For 2.5 inches what method is most aesthetically pleasing?
They are both average proportion. I am 170cm with 175 wingspan
1:1 more or less.
Quote from: billsmafia on May 28, 2021, 08:57:39 AM1:1 more or less.
You mean 8:10? That would be normal. Tibias are shorter.
At that height and for your goal I’d argue for femurs.
Yes 8:10. Just concerned how I will look nkd. Also from side view bending. If you see some diarys, person looks fine from front but when bending sideway it looks awkward becus the knee is so low in height.
Easier to hide with clothes on but without no clothes it could look weird in my opinion.
Unless you have a deformity on the tibia that would be beneficial to get fixed (ie rotation deformity, severe bowlegs), do femur. It is way easier and looks way better. Your legs don't even look long after 2.5 inches in the femur, nobody can tell where the extra height is coming from. No girl has ever mentioned anything about my legs looking long nked post-op.
Good news, I remeasured the wingspan and it is at almost 5 foot 10!
Quote from: billsmafia on June 01, 2021, 01:55:24 AMGood news, I remeasured the wingspan and it is at almost 5 foot 10!
Depending on raw arm length (since wingspan includes shoulders) you’re good for at least 5’10 and up to 6’0 if you have long arms.
Honest i’d be just happy with 5 foot 9. Right at the average. Which is why if I’m just going for 5 to 6 cm I’m considering tibia. Better aesthetic wise, espeically external, just get it done and leave with no worry for 1 year rod removal followup. Femur I’m considering for lower rates of complication. Howverr it’s unlikely that I would shoot for the full 8cm+.
I can afford either and from the US too.
Also are tibias less painful than femur? I hear different opinions
You must be logged in to post a reply.