111 “younger” (18-19 years old) and 32 “older” (40-68 years old, for whom 100% erection was induced by drug injection) German men:

BPEL (young men) = 5.70”. BPEL (older men) = 5.58”.

UPDATE (05/13/2007): The full text of the article specifies that these measurements were bone-pressed.

Study 11 - 104 British men, 17-84 years old:

FSL = 5.12”.

Study 12 - 123 Korean men, “early 20s” in age:

BPFSL = 4.21”. NBPFSL = 3.78”.

Study 13 (added 05/27/2005 - not included in calculations or discussion below) - 200 Turkish men, 20-22 years old:

NBPEL = 5.01”.

Study 14 (added 05/13/2007 - not included in calculations or discussion below) - 115 Nigerian men, 30-65 years old:

FSL = 5.30”. Range: 2.95”-7.68”.

Study 15 (added 02/23/2009 - not included in calculations or discussion below) - 100 American men who had had a prostatectomy (47-74 years old) and 130 who had not (47-74 years old), with erections induced by drug injection if needed:

BPEL (prostatectomy) = 6.06”. BPEL (no surgery) = 5.98”. EG (prostatectomy) = 4.65”. EG (no surgery) = 4.57”.

Out of these high-quality studies, four included a measurement of erect length, the statistic that most interests men at Thunder’s Place. Three of these four included direct injections of a drug into the penis to induce a 100% erection — so their numbers can’t be dismissed as too low due to measurement anxiety. The four studies reported average erect lengths ranging from 5.35” BPEL to 5.88” NBPEL (the latter number comes from college students on spring break in Cancun, who probably had small fat pads). For the three studies that did not include erect measurements, we can estimate that the erect figure would have been about 0.25” longer than the reported stretched flaccid length, judging from the differences in studies that included both FSL and EL. For these three additional studies, the average erect length can be inferred to range from 4.46” BPEL to 5.37” (might be NBP or BP).

Studies in which size is verified by a third party, therefore, have consistently turned up averages below those of self-report studies. For example, the famous Kinsey self-report survey found an average NBPEL of 6.16”, while a Durex online survey showed an average of 6.4” NBPEL. In my opinion, to trust men’s anonymous self-reports over the data of seven objective medical studies demonstrates penis-size paranoia — something to which we are prone here. If we look at the objective data instead, the average erect penis length appears to be no greater than 5.5 - 6.5” BP — and may even be smaller.

Disclaimer: I am not trying to suggest that enormous penises do not exist. They do — and some men are born with them. But for those who were not born with a huge one, and who instead aim to build one through PE, I think it’s important to establish a reasonable standard of what “average” is, so that size-paranoia does not continue to haunt them even after they have reached a truly large size.

sticky that sucker……..

You don’t mind if I pass this post along to another forum (non-pe), do you?

This is great info and I’d like to share it, but I don’t want to without your permission.

Those drug induced erections produce an BPEL larger than the BPFSL which I have yet to seen reported here with a natural erection.


The "average size" is usually over-estimated. Small guys don't take part in surveys and big guys jump at the chance.

Girl claims she had a huge ex? Stick a spider in the bathroom or a mouse in the kitchen and when she comes out screaming ask her how big the spider/mouse was...

It assumes fairly small lengths, which is all the more frustrating because it’s such a reputable study. I suppose it has to be a question not of wondering where you’re at, but where you’re going to.

I read today on another thread about a member having his cock regarded as small when he’s at 8 x 5.5 NBP. The Dirk Digglers of this world are surely rarer than all that, and the women exaggerating?


You can't kill ideas with bullets!

It’s hard to believe, with the internet and the media and what not…But, if you ever want a non biased view of dick size, go look at nudist pictures. They are never erect, but most guys are only packin’ 2-3 inches flacid. Great post!


Previously known as Gandolf*

Originally Posted by Dr Schwanz
It assumes fairly small lengths, which is all the more frustrating because it’s such a reputable study. I suppose it has to be a question not of wondering where you’re at, but where you’re going to.

I read today on another thread about a member having his cock regarded as small when he’s at 8 x 5.5 NBP. The Dirk Digglers of this world are surely rarer than all that, and the women exaggerating?

If you mean the king kong size queen one, then the guy is 7.5” now and the women didnt say he was small she just said she seen bigger.

Originally Posted by trigger
Those drug induced erections produce an BPEL larger than the BPFSL which I have yet to seen reported here with a natural erection.

Trigger,
Do you mean that you have not heard of a member with a BPEL longer than a BPFSL here at Thunders?
Check out this thread. There are quite a few guys who’s BPEL is longer than there BPFSL. From memory, the conclusion of that thread is that it was probably due to the increase in size of the glans when erect compared to flaccid.

Nice one Goomba. Would have been cool to see our own BPEL and EG surveys included though. I know they are not independently verified by a third-party, but we PE’ers are usually pretty honest. After 600+ votes, I trust our averages. Anyways, great job.. you’ve found a place in my favorites. :D

Wessells involved in his study the difference in fat pads of young and older men. Though he came up with a average of 1.18” fat pad, he says his patients in general were heavier than usual, so I think adding 1” for fat pads overall (except specifically the Wessells study) should keep thing easy and simple for us. Wessells young men showed a fat pad of about .69 for young men, so I’ll go with this for young men. Adding 1/4” to stretched lengths to arrive at erect lengths should also help arrive at bpel measurements.

Condom companies are after the best fit for their condom and would measure onl yup to the fat pad.

Study 1-Wessells———————————-6.26” bpel (5.08 nbp + 1.18 = 6.26)

Study 2-Lifestyles Condoms——————-6.57” bpel (5.88 nbp + .69 = 6.57)

Study 3-Young Italian men———————5.86” bpel (4.92 fnbp + .69 + .25 = 5.86)

Study 4-Israeli men——————————-5.35” bpel

Study 5-Condoms,———————————6.39” bpel (young men nbp 5.70 + .69 = 6.396.11)

Study 6-European men—————————6.36 bpel (5.11 fnbp + 1 + .25 = 6.36)

Study 7-Korean men——————————4.46 bpel (4.21 bpf +.25 = 4.46)

Averages in size order and rounded off:

6.5—-Lifestyles
6.4—-Condoms
6.4—-European
6.3—-Wessells
5.9—-Italian
5.4—-Israeli
4.5—-Korean

I agree that surveys where they take their own measurements aren’t to be trusted, but in cases like sizesurvey he threw out 2% of the top numbers to try and offset that. He gave good instructions and it was a very big survey. The result there was 6.4” , and looking at the results from these 7 studies, his result merits notice. These 7 studies and even sizesurvey’s result does throw a lot of question on Kinsey. It makes me wonder if Kinsey himself could be trusted. Thunder’s charts show an average of 6.25, and the data base at Thunder’s shows 6.5. Smaller guys in general may come here, but the way we measure offsets it to possibly balance things back out. If there is a difference in race, then results of all surveys are dependent on which group(s) are surveyed and until surveys have been done in a completely comprehensive way we will only have estimates, correct or incorrect, to go by.

Thunder’s shows 8”bpel to be between 3.5 %(last time I looked) and Kinsey was showing 7.5%. Sizesurvey is close to agreeing with Kinsey on this. It makes sense to me that not as many 8”bpel guys will find Thunder’s and so the chart at Thunder’s doesn’t represent the general population. On the other hand, men reporting into surveys like Kinsey and sizesurvey will have exaggerated and not represent the general population accurately. Based on these observations, I believe it is reasonable to believe the truth is somewhere between 3.5% and 7.5%. I think 5% would be a reasonable guide to go by for 8” bpel and longer. I still believe that long guys will get around at least twice as much in general. I’ve read this before also. This makes these guys seem like 10% instead of 5%.

Whew! This is exhausting.

Originally Posted by Andrew69
Trigger,
Do you mean that you have not heard of a member with a BPEL longer than a BPFSL here at Thunders?
Check out this thread. There are quite a few guys who’s BPEL is longer than there BPFSL. From memory, the conclusion of that thread is that it was probably due to the increase in size of the glans when erect compared to flaccid.

I read that thread and figure they are measuring wrong as a few people mentioned in it. The head will expand so you must grab by the actual glans to factor this in. If I grab behind the glans I have a measurement of about the same, but gain 1/2” doing it properly. I know many warn against it, but I have always done my manual stretching by the glans and have never lost any sensation. It makes perfect sense that FSL is longer than EL, you can pull with more pressure than blood will cause, and when it is inflated you will loose some length to the width just like you can stretch a balloon further than you can blow one up.

The lifestyles study is seriously flawed. I think it was 25% of people who pulled out at the last minute when they saw that it was 2 female nurses going to do the measurements, was it guys with big dicks backing out or guys with small ones? I think we all know the answer…
I think the Wessels only had 80 men with drug induced erections, I have heard reports of larger viagra erections. There is no mention of how the men became involved in most of these surveys which is VERY important.

Heres a poll I started How small would you have to be to refuse to take part in a size survey?

I wouldn’t enter a strongman contest in a fairground for fear of embarrassment. I am sure if you asked for volunteers in a girls school to measure average weight it would end up below the real average as fat girls would not take part and slim ones would be more than happy.

I think the Italian soldier one is still the best as I presume they were obligated to take part so even small guys had to take part. Being soldiers they should be fit with small fat pads.


The "average size" is usually over-estimated. Small guys don't take part in surveys and big guys jump at the chance.

Girl claims she had a huge ex? Stick a spider in the bathroom or a mouse in the kitchen and when she comes out screaming ask her how big the spider/mouse was...

I only have one thing to add here, and that is that study 4 looked at men with ED (gah! I HATE that acronym!) and so their size may have atrophied from disuse.

Originally Posted by beenthere
Averages in size order and rounded off:

6.5—-Lifestyles
6.4—-Condoms
6.4—-European
6.3—-Wessells
5.9—-Italian
5.4—-Israeli
4.5—-Korean

I agree that surveys where they take their own measurements aren’t to be trusted, but in cases like sizesurvey he threw out 2% of the top numbers to try and offset that. He gave good instructions and it was a very big survey. The result there was 6.4” , and looking at the results from these 7 studies, his result merits notice. These 7 studies and even sizesurvey’s result does throw a lot of question on Kinsey. It makes me wonder if Kinsey himself could be trusted. Thunder’s charts show an average of 6.25, and the data base at Thunder’s shows 6.5. Smaller guys in general may come here, but the way we measure offsets it to possibly balance things back out. If there is a difference in race, then results of all surveys are dependent on which group(s) are surveyed and until surveys have been done in a completely comprehensive way we will only have estimates, correct or incorrect, to go by.

Thunder’s shows 8”bpel to be between 3.5 %(last time I looked) and Kinsey was showing 7.5%. Sizesurvey is close to agreeing with Kinsey on this. It makes sense to me that not as many 8”bpel guys will find Thunder’s and so the chart at Thunder’s doesn’t represent the general population. On the other hand, men reporting into surveys like Kinsey and sizesurvey will have exaggerated and not represent the general population accurately. Based on these observations, I believe it is reasonable to believe the truth is somewhere between 3.5% and 7.5%. I think 5% would be a reasonable guide to go by for 8” bpel and longer. I still believe that long guys will get around at least twice as much in general. I’ve read this before also. This makes these guys seem like 10% instead of 5%.

Whew! This is exhausting.

Nice post beenthere, really helps put things in perspective. :up:

Thanks for the interesting comments, everyone.

Quote
You don’t mind if I pass this post along to another forum (non-pe), do you? This is great info and I’d like to share it, but I don’t want to without your permission.
Ulcaster,
Feel free to post it in any forum, PE or non-PE. Thanks for asking :) .

Quote
Those drug induced erections produce an BPEL larger than the BPFSL which I have yet to seen reported here with a natural erection.
Trigger,
I suspect it’s simply a matter of the doctors not yanking the shit out of the subjects’ penises, as we likely do when measuring FSL. By the same token PEers’ erect measurements might be a smidgen bigger than a doctor would measure, since we are sure to push the erection down to exactly 90 degrees and we cram the ruler way into the bone, etc…

Quote
But, if you ever want a non biased view of dick size, go look at nudist pictures. They are never erect, but most guys are only packin’ 2-3 inches flacid.
Track_Star,
Absolutely! I noticed the same thing when at a nude beach in Hawaii.

Quote
Would have been cool to see our own BPEL and EG surveys included though. I know they are not independently verified by a third-party, but we PE’ers are usually pretty honest. After 600+ votes, I trust our averages.
Stevie,
I didn’t mention our survey because a PE forum may tend to skew toward smaller penises — doesn’t seem like a random sample. But yes, our average is somewhere around 6” BP, right? Similar to the medical studies’ averages, indeed.

Quote
Averages in size order and rounded off:

6.5—-Lifestyles
6.4—-Condoms
6.4—-European
6.3—-Wessells
5.9—-Italian
5.4—-Israeli
4.5—-Korean

Beenthere,
Excellent job there. I agree with your assumptions and the final list you came up with for BPEL. Taking into account Metal Ed’s point that the Israeli men’s penises may have atrophied, I think we have superb convergent evidence for an average BPEL of 5.9 to 6.5. The Korean figure may reflect differences in genetics or in nutrition.

Quote
I think the Italian soldier one is still the best as I presume they were obligated to take part so even small guys had to take part.
Trigger,
I agree with you about the self-selection bias present in most of these medical studies. I didn’t go into that because I wanted to keep my post short and not overstate my case, but yes — I’d also say that the Italian figure is the best of the bunch, suggesting that 6” BPEL is a pretty definitive answer to the “what’s average?” question.

Originally Posted by Para-Goomba
If we look at the objective data instead, the average erect penis length appears to be no greater than 5.5 - 6.5” BP — and may even be smaller.

Disclaimer: I am not trying to suggest that enormous penises do not exist. They do — and some men are born with them. But for those who were not born with a huge one, and who instead aim to build one through PE, I think it’s important to establish a reasonable standard of what “average” is, so that size-paranoia does not continue to haunt them even after they have reached a truly large size.


Para,
I think the sad thing is, this whole area of study is shrouded in ambiguity. Bone-pressed, non-bone-pressed; personnel-measured, self-measured; girth midshaft, girth at thickest point; racial & ethnic variations, age, the “types” of guys who enter these studies, etc., etc., etc.

I’ve never claimed to have the “definitive answer,” nor am I convinced that the studies you’ve presented “prove” anything. In the first place, any national study (Israeli, British, Korean, etc.) is going to give a skewed picture of the “average man” - unless, of course, you’ve compiled these studies from about 170 countries.

Also, I agree that self-measure studies invite exaggeration; however, most men are not going to be at 110% wood when a stranger (especially another man) is standing there impatiently, ruler in hand. I’d be damn lucky to get it to 70%, if that - without feeling “gay” (no offense to gays at all, it’s just that I’m not gay). It’s also an unususal situation if the researcher is a women. To me, it would certainly not be a “sexual” encounter: neither of you are there for social reasons, she won’t be “touching” you or trying to turn you on, and you both know that sex ain’t gonna happen. To me, I would feel as self-conscious as if I was pulling down the back of my pants so a nurse could jab a needle into my ass cheek. So, self-measure invites exaggeration; 2nd party measurements discourage full erection (a catch-22, to be sure).

And I have to wonder about that Durex condom study taken at the Mexican resort - about 300 white college guys. Probably many of them were toasted (and possibly suffering from “beer dick”). They were also standing around, waiting to enter the tent to be measured; no doubt they under pressure, and were probably drinking as they waited their turn. I think it’s a bit over-optimistic to think these guys were all being measured at 100%. And even the slightest deflation can knock 1/4”, 3/8” even 1/2” off of your measurement.

I just think it’s a bit self-deluding to think that a vast number of men out there are only around 5” BP; whereas the big cocks are as rarely seen as Halley’s Comet. I asked the question I suggest young men “Don’t Ask” - back when I was 21, of my future wife. Now, I was only the 3rd guy she’d ever been with (she had just turned 20 and had dated a guy earlier for 3 years). Anyway, it came up in a very casual way; I played it very cool, presented a mostly disinterested demeanor. At the time I was 6.5” - mostly NBP, or a very mild BP - and I was very ripped, so my fat pad was minimal; and my BP would’ve been very mild, as I would’ve considered a deep press “cheating”).

Anyway, her “report” was that I was thicker than both - :) - at 5.25” midshaft, about 5.6-5.7 base. Lengthwise, one was “about an inch longer” and the other was “about an inch shorter.” So, out of having been with just 3 guys, she had a 5.5”, 6.5” and 7.5” - and I’d assume that’s a very mild BP. So, she caught up to a 7.5” with only her 2nd guy ever. Now, she didn’t venture any numbers or claim any measurements; she was using her hand as a guide - simply & honestly - and just said, very matter of fact: “so-and-so was about an inch shorter than you and so-and-so was about an inch longer - but his thing bent to the side, I felt bad for him. But you’re definitely thicker than both of them.” Certainly didn’t feel that she was fucking with me in any way.

Her sister, who is very unlike her in every way, was very sexually active (ahem….anyway). She told her mother about 2 different guys she was with that she absolutely could not have sex with - without the aid of Vaseline. And that nasty girl had her own lingo for a “good date” - a “2-hander.” It means the obvious - that she could place one hand above another and still have her top hand filled with dick. By her account, she had many 2-handers. Again, no claims of inches or cms, just a very direct observation based on tangible evidence - her hands.

Kinsey stated that the most common size was 6” (NBP), I do tend to believe that’s about as accurate as anything we’ve come across. And most of the studies you’ve cited contained only about 55-300 subjects; most were only about 100; 1 study examined over 3,000 men.

From all that I’ve read over the years, and including statements from buddies of mine who seemed honest about their size, as well as the comments of women friends, I do believe:
1) The vast majority of men are between 5.5-6.5” NBP (a huge number of men).
2) Huge dicks are statistically rare, but not as rare as many tend to believe, perhaps, and
3) Women definitely, without question, prefer a big dick over a small dick.

That 3rd statement does not pertain simply to “size queens,” nor does it imply in any way that women go looking for a future mate with ruler in hand - it simply means what it says: Women prefer a big dick over a small dick.

And the hung men do have an edge in this game because of far greater pleasure potential; and, as Captn has said, Most women do not have to be convinced of this.

Thanks for all of the info, though. I enjoy reading that type of stuff.

- w a d

Top
Similar Threads 
ThreadStarterForumRepliesLast Post
CNN's view of average penis size and making it bigger!regularwhiteguyPenis Enlargement18907-16-2012 03:16 PM
true average size?triggerPenis Enlargement3811-15-2010 02:43 AM
average penis size of Spanish men...who boast of being Latin LoversGuiriPenis Enlargement2406-09-2010 07:24 AM
Condom size is too large for average penisbeowulfPenis Enlargement3201-04-2010 10:05 PM

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:34 AM.