leg-to-body ratio question

Edit Post

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.171790

Hello,

Probably the best research about human body proportions, everyone should check it out if you are interested in such topic.

But there is a thing I cannot be sure of, what kind of a length is used as your "leg length" ?.
My real inseam is 82 cm. So the result is 82/173, which equals to 0.473.

Considering my current values, hypothetically, If I add 7 cm on femurs it's going to be 82+7/173+7 (89/180) = 0.494 which would still be in "normal range" (SD = 0)

But I think i'm calculating it wrong, does anybody know what exactly we should use as the leg length?

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.171790

Edit Post

?

Edit Post

The study has your answer to your own question.

"Total leg length was measured as the height to the trochanter landmark on the hip minus ankle height, which was calculated as the distance from the floor to the lateral malleolus landmark on the ankle. Anatomical leg length is defined as the length of the tibia plus femur [14], so our approach is likely to give a closer approximation of anatomical leg length than does the more common measurement of distance from base of foot to the perineum (crotch) seen in the literature (e.g. [20,27])."

Edit Post

Mine is like 60-61 cm I guess. More than good for 5'11. 6'1 is pushing it but If I get to do LL, I can't just do 1 segment. I'm well proportioned and it makes everything harder.. (I wish i had long tibs..)

Edit Post

Quote from: a on May 01, 2021, 11:24:48 PMI can't just do 1 segment.

y?

Edit Post

As I said, 5'11 is a great height. I'd calmly settle with it by doing 7 cm on femurs.

But unfortunately my leg proportions would look bad. Because I think my tibias are already short. If i do femurs, I also have to do tibias.
and there is no point of doing tibs only, since 178 cm wouldn't make that much of a difference.