Honestly, if your femurs are already on the longer side compared to your tibias, I’d personally lean more toward tibia lengthening to keep the proportions balanced.
Something like 7–9 cm on the tibias can actually create a more natural overall leg ratio rather than making the femurs look too dominant. I did 8.5 cm myself, and I’m really happy with how the proportions turned out in the end.
A lot of people say tibias are “always a bad idea,” but I don’t think it’s that black and white. It really depends on your starting proportions, flexibility, rehab, and surgeon. If athleticism is important to you, staying balanced proportionally matters too — not just the total height gain.
Quote from: threadspin on May 08, 2026, 06:43:03 PMI seek a 6-7 cm increase 178- 184 or 185. Is quad 4-5cm femur 2cm tibia a good idea? My femurs are already kind of long compared to my tibia. Is doing tibias always a bad idea? Am I better off just doing 6 cm femur, especially in terms of athleticism? Money is not a problem for me.
nothing wrong with doing tibia. femur is just better.
Quote from: ilovecat1991 on May 13, 2026, 05:41:37 PMHonestly, if your femurs are already on the longer side compared to your tibias, I’d personally lean more toward tibia lengthening to keep the proportions balanced.
Something like 7–9 cm on the tibias can actually create a more natural overall leg ratio rather than making the femurs look too dominant. I did 8.5 cm myself, and I’m really happy with how the proportions turned out in the end.
A lot of people say tibias are “always a bad idea,” but I don’t think it’s that black and white. It really depends on your starting proportions, flexibility, rehab, and surgeon. If athleticism is important to you, staying balanced proportionally matters too — not just the total height gain.
8,5 cm on tibias is always a bad idea though.
I’d personally not involve tibias. Just do femurs +7 cm
You must be logged in to post a reply.