Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[gucciSeagull]

Hi, I'm a 30 year old 5'8" (172cm) ectomorph male considering femur limb lengthening to get to 5'11" (180cm). Below is a photo mock of what I would look like with an extra 3". I'm concerned that my proportions would look unnatural due to my already long legs and short torso. (I am also quite skinny and trying to improve my general physical appearance, but that's another story.)

https://imgur.com/MogoYvj

Any thoughts or opinions are very much appreciated as I continue to consider this procedure. Thanks.

[deletedaccount]

Femurs look a bit long but not too bad

[gucciSeagull]

Femurs look a bit long but not too bad

Thanks for the reply! Yeah, not sure I'll be going through the process if the result is "not too bad"

[Sanity]

u have the same problem i had. long tibias but also not short femurs. 3 inches on femurs wont look nice because 2 things: 1 the knee will shift so far down and while bending/walking/sitting wont look aesthetic. 2 the overall leg to body ratio will suffer with 3 inches as u already have long legs. and 3 on tibias wud do the same thing pretty much for leg to body and knee would rise too high (still better aesthetically than lowered knee)

may i suggest considering only 2 on tibias. because doing 2.5 on femurs would still be pretty much having same cons and stil not as aesthetic as 2 on tibias.

This is a tough spot to be in. i was exactly in the same spot as u a year ago. btw i only did 4.5cm (1.8inch) on tibias just because i had very long tibias and femurs for 5'8 height and still my tibias look very long but every1 i have met during my ll agrees that 2 inches on femurs instead would've looked worse.

[gucciSeagull]

u have the same problem i had. long tibias but also not short femurs. 3 inches on femurs wont look nice because 2 things: 1 the knee will shift so far down and while bending/walking/sitting wont look aesthetic. 2 the overall leg to body ratio will suffer with 3 inches as u already have long legs. and 3 on tibias wud do the same thing pretty much for leg to body and knee would rise too high (still better aesthetically than lowered knee)

may i suggest considering only 2 on tibias. because doing 2.5 on femurs would still be pretty much having same cons and stil not as aesthetic as 2 on tibias.

This is a tough spot to be in. i was exactly in the same spot as u a year ago. btw i only did 4.5cm (1.8inch) on tibias just because i had very long tibias and femurs for 5'8 height and still my tibias look very long but every1 i have met during my ll agrees that 2 inches on femurs instead would've looked worse.

Thank you so much for your reply and insight Sanity. I will photoshop another version based on your suggestion and see how that looks. Are you happy with your own results? Is there any functional difference in your legs after you've done the surgery?

Again, really appreciate your feedback!

[Sanity]

i am happy with my result the only disappointing thing is for a5'8 guy i already had long legs so even 4.5 looks like 7.5cm on a normal guy. i do wish i had less in legs and more in spine so i could actually gain more height(pain was bearable for me to turn a few more cm). anyways height trumps proportions anydayso im stil happy.

also on the upside i did really under 12% of lengthening so my functions shouldnt suffer at all which they dont even tho im stil in frames.

[gucciSeagull]

i am happy with my result the only disappointing thing is for a5'8 guy i already had long legs so even 4.5 looks like 7.5cm on a normal guy. i do wish i had less in legs and more in spine so i could actually gain more height(pain was bearable for me to turn a few more cm). anyways height trumps proportions anydayso im stil happy.

also on the upside i did really under 12% of lengthening so my functions shouldnt suffer at all which they dont even tho im stil in frames.

Thanks for your reply again! Good to know you're happy with your experience. Do you know when you'll remove your frames? Do you think your legs were longer than mine? And, sorry, I'm afraid I don't understand, what do you mean 4.5cm looks like 7.5cm on a normal guy? I also don't understand what 12% of lengthening means? Do you mean you increased your original tibia length by 12%?

Again, sorry for the confusion, just want to make sure I understand everything 100%

I've uploaded a new mock of what I would look like with a 2" tibias increase (center) instead of 3" on femurs (right):
https://imgur.com/F7ElOEy

I do tend to agree, the more aesthetically pleasing proportions comes from the tibias (center) lengthening.

If anyone else has any feedback, or advice, I'd love to hear it. Thanks!

[Sanity]

i mean my tibias were prob ~2cm longer than an average guy of 5'8 height. and yes 12% means wat u said. its within very safe limits. even 15% is considered quite safe.

yes thts how i look pretty much length wise, but the legs are more muscular and not so thin so not like that fr sure (calves grow much wider after lengthening is finished)
my frames come of in a couple of weeks and i can alrdy walk perfectly fine dont even need to use hands while going up and down the stairs. balance is also gr8.

legs to torso ratio is very high now, i have sitting height of 90cm (rechecked) and a standing height of 178.5 so that is like 50.5% legs and 49.5% torso which is very high but still within normal human variations for proportions.

edit: to answer ur question yes my tibias were almost as long as urs pretty much) give or take half a cm and my femurs were surely a bit longer