The Subject of Size

After much reading on the subject of penis size, the most common numbers I’ve seen were approximately:
Average erect girth: 4.84" - 4.97"
Average erect length: 5.88" - 6.16"
*The volume range for the above is between 11-12 cubic inches…
** 5.88 x 4.84 = 10.96 ci
** 6.16 x 4.97 = 12.11 ci

About 3/4 of men are between 4.5 - 5.5" erect girth.
About 83% of all men are between 5-7" erect.

TOP 8%
For Length, 7.25" or better…
For Girth, 5.75" or better.
7.25 x 5.75 = 19.07 ci

So, if your cubic-inch displacement is about 11-12 inches, you are average. If you’re between 12.5 to about 19 cubic inches, you are above the average. Over 19 cubic inches is in the top 8% of penis size.

* - Free penis volume calculators (both standard & metric) are available at http://www.free … .com/waxn~world — if you need help in determining your penile volume.

Interesting study Wad, seems to correlate with most of what I’ve read. One question; are the length measurements BP or NBP?

Actually, assuming the data is accurate, probably more like the top 2%. FAR LESS than 8% of guys would make the top 8% in BOTH dimensions. An exact percentile cannot be extrapolated from the given data, however, because the two variables are only semi-independent, and the strength of the correlation between the two dimensions is unknown.

The guy at http://www.size … com/result.html has a scatter plot where rho=.426 Seems reasonable.

Most surveys, to my suprise, are non-bonepressed. They give directions such as “measure from the tip of the penis to the point where the penis contacts the body,” etc. That would clearly indicate NBP.

Only one survey said to “press the ruler firmly.”

I agree that less than 8% were make the top in BOTH dimensions. It was not presented that way. I simply looked at some numbers in each category - girth & length, respectively - and found the top 8% in each. But 8% is about 2 of every 25 men, and I believe that 2 of ever 25 men are probably at least 5.75” girth OR 7.25” length.

How many of those surveys did have guys measuring and reporting the results themselves?I would definitely subtract 1/2” length and 1/4” from those surveys and that would probably give us the true average. From what I remember there was only one survey performed by a Brazilian doctor where subjects did not measure themselves and average length was slightly over 5”.

I think drive2000 has the right idea. It would be very easy to lie and increase size slightly to protect ones ego. Although I strongly believe in PE, I would suspect that even on this board there are a couple of cases of ‘inflation’.

The problem is that NONE of the self-report surveys that I’ve seen give EXPLICIT instructions (i.e. “Be sure to press the ruler very firmly into fat pad”, OR “Be sure NOT TO press the ruler into fat pad”), and thus leave a lot of room for individual interpretation.

Because of this imprecise wording, I think it’s clear that the numbers reported in all of these surveys are a mixture of BP, NBP, and fudged numbers. Just as a self-esteem preserving measure, it seems likely that most guys would be prone to BP unless instructed explicitly NOT TO. I also think that most guys probably rounded up to the nearest 1/4” increment, rather than down.

It would be nice if someone would do a well controlled survey. All the studies I’ve seen have been very poorly implemented.

The doctor/nurse measured studies are not a lot better. I think such studies are just as likely to underestimate size, as the self-report studies are to over-estimate, because they probably measure a lot of sub-par erections. I doubt many guys could produce a 100% erection for a clinician to measure, unless really hot nurses were giving the guys handjobs and stopping to measure when they looked ready to blow. Somehow I doubt any of the surveys were conducted that way, LOL. I think I read that one doctor injected patients with an erection producing drug, to counter this effect, but he had too small of a sample size, and didn’t state if he measured BP, or NBP.

I know. It looks like you were quoting Kinsey data. I’ve only seen his data presented in charts summarizing each dimension independently, BUT I’ll bet that the raw data is preserved somewhere (i.e. Subject A: L5.75, G5.0, Subject B: L6.5, G5.25…). If so, it could be reinterpreted to chart average volume. I think this probably applies to the other studies as well. Unfortunately, I don’t think any of the studies have released the raw data.

If they weren’t BP than every fat guy would have a small dick and every skinny guy would be bigger and it would screw the test up. They probably don’t measure BBP “blood bone pressed” almost drawing blood we press so hard like most of us but they must be be BP.

I think how they pick the guys is more important than the BP issue. I still reckon we are seeing the average size of “guys who are confident/proud enough to let their erection be measured”. I have said in other threads if I measured the weight of women I think my average would be lower than reality since the fat women wouldnt let me measure them as they are embarassed and self concious, just like guys with small penises.

The Definitive Penis Size Survey | SizeSurvey.com is BP.

The swedish surveys I’ve read are BP.

I read a woman’s post on a swedish community forum in which she said that her brother was a doctor in the UK. He had led a penis size survey there, in which all measurements were BP measurements. The avarage size there was also about 6".

Yes, I agree. Whenever I’ve looked a little deeper into just about every survey I’ve come across, some red flags usually go up. While it’s true that many men will “add a little” when they do it themselves, how does one get a blistering erection with a doctor & nurse impatiently standing there holding a ruler? I sure as hell couldn’t - so my measurement would be understated, probably considerably.
Or you’ll see surveys with very few total subjects, or almost all-white (one had only 17 blacks in it) - so most do stink. Even the Durex Condom survey was done at a vacation resort in Mexico - probably measuring mostly white uppermiddle to upperclass college students. Again, not a very good sampling of the general population.

I think Size’s PE Data Page is fairly accurate. Most guys that post their stats there know the correct way to measure. I’d also assume they don’t overstate their size since most use it as a way to track progress. Here’s an analysis of the data I put together in August. The starting size statistics for the participants with at least two entries coincide with Wadzilla’s results (not 100%, but close). A 5-10% margin or error should be acceptable because we’ll never get 100% accuracy from any survey.