Is there a correlation between length and girth

Just wondering if general the larger the length somebody is the larger girth he will have? Or is there not necessarily a link between length and girth?

Not necessarily one I’d say, you see all kinds of shapes and sizes. Within reason, that is.

I think most people’s inclination is to say “No,” but I do think that an awful lot of long cocks are pretty thick too. They almost have to be to stay stable. Short ones, however, aren’t necessarily automatically thin. I would also assert that there are more short thin cocks than long thin cocks (thin being maybe 4.5” around or less).

No, not necessarily but I agree with thenatural, longer cocks are generally speaking thicker.

The only chart that comes to mind that could be useful for this is Thunder’s ‘PE Data Chart’ link at the bottom of the page. Even though it’s used to keep up with one’s gains, it could also be used to help possibly determine if there is a correlation between length and girth pre - pe. I don’t have the time to manually go through it with pen and paper or I would. If someone knows how to transfer it and set it up in Excel or something that would be great. I’ll go through it at a later time if no one else does, but I hope someone will. I’m interested if there is a connection or not.

is there any chance of getting this moved to the main forum so that there are more views and maybe more people can have the opertunity to put thier knowledge to this question?

Done. Check out the Forum Guidelines too pleas, jelqbeginner :)

There is no correlation in my opinion, as there are a lot of long skinny cocks and a lot of short fat ones too…

I actually think there is a reasonably strong correlation. Bear in mind that ‘correlation’ does not imply a unbreakable rule, just a link between two things. So while someone pointed out that there a lot of long thin ones and a lot of short thin ones, that doesn’t disprove a correlation. What’s relevant is that short/thin is more common than long/thin (as was mentioned). Similarly, long/thick seems more common than short/thin. You hear of 5x4.5 and 8x6 far more often than you do 5x6 and 8x4.5.

Theoretically a correlation is to be expected. For example: erection quality affects both length and girth; the inner penis is thicker towards the base, so as more is exposed (longer penis), the overall girth increases (thicker penis); injury generally causes a decrease in both length and girth; megalophallus increases both length and girth, etc. It’s clear that length and girth are strongly intertwined.

I looked at the first 612 posters’ earliest stats listed in ThunderPlace’s PE Data Site (link located at bottom of page). I stopped at that point since this is as much time as I could put into it at the moment.

————————-<4 G—-4-4.99 G—-4.5-4.99 G—-5-5.49 G—-5.5-5.99 G—-6-6.49 G—-6.5-6.99 G—-7> G

4-4.99 BPEL———-10%—-50%————25%————5%————-10%————0%————0%————-0%
20 posters————-2 ——-10—————5—————-1—————-2—————-0—————0—————-0

5-5.99 BPEL———-4%——17%————47%————26%————-3%————1%————0%————-1/2%
156 posters———-6———27—————74—————41—————-5—————2—————0—————-1

6-6.99 BPEL———-0%——-7%————34%————42%————-13%———-3%————1/3%———-1/3%
268 posters———-0———-18————-91—————113—————35————-9—————1—————-1

7-7.99 BPEL———-0%——-3/4%———12%————33%————-30%———-18%———-5%————-3/4%
132 posters———-0————1————-16—————44—————-39————-24————-7—————-1

8-8.99 BPEL———-0%———0%————0%————17%————-34%———-34%———-10%————-3%
29 posters————0————0—————0—————-5—————-10————-10————-3——————1

9> BPEL—————-0%———0%————0%————-0%————-57%———-14%———-14%————-14%
7 posters—————0————0—————0—————-0—————-4—————1—————1——————1

What follows below is just an estimate, as I merely made marks in the above chart when a length and girth were in a range, and didn’t record precise numbers, which would have taken far more time. For instance, if someone had a 6.375 BPEL and 5.1 Girth, I made one mark in the 6-6.99 BPEL and 5-5.49 Girth row/column intersection.

To get an idea of estimated average correlations, I’m assigning the following (once again, this is not precise but should give a reasonable picture as to the average girth relation differences between the length ranges). It’s clear in the above chart that a correlation exists, but perhaps the following will help clarify it.

<4 G range is assigned an overall 3.75 G estimate
4-4.49 G range is assigned an overall 4.25 G estimate
4.5 -4.99 G range is assigned an overall 4.75 G estimate
5-5.49 G range is assigned an overall 5.25 G estimate
5.5-5.99 G range is assigned an overall 5.75 G estimate
6-6.49 G range is assigned an overall 6.25 G estimate
6.5-6.99 G range is assigned an overall 6.75 G estimate
7> G range is assigned an overall 7.25 G estimate.

From the above assigned girth estimates the following result is arrived at:

BPEL —————-Averaged Girth
4-4.99”———————-4.5”
5-5.99”———————-4.8”
6-6.99”———————-5.1”
7-7.99”———————-5.6”
8-8.99————————6.0”
9>”—————————-6.2”

Perhaps more data could alter this somewhat, but with this strong a connection so far, it’s not looking like it. I’m surprised the correlation is so much.

In the above post, near the top, 4-4.99 G chart heading should read 4-4.49 G. I didn’t spot it in time to edit.

Btw, if anyone were to put the database into a program, hopefully that program can be set up to red flag repeats that can be then be looked at. I was hurrying and still managed to spot about a half dozen same person repeats, where folks had re-entered their exact same measurement stats and dateline under a slightly different name (like a small letter instead of a capital letter, or a number added to the the end of their name). One I just happened to catch was two different names but the exact timeline and measurements listing over a long period of time were duplicated. So there could be a few that got by me.

Thanks for doing the number crunching beenthere, interesting results :)

Yeah, it’s particularly interesting because this is the first data anywhere on this. The topic has come up a few times, and opinion has been split. I had no idea what to think about this topic. There aren’t any polls or studies comparing this. Not even clear anecdotal to latch onto in this particular comparison. Perhaps there is other data somewhere, but I’m not aware of any, other than this thread now. I suddenly found myself a bit taken aback by the result. It just sort of seems unfair that guys that have extra length tend to have extra girth also. Maybe I’ll add more data to this sometime, so that there is more to go by.

Bump

I missed this thread.

I just downloaded the PE Data Site spreadsheet and found a correlation of 0.62 between erect length and erect girth (R-squared = 0.38), pretty strong but not as strong as I’d have expected. One limitation of these data is that several data pairs represent the same dick (growing over time via PE) in many cases.

See the attachment for a scatterplot.