Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ideal Measurements (Chest, Upper Arm, Legs, Calves, Neck)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ideal Measurements (Chest, Upper Arm, Legs, Calves, Neck)

    So what are the ideal body measurements?

    Greco Roman Ideal Proportions / Measurements:
    This tool is interesting:
    http://www.fitness.com/tools/greek_proportions/

    Based on my 7" wrist I get these results:
    Your ideal body measurements are:
    Chest Size: 45.5
    Forearm Size: 13.2
    Waist Size: 31.9
    Thigh Size: 24.1
    Hip Size: 38.7
    Calf Size: 15.5
    Biceps Size: 16.4
    Neck Size: 16.8


    it will give you your 'greek' ideal body measurements / proportions. In general, these measures are 'small' based on present day body-building standards.

    Steve Reeve's Ideal Measurements
    Here's another ideal which I found fascinating:
    http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/drobson207.htm

    The best part is where he talks about "The Steve Reeves Ideal Body Measurement". Steve Reeves gives some ideal bodyweight numbers, but I have to say he's wrong on those bodyweight numbers. At 5'10" 185lbs I was built with near perfect symmetry, and I was nowhere near 18" arms, neck, and calves (his ideal). Currently, my arms, neck, and calves are all over 16" but less than 17" (my arms are the biggest, followed by my neck, then calves). I believe at 5'10" I couldn't reach those numbers with anything less than 200lbs. Regardless, I found his other ideal measurements interesting. In fact, most natural bodybuilders in our present day seem to strive for these ideals.

    Steve Reeves Ultra-Symmetrical Physique Ratios
    Arm size = 252% of Wrist size
    Calf size = 192% of Ankle size
    Neck Size = 79% of Head size
    Chest Size = 148% of Pelvis size
    Waist size = 86% of Pelvis size
    Thigh size = 175% of Knee size

    For the record, Steve Reeves measurement were:
    Arms: 18.5
    Calves: 18.5
    Neck: 18.5
    Thighs: 27
    Chest: 54
    Waist: 30

    (source: see link above, also supposedly he weighed 210lbs with these measures)

    Here are my results based on these ratios:

    My Ideal Measurements (an example):
    Arms 18 (based on 7 wrist)
    Calf 18 (based on 9.5 ankle)
    Neck 18 (based on 23 head)
    Chest 47 (based on guess of 32 pelvis, but im not sure)
    Waist 28 (based on guess of 32 pelvis, but im not sure)
    Thigh 27 (based on 15.5 knee)
    Forearms 14 (I hear 14 forearm / 18 arms are 'ideal')

    I don't know how to measure my pelvis, so I worked backwards to my lowest waist size ever to come up with a number. At 4.5% bodyfat I had a 28" waist, so thats how I came up with that number. It does seem ridiculous that to have ideal legs they must be almost the same size as my waist. One of my 'ideal' measures doesn't seem to match a ratio that reeves likes. Steve Reeves says having a chest exactly twice the size of each leg is ideal. This might be because I don't know how to measure my pelvis.

    As a sidenote, although steve reeves claims he was 6'1" some people that met him say he couldn't be taller than 6' 1/2".

    Anyway, I haven't tried to gain size in a long time; I was pretty satisfied with my size in college, but after reading up on bodybuilding subjects lately I have started thinking it would be nice to gain some more mass. I have never been interested in looking like the freakishly proportioned bodybuilders we see these days, but it would be nice to reach some kind of 'ideal'. Even if I don't reach what I consider "perfect proportions" I think it's useful to have goals. Although getting my waist back down to 28" might be difficult or impossible, perhaps 29" or 30" is within reason.

    Anyway, what do you guys think the 'perfect' body proportions are? Do you like steeve reeves or the grecian ideal, or do you think something else is more ideal?
    blink2000
    Senior Member
    Last edited by blink2000; 10-10-2010, 06:41 PM.
    My progress journal / useful PE links

  • #2
    Very interesting to think of what an "ideal" is. We have the same wrist diameter Blink (7") and so our Grecian Ideal is the same:

    Grecian:
    Chest Size: 45.5
    Forearm Size: 13.2
    Waist Size: 31.9
    Thigh Size: 24.1
    Hip Size: 38.7
    Calf Size: 15.5
    Biceps Size: 16.4
    Neck Size: 16.8

    Steve Reeves "Ideal":
    Chest: 49
    Waist: 28
    Thigh: 24
    Calf: 16
    Arms : 18
    Neck: 18

    My measurements:
    Chest: 40
    Waist: 30
    Thigh: 21.5
    Calf: 15
    Arms: 14
    Neck: 16

    At 5'10" I'm 165 (not the 185 ideal according to Steve) with a body fat percentage around 10% (currently).
    A 49" chest with a 28" waist would definitely not be "proportional." I would say Grecian seems more "ideal"...but I guess it's relative. I'd want an ideal that is BOTH functional and aesthetically pleasing. I wonder of Steve's are more aesthetic based? I can't imagine adding 4" in my biceps...

    Good post blink...
    STATS:
    Start (Aug '10) -- BPEL 6" x 6" -- BPFSL 5.75" x 3.5"

    GOAL:
    BPEL 7.5" x 6.5"
    :rolleyes:

    Comment


    • #3
      Strength training thickens the waist, so wasp waists are not functional in that sense. Most of these measures might be a lot smaller than bodybuilding, but they would be very hard to achieve natural. If you look at pre ww2 bodybuilders, the best ones might have been around this size.

      Comment


      • #4
        I used to get big compliments from girls for having an extreme "V" shaped upper-body. I miss those days sometimes... but hey, there's no reason I can't get back there. If I can't get low enough bodyfat, I suppose I could make up for it with a bigger chest, and bigger arms. I have started thinking I want to reach more ideal body proportions. This is why I did that research on the perfect body proportions / measurements.

        Some bodybuilders can have a relative wasp waist, take a look at this:
        arnold schwarzenegger: "At his bodybuilding peak his chest was 57", waist 34", biceps 22", thighs 28―", calves 20", and his competition weight was 235 lbs (260 lbs off-season)." http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000216/bio

        Or is that different from what you mean by a 'wasp' waist?
        blink2000
        Senior Member
        Last edited by blink2000; 10-11-2010, 05:25 AM.
        My progress journal / useful PE links

        Comment


        • #5
          Does anyone else have more thoughts on this? Are these good ideal measurements for a man (Neck, Waist, Chest, Arms, Legs, etc)?
          My progress journal / useful PE links

          Comment


          • #6
            Arnold was 270 pounds "blnk 2000" and those measurments you gave dont seem accurate, 57 inch chest? body builders these days are much bigger than arnold and even they are not much bigger than 57 inch chest.

            If you want good proportion then, it is, ideal size depends on your size and height.

            Comment


            • #7
              Some of the old bodybuilders did have a thin waist. Look at strongmen and powerlifters etc and you won't see many though. Strength is not a requirment for bodybuilding.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by tamzatank View Post
                Arnold was 270 pounds "blnk 2000" and those measurments you gave dont seem accurate, 57 inch chest? body builders these days are much bigger than arnold and even they are not much bigger than 57 inch chest.

                If you want good proportion then, it is, ideal size depends on your size and height.
                Arnold had the best physic of all time.Well of course the modern BB will be bigger but not one them can compare to arnold

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sidewinder.a7x View Post
                  Arnold had the best physic of all time.Well of course the modern BB will be bigger but not one them can compare to arnold
                  Agreed, in Arnold's era they still adhered to the classical proportions which is why people will always look at the black & white photos of him & aspire to it.

                  I think it is the GH that the current BB's take that gives them turtle stomach & a lot of them do not seem able to avoid Gyno in the same way Arnold et al did, presumably because they take much more androgenic steroids & in higher amounts.

                  I think they should change the rules slightly to push towards a more aesthetically pleasing physique - I doubt it will happen though.
                  Vulcan
                  7.25 (start July 2009)>>>>>>8.125"BPEL (current)
                  5.25 (start July 2009)>>>>>>5.75"EG (current)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yes, I was looking at steve reeves as an 'ultimate' example of what might be possible without steroid use (he had 18.5 arms, neck, calves, 56 chest, 30 waist). I have never used any chemicals (nor do I want to).

                    Based on that, at least for me personally, I think 18" Arms, Neck, Calves, 52" chest, and 28" legs are all possible for me. My lowest waist size was less than 28" (or maybe less!-- that was just the pant size I wore, and as I recall, they were loose!). In fact, my waist size may have been as low as 26" while I had a 43" chest (at 4.5% bodyfat). Anyway, a 30" or 29" waist is much more achievable for me (I do think I'm bigger now and with more muscle mass that waist size is no longer possible). (my arms, neck and calves are all over 16" and my legs are 25.5 and my chest is about 47--i'm not chiseled yet, but I'm sure I can maintain that size even while I lose weight.. I do think 17" on my arms, neck, and calves are all easily within reach...)

                    Back to the main topic... I think guys that are too huge don't look good. Arnold (as Vulcan mentioned) kept classical proportions--and that's why he looked awesome, and that's why people aspire to look like him. The Bodybuilders in our day simply look freaky--it's not attractive. My question I guess is, what looks 'good'. Do 20" arms look good on a 5'8" guy? How about 22" arms on a 5'6" guy? I guess more than proportions I wonder what people think is 'ideal'.
                    blink2000
                    Senior Member
                    Last edited by blink2000; 10-13-2010, 12:02 PM.
                    My progress journal / useful PE links

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      everyone is different 16in arms on 2 different people will look nothing alike.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I would not say Arnold had classic prportions.
                        Frank Zane is the obvious choice for classsic physic in modern times. Bodybuilding has gone backwards ever since his time, he was probably the ultimate expression of the style.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Pegasus View Post
                          I would not say Arnold had classic prportions.
                          Frank Zane is the obvious choice for classsic physic in modern times. Bodybuilding has gone backwards ever since his time, he was probably the ultimate expression of the style.
                          Yeah, many say classic physiques died after the 40's or 50's.

                          Here's a whole blog on just classic physiques vs. modern day bodybuilding: http://classicphysiquebuilder.blogspot.com/search/label/Classic%20Physique%20Ideal

                          The general idea is that bodybuilders no longer look healthy or attractive; so people say that's why the golden age is over...

                          This is pretty interesting too:
                          http://www.sideshowcollectors.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39058

                          It shows about 20 guys (including arnold) saying they looked up to steve reeves growing up. The article says that a lot of the physiques we see in comic books were based on steve reeves as well. Although steeve reeves had greek proportions, if you look at his measurements, he's probably a little bigger than what we might consider typical greek proportions. The irony of all that is he looks tiny compared to modern day muscle freaks.
                          My progress journal / useful PE links

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I have only been doing the convict conditioning for 1 week but I can already see a change in how I look & feel.

                            I think it will make a persons body look how they are meant to look, I am prepared to accept whatever proportions it gives me.
                            Vulcan
                            7.25 (start July 2009)>>>>>>8.125"BPEL (current)
                            5.25 (start July 2009)>>>>>>5.75"EG (current)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              There are many ways of definig classical, but if you think in historical terms, the classical male body would be that of the greek ideal and the aureal proportion. Just look at classical greek statues and you will see what I mean. For those who have Convict Conditioning, Wade talks about this and even shows two photos of greek statues in the book. Itīs very deifferent from today bodybuilding standards. No small waist, no huge pecs and a very balanced torso. If you think in that way, Eugene Sandow have the most perfect physique, the guy looks like a greek statue. Personally, I donīt like the bodybuilder look, even Arnold I think is to big and weird, but thatīs just a matter of personal taste. And of course, whatīs considered beautiful varies with time and culture.

                              I was reading somewhere how guys like Sandow trained, they used lots of bodyweight exercises (just like Wade says, and thats one of the reasons I like CC so much ), and they didnīt do Squats nor Bench Press. Instead, they did lots of overhead presses, like the Bent press and the military press. Pavel Tsatsouline talks about this in his books, but thereīs lots of thing on the internet on how oldtime strongman trained. Thereīs even a book only about this subject.

                              Iīve included a photo comparing Arnold and Sandow, its from this site:
                              http://johnbarban.com/a-steroid-free-bodybuilder-you-can-trust-eugen-sandow/

                              So, what do you guys think of it?
                              Attached Files

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X