Data req.: Clarifying discrepancy between cylinder size and circumference achieved.
When changing from a larger diameter tube to a smaller diameter tube, 2.25” to 2” my penis circumference (middle shaft erect girth: MSEG) decreased from ~6.25” to 5.8”. On that basis I think that a 2” tube can at max produce a 5.8” girth despite allowing for a max expansion in the tube of 6.28” circumference. The current recommendations used by various sites on pump tube sizing seem wrong.
I think it might be useful to see if we can establish a ratio for the max girth achieved using a given tube diameter, or establish how much extra tube diameter is necessary for a resulting non-pumped girth. Having this information could also clarify what amount of girth expansion is necessary for girth growth, a potentially very useful bit of info for clarifying the mechanisms of PE.
To calculate the max circumference possible for a given tube you multiply the diameter by pi. Pi is ~3.141592654.
I’d like to compare the max girth achieved by various people for a set tube diameter to see if a general rule can be established or the discrepancy is highly variable (which it might be).
I think the following format for info would be useful for quick reading.
Tube diameter: 2”
Max in tube circumference possible: 6.28”
Resulting non-pumped penis circumference MSEG achieved: 5.8”
Resulting circumference / max tube circumference possible: 5.8/6.28 = .92
If no pattern emerges, it might be interesting to ask further questions about penile cross sections (elliptical shape, triangular, or circular), though that might be beyond the scope of this site’s interests for now and I don’t see an immediate application of that information to PE.
Starting: 7"bplx5.2" 2017 (shrunk from disuse)(originally 8"bplx4.5", gained to 9"bplx6")
Current: 9.0"bplx6.125" 2020
Goal: 11.5"bplx7" 2021.