I can agree that it could look kind of odd if you overlengthen too much, but that almost never happens in practice (so far as I've heard). Even with already longer legs, people could get away with 25 cm without looking freakish. Yes, it looks kindly feminizing having those proportions, but there's no other choice to lengthen spine as well for now. Furthermore, if you lengthen above 185+, tall people naturally have high proportion variations and there are plenty of tall people that are like 65% legs. But that requires you to lengthen arms as well in this exceptional case.
No, man, 25 cm is too much, even 20 cm is too much. 16 cm is enough if one is so desperate to squeeze off every cm possible with 2 surgeries (10 cm LON femur and 6 cm LON or external only tibia).
25 cm will not only screw leg-to-arm ratio but also leg-to-torso ratio to a comical degree. Every woman will get turned off immediately once you take off your clothes and reveal your freakish body proportions.
It doesn't have to look perfect and it doesn't even have to look 'natural', it just has to overall make you more attractive than being shorter but with 'better proportions' does.
More height is pretty much always going to be more attractive than better proportions unless you already started at 5ft 10+.
Start at say 5 ft 5, and doing 6 inches to now be a 5ft 11 't-rex' is still much better than only doing 2 inches and 'maintaining a good wingspan ratio' or whatever. No one is saying it's as good as being 5ft 11 naturally but that isn't one of the options on the table, it's either bad proportions, or remain short.
If you already started at 5ft 10+ it's a consideration but that's only because the marginal benefits of extra height will taper off considerably after only a 2 inch gain and past 4 inches isn't a benefit at all.
I agree that when doing double LL at a starting height of at least 5'5 (lowest normal male height) it makes sense to lengthen the upper safe limit (6 inches) in order to become above average height. Strong 180 cm barefoot is low end of tall height (noticeable above average in the west) but nothing special indeed. At least it's not considered average height even if it's marginally higher than average and barely qualifies as a tall height.
Given that I'm hovering between 165-167 cm throughout the day, I need to lengthen 15 cm in order to break that average height barrier and become a bit taller than average. My wingspan is 174-176 cm range (depending how much I stretch). I know that it won't look perfect after 15 cm of double LL but it won't be t-rex level either. My arm length is 73 cm from acromion to middle finger and that's with a 17.5 cm hands which is very small so if I had at least 20 cm hand length my arm length would have been 75.5 cm. Average arm length for 180 cm white man is about 78 cm long so I will have 5 cm shorter arms which is noticeable but not detrimental either.
If I lengthen 10-12 cm, I will stand at exactly average height at 175-177 cm range which is not a failo but is not enough to appear tall with 4 cm Air Maxes for example. At a strong 180 cm another 2, 2.5 cm boost from shoes is enough to appear visibly taller than the average male, especially with long legs from double LL of 15 cm.
Unfortunately, some guys have a really bad starting proportions for such a huge amount of lengthening, i.e. small torso, narrow shoulders, small skull, short and frail arms...
Meck looks tall after he gained muscles in his legs, although his arms are a bit short proportionally for his new height and his long legs. It's miles better than his old height of 163-164 cm indeed, but 16 cm is something that only a few could accomplish with 2 surgeries and is a dangerous goal. At least 14 cm is realistic with 8 cm femur and 6 cm tibia and it's enough IMO.
Author
Topic: I am a 170cm male. (Read 3891 times)