(CQ) Cock Quotient

Discussion in 'Sex With a Large Penis' started by basque9, Jun 27, 2007.

  1. basque9

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,358
    Albums:
    14
    Likes Received:
    40,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore (MD, US)
    It occurs to me that there should be a numeric measurement of cock length which similar to IQ (intelligence quotient) should facilitate quick comparison between and among individuals! Irrespective of whether measured in the English or metric system, cocks of the same length would have the same ratio to designate size.
    I propose that the CQ (cock quotient) be established. It is proposed as the ratio obtained by dividing your cock length in inches or centimeters by the average length of cocks expressed in inches or centimeters and multiplying that ratio by 100.
    I use myself as an example: 9.30 inches length./. 5.80 inches average=
    1.60 x 100 = 160 CQ.
    A European with an identical length cock would do the following calculation: 23.62 c length./. 14.73 c avg= 1.60 X 100 = 160 CQ

    Do you like this idea?
    Would you adopt this cock quotient if it became accepted practice?
    What is your CQ?
     
    Allan S. likes this.
  2. avg_joe

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,284
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    It sounds like error proof test calculations from my physics and chemistry labs. LMAO !!!
     
  3. basque9

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,358
    Albums:
    14
    Likes Received:
    40,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore (MD, US)
    Well, I gather that is not exactly an endorsement! LMAO:smile:
     
    Allan S. likes this.
  4. Drago

    Drago New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Just left of nowhere (Winnipeg)
    lol wth I'll participate...

    my "CQ" accoring to the formula would be 129 (129.310344827586206896555172413793 to be percise :p)
     
  5. Biggie77

    Biggie77 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2006
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    0
    164 here

    Shouldn't there be a valuation including girth. I'm girthy so I want it included dammit! :mad::tongue:
     
  6. Duality

    Duality New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Messages:
    135
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Where you live
    :confused13:

    I think I'll just stick with, "yeah... I'm kinda big down there..." :biggrin1:
     
  7. basque9

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,358
    Albums:
    14
    Likes Received:
    40,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore (MD, US)
    Now that you mention it, Biggie, there is no reason why there could not be an accompanying girth quotient..just as in blood pressure measurements, two values are given ! You , for example, might have a CQ of 164 over 175, where the 175 might represent your girth quotient . Definitely adds information to the model as originally proposed! Yes, I like it guy!:smile: :smile:
     
    Allan S. likes this.
  8. prepky

    prepky New Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    494
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    kentucky
    137.93 here
     
  9. nudeyorker

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    42,918
    Likes Received:
    36
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC/Honolulu
    This involves math...forget it, I'll just keep saying above average!
     
  10. meatpackingbubba

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    3,408
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    4,072
    Gender:
    Male
    Verified:
    Photo
    A cock quotient may make some sense but only if it is comparing total mass. This can be approximated for a penis by using the calculation use to obtain the volume of a cylinder.

    For those of you that care, the formula is as follows:

    pi (3.1415) times the radius squared, times the length.

    With regard to the penis, one first needs to determine the AVERAGE radius of the penis. Measure girth in three places....the head, mid shaft, and base. Add these three measurements together and divide by three to get the AVERAGE girth. Then divide that result by pi (3.1415) to obtain the average diameter, then divide the diameter by two to get the average radius. For instance, if your dick is 5" at the head, 5.5" mid shaft, and 6" at the base, you have an average girth of 5.5", an average diameter of 1.75", and an average radius of .875".

    The radius is then squared (in our example, .875 times .875 equals .765) and then multiplied by pi to obtain the surface area of a circle. The surface area of a circle multiplied by height (length) gives a result representing the volume of a cylinder.

    A small penis (5" long and 4" around) is only 6 cubic inches. An average penis (6" long and 5" around) is twice that size at about 12 cubic inches. A medium penis (7 long and 5.5" around) is about 17 cubic inches. A large penis (8" long and 6" around) is twice as big as average and four times larger than small at about 23 cubic inches. A horse-hung penis (10" long and 7" around) is about 39 cubic inches.

    So now we have some real means to gauge true relative size. Horse hung is only twice as long as small penis, but over SIX TIMES LARGER by volume. Length is important, as are aestheticly pleasing proportions, but it is girth that packs the volume on.

    Now....go ye forth and calculate. Report your numbers here.

    By the way...Bubba Jr weighs in at about 27 cubic inches.
     
  11. basque9

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,358
    Albums:
    14
    Likes Received:
    40,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore (MD, US)
     
    Allan S. likes this.
  12. Aplus

    Aplus New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    554
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ohio
    While I find things like these interesting, I'm not sure what true purpose they serve. Is it to find out who is really bigger or biggest, or do they have some true real life or scientific meaning. Seems to really de-value those who are less hung or girthy. Can't just be about bragging rights can it, or is it about finding the true measure, which conventional measurements can miss?
     
  13. meatpackingbubba

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    3,408
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    4,072
    Gender:
    Male
    Verified:
    Photo
    LOL....both.

    In response to Donkey....I am not sure what you mean about comparing between different systems, all I know is that the volume method certainly is the best for taking all things size-wise into account. You are an example....this method gives you adequate credit for your horse-girth, making your dick easily equivilant in total volume to a 10 or even 12 incher of less girth.

    So, we can gauge size by total mass. The remaining question then is proportions. A dick too long for its girth become a pencil dick even if it is 10 inches or longer, while a dick with very big girth but inadequate length is usually not particulary attractive and may not even be that fuctional.
     
  14. basque9

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,358
    Albums:
    14
    Likes Received:
    40,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore (MD, US)
    If you read back over my proposal for CQ, you will see that a 100CQ ( the CQ of an average sized cock) is the same length in both the Metric and English systems of meaurement...I devised it that way! In my case a CQ of 160 is exactly the same length as a cock of 160CQ, for example in Paris. I thought since it gave immediate comparative results irrespective of system of measurement it could be used as a universal measure of cock length! It was later suggested that girth should have a quotient and that works equally easily to compare between English and Metric systems. However, it would require two CQ's to express both length and girth components.
    Using volume as the comparative measure would work equally as well : the volume of an average sized cock would be designated as 100CQ, the formula I devised would be employed and in my case my CQ would become
    approximalely 342 ( I did not actually calculate it but estimated from your original posting).In the same way your CQ would become 225 . The measure would not be about bragging rights...it would be the first measure I know which allows direct comparison between cocks evaluated in either measurement system(English or Metric)!:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:
     
    Allan S. likes this.
  15. sykray

    sykray Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    104
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chon Buri (TH)
    If you will excuse my pedantry. First, we have to determine an agreed mean erect penile length. I believe it to be less than 5.8 and more like 5.3 or 5.4

    To make true relative comparisons, we also need to know the standard deviation of the length of penis - how much variation there is in the population around the mean.

    68% of men would have erections between one standard deviation below the mean to one standard deviation above the mean. This would be seen as the average range. In IQ terms this is 85 to 115.

    Without knowledge of the SD we would not, in fact know whether a CQ of 140 is above average, well above average or bloody incredible.
     
  16. 1kmb1

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Messages:
    790
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    15
    Gender:
    Male
    Verified:
    Photo
    no thank you
     
  17. basque9

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,358
    Albums:
    14
    Likes Received:
    40,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore (MD, US)
     
    Allan S. likes this.
  18. meatpackingbubba

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    3,408
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    4,072
    Gender:
    Male
    Verified:
    Photo
    Donkeyboy:

    The standard deviation for penis length is approximately .80" and for penis girth it is approximately .50".

    As to your point about the universality of the CQ, that does not change, but instead of using length as the marker we use total mass (volume) instead. So, YOUR MASS divided by AVERAGE MASS would result in a Cock Mass Quotient rather than a Cock Length Quotient. The resulting quotient would be the same whether calculated in cubic centimeters or cubic inches because it is measuring a relationship between two number, your penis size versus average.

    Incidentally, the average dick is about 11 cubic inches or 28 cubic centimeters.

    Now, go ye forth and calculate.
     
  19. basque9

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,358
    Albums:
    14
    Likes Received:
    40,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore (MD, US)
     
    Allan S. likes this.
  20. basque9

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,358
    Albums:
    14
    Likes Received:
    40,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore (MD, US)
    It is not really essential to understand or even know the standard deviation of cock mass in order to get meaningful comparisons among cocks as the user immediately recognizes that a 100CQ is average and that a 245 CQ is 2.45 times as large as average and that a 373 CQ is 3.45 times as large as average! Makes perfect sense to me! As to bragging rights..sure why not Bubba has a 245 CQ cock..sounds damned impressive to me! LOL :smile: :smile: :smile: Donkey[/quote]


    I goofed slightly above when I said a 373 CQ is 3.45 times.....I meant to say is 3.73 times as large as average..was hurrying, I guess!
     
    Allan S. likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted