Page 1 of 2
1
2
LastLast
  1. #1

    How is it possible that I have 18 inch arms?

    1) I'm not fat.

    2) My arms aren't super muscular.

    I've been measuring my arms (along with chest, waist etc.) for a few months now, and they sit right at 18 inches. I didn't think that was a big deal until I started looking at a lot of body builders who look massive compared to me and they only have 16.5" arms and crap.

    Is it possible I'm measuring my arms completely wrong or something?

  2. #2
    it is quite possible that you are doing it wrong.

    grab something shoulder height and make your arm go slack so there is a slight bend in your elbow and neither your biceps or triceps are engaged. then measure the slice of arm just above where your tricep bulge is.

    make sure you are using a sewing measuring tape as well, construction ones will give skewed results as they are rigid and dont conform to your arm properly.
    Quote Originally Posted by tkjnz
    If memory serves me right, a fox is a female wolf.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Jersovic View Post
    1) I'm not fat.

    2) My arms aren't super muscular.

    I've been measuring my arms (along with chest, waist etc.) for a few months now, and they sit right at 18 inches. I didn't think that was a big deal until I started looking at a lot of body builders who look massive compared to me and they only have 16.5" arms and crap.

    Is it possible I'm measuring my arms completely wrong or something?
    It's possible I suppose, get a crafting tape (not a standard tape measure), make a muscle and measure around the centerish of your bicep.

    Also, there's is no bodybuilder on the planet bragging about 16.5" arms. 16.5 might be big if they have a tiny frame, and I mean tiny, like 5'5, 150 pounds.
    A decent size for an average sized person (5'7-6' tall, 150-190 pounds) that's trying to build muscle is around 21"

    Hulk Hogan always boasted about having 24" 'pythons' (Biceps). I have friends with arms bigger than that, they're 6' tall and 250 pounds and not one bit of it is muscle. Everyone is different.
    Apply blizzards model to any other subscription service,you'd be outraged:
    Netflix adds no new movies for a year, you click a new movie, there's a $5 fee.
    You're in an accident, click your onstar button, but there's an addition $20 fee for them to help.
    You turn on your tv only to find all you get are the infomercial channels. Every other show is pay per view.
    See how dumb that model is?

  4. #4
    Herald of the Titans RoKPaNda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,734
    IIRC when photographed/measured/etc body builders are massively dehydrated so that their muscles stand out more and it gives that impressive look which I imagine could result in smaller arm measurements. Or you could just be measuring wrong.
    Last edited by RoKPaNda; 2012-08-17 at 07:00 AM.

  5. #5
    Dreadlord mludd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    936
    18" (45.7 cm) circumference sounds pretty big. How are you measuring?

    Edit: I'm assuming you're not hitting the gym several times per week and that you're just a regular guy. I don't really know anyone who's not overweight who doesn't lift with upper arms that thick.
    Last edited by mludd; 2012-08-17 at 07:03 AM.
    I am the Kwisatz Haderach

  6. #6
    Scarab Lord Mokoshne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    getting a coffee
    Posts
    4,489
    theres nothing unnatural about 18 inch arms, that is just how god created you.

    you are perfect.
    My weekly podcast can be downloaded here this week we discuss Bill Cosby

  7. #7
    Dreadlord mludd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by Dazzy View Post
    A decent size for an average sized person (5'7-6' tall, 150-190 pounds) that's trying to build muscle is around 21"
    For someone trying to build muscle 21" sounds big, unless they're curlbros...
    I am the Kwisatz Haderach

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by herpecin View Post
    it is quite possible that you are doing it wrong.

    grab something shoulder height and make your arm go slack so there is a slight bend in your elbow and neither your biceps or triceps are engaged. then measure the slice of arm just above where your tricep bulge is.

    make sure you are using a sewing measuring tape as well, construction ones will give skewed results as they are rigid and dont conform to your arm properly.
    I'm pretty sure that I am doing it wrong too, but I am using a measuring tape that came with my sewing machine, lol. (I only have a sewing machine for my ghillie suit.)

    And I think I'm doing it in the area you're describing (it's kind of hard to find a tricep bulge when you don't have a tricep LOL). But there are parts of my upper arm that are definitely skinnier than others -- so I'm not sure exactly which part I need to measure.

    Quote Originally Posted by mludd View Post
    18" (45.7 cm) circumference sounds pretty big. How are you measuring?

    Edit: I'm assuming you're not hitting the gym several times per week and that you're just a regular guy. I don't really know anyone who's not overweight who doesn't lift with upper arms that thick.
    I'm taking a sewing machine measuring tape and running around my upper arm where it is thickest. My arms actually look skinny from certain angles (like huge from the side, anorexic from the front). I definitely don't lift weights, but I do pullups and crap. Nothing to give me 18 inch arms though. I don't know what's going on here.

  9. #9
    Dreadlord mludd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by Jersovic View Post
    I'm taking a sewing machine measuring tape and running around my upper arm where it is thickest. My arms actually look skinny from certain angles (like huge from the side, anorexic from the front). I definitely don't lift weights, but I do pullups and crap. Nothing to give me 18 inch arms though. I don't know what's going on here.
    That they look thinner from the front is pretty common, you can see this on guys who lift a lot as well. There's a reason guys who flex their arms when posing for photos angle them so you see them from the side. :P

    Also, if you don't have a tricep bulge when flexing your arm then it definitely doesn't sound like you have very muscular arms, the triceps tend to be bigger than the biceps (unless we're talking about the "curlbros" I mentioned before).

    Peculiar. :P
    Last edited by mludd; 2012-08-17 at 08:42 AM.
    I am the Kwisatz Haderach

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by mludd View Post
    That they look thinner from the front is pretty common, you can see this on guys who lift a lot as well. There's a reason guys who flex their arms when posing for photos angle them so you see them from the side. :P

    Also, if you don't have a tricep bulge when flexing your arm then it definitely doesn't sound like you have very muscular arms, the triceps tend to be bigger than the biceps (unless we're talking about the "curlbros" I mentioned before).

    Peculiar. :P
    That's why I'm confused dude, my shit ain't big at all (I would almost post pictures, but that's a bad idea). I was a super fat kid though, so I'm wondering if I'm just a naturally thick kid or something? I'm onlt like 155 pounds though, so it still doesn't make sense.

  11. #11
    Jersovic is a troll, he makes stupid threads in other forums too. I'm surprised he hasnt been banned yet.

  12. #12
    Pix with measuring tape... I been working towards 18in biceps and I'm jacked.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Jersovic View Post
    That's why I'm confused dude, my shit ain't big at all (I would almost post pictures, but that's a bad idea). I was a super fat kid though, so I'm wondering if I'm just a naturally thick kid or something? I'm onlt like 155 pounds though, so it still doesn't make sense.
    You really should post pics, because I have a feeling you're measuring wrong (are you sure its the inches side of the tape and not the centimeters?)
    Alliance: Caboose | Cabooseor | Carnitine | Doc | Donut | Kerza | Loudcutter | Mehen | Murkel
    Horde: Madbeats
    Not shown: 90 BE Pally, 90 Orc DK, 90 Human Monk...

  14. #14
    The Patient Abominator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    265
    First of all I have 18 inch arms at a relatively low body fat percentage, this requires you to be extremely muscular, so much so that you draw everyone's attention. There are 2 types of people who have 18 inch arms, bodybuilders who have been training for many years and fat people (extremely fat people). Pretty sure you're measuring wrong or unaware of your excess horizontal distance.

    Also regarding what Dazzy said. Hulk Hogan did not have 24 inch arms, 90% of professional bodybuilders don't have 24 inch arms, even when they're bulking, so it's pretty safe to say that Hulk Hogan a wrestler and not a professional bodybuilder did not have 24 inch arms. I don't think you understand how big 24 inches is, it's bigger than most people's heads, one of the biggest bodybuilders of all time Noah Steere who was from memory 6'6 300 pounds at <12% body fat had 25 inch arms and they dwarfed most people's heads.

    Another thing the whole idea of 21 inch arms being ideal for someone who is 5'7 to 6' is absurb at best, especially considering the weight range you suggested. Professional bodybuilders have 21 inch arms, professional bodybuilders have been training for years and decades, on steroids, with nearly perfect genetics. Most people wouldn't even get close to 21 inch arms even if you gave them all the steroids on earth.

    Phil Heath has somewhere between 21 and 23 inch arms.
    http://www.bodybuilders.com.au/forum...e.php?id=14269
    Yeah that's ideal and easily achievable right?

  15. #15
    The Lightbringer Bigbazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    3,675
    Most people trying to build muscle have 21 inch arms? You realise Arnolds Schwarzeneggar's arms were like 19-20 inches? Maybe a little bigger at his biggest.


    You're saying that "Most people trying to build muscle" have arms the size of Mr Olympia? LoL.
    I7 2600k @4.5ghz : 16GB DDR3 : GTX670 : Firestudio : Naga : G27

  16. #16
    Funny that the thread starter is banned.
    Anyway he cant have 18 inch arms without being fat since he said he doesnt have much muscle.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Harzaka View Post
    Funny that the thread starter is banned.
    Anyway he cant have 18 inch arms without being fat since he said he doesnt have much muscle.
    Could have a tumor.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by jbhasban View Post
    could have a tumor.
    its not a tumour, its not! Get to tha choppahhhhh

  19. #19
    People's bones do differ in size.

    18 inches for an amateur measurement of an upper arm isn't that strange. It's a little big, but possibly mismeasured and possibly just big bones combined with elevated HGH naturally. Also, if that was measured after exertion, it will be inflated due to muscle swelling.

    24 inches is builder-sized. Sometimes bigger, these days. Arnold's measurements in 1970 are essentially unimportant compared to 40 years later, differences in nutrition, etc.

    18 is pretty big for a non-lifter, but it can happen. I used to be an athlete, but didn't ever lift because I wanted to retain flexibility. Just calisthenics. I'm around 17-18 inches forearm, 22 inches bicep flexed. I'm not even that big if you looked at me, just a little big.

    So, 18 inches isn't too surprising. Large bone structure, muscle swelling, inaccurate measurement, higher-than-average normal HGH levels, there are several other possibilities.

  20. #20
    The Patient Abominator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by LurkerOnly View Post
    People's bones do differ in size.

    18 inches for an amateur measurement of an upper arm isn't that strange. It's a little big, but possibly mismeasured and possibly just big bones combined with elevated HGH naturally. Also, if that was measured after exertion, it will be inflated due to muscle swelling.

    24 inches is builder-sized. Sometimes bigger, these days. Arnold's measurements in 1970 are essentially unimportant compared to 40 years later, differences in nutrition, etc.

    18 is pretty big for a non-lifter, but it can happen. I used to be an athlete, but didn't ever lift because I wanted to retain flexibility. Just calisthenics. I'm around 17-18 inches forearm, 22 inches bicep flexed. I'm not even that big if you looked at me, just a little big.

    So, 18 inches isn't too surprising. Large bone structure, muscle swelling, inaccurate measurement, higher-than-average normal HGH levels, there are several other possibilities.
    So let me get this right, you had 22 inch arms when most professional bodybuilders have 21 or less so 1) I think you might be delusional and 2) some people don't magically have bones 4 times the size of another person's bones, it doesn't work like that trust me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •