how cylindrical are you?

OK, so I was looking around, and it seems to me that most people have fairly cylindrical cocks, ie same width from the top as with the side. How about you guys? How is the width from above compared to the side? And ladies, what do you prefer?

Myself, I am quite a bit wider from above. About 2 inches arcoss from the top (3 fingers wide, attached) while only 1 from above - 6 is my total girth (7 long). Knowing that, I was wondering how normal it is to be so different one side to another.

Attached Images

	sideview_LPSG.jpg (43.5 KB, 694 views)
	3fingers_LPSG.jpg (48.6 KB, 597 views)

my dicks a bit more oval.. two and a half top and bottom, two fingers on the sides... yet im only 5.5 thick.. Its funneh because people SWEAR im 6 around.. but a tape measure dosnt lie :)

Very interesting question actually, I was wondering about this. I too am 7" long, 2" across on top by about 1.5" on the side and I was actually wondering if this is odd. My gf who's seen about 30 or so erect penises remarks that she's seen more circular, and weirder shapes, etc. but she gets the most out of one that is a bit more oval because it stretches her in a better way to add friction to her clitoris. That's what she told me anyway.

Leave it to me to be the odd guy out. My shaft has got a large girth, 7-7¼" but it is actually wider from a side view than from the top view. It's due to a very prominent corpus spongiosum, I'm sure.

side to side is about twice what top to bottom is.

Roughly the same cross section as my wrist

From above i am slightly under 2.5 inches.

I'd never thought much about this before. I think I fall into both categories. Wider across (seen from above) than from the side, until you get to the last three or so inches near the base, where the urethral bulge on the underside makes it deeper than it is wide.

Very cylindrical at 5.5 circumference.

If any change I would want to be more oval.

A few of my friends over the years have at some point referred to their measurements, specifically girth being a similar 5.5 and from having seen them previously I would have thought they were considerably thicker.
I guess Im saying oval looks thicker

Mine is about the same size and shape as my wrist too. I can wear my watch on it. Now, if I only had a larger wrist

yeah, I've got a picture of my dick wearing my watch in my gallery...

My wrist isn't huge, but it's proportional to my body at 6'2 and 210 lbs

Like Pecker, I am more cylindrical than oval, tending a bit toward a deep side view.

Roosevelt's watch pic is a hoot, by the way. It has long been a favorite. Now if we could get the wide-angle version of that one...

check my gallery forties... ask and you shall recieve (no watch though)

My hard-on is oval. Two inches wide, an inch and a half in the other (side) dimension. I don't have a big corpus spongiosum like Pecker and others. There's a guy on here goes by bull something who has a huge corpus spongiosum. (The corpus spongiosum surrounds the urethra and makes up the glans and your penis bulb down there below your scrotum when you're hard.)

It seems like more people would have oval erections because there are two erectile chambers side by side in the body of the penis, the corpora cavernosa (plural). But, I've seen more rounder hard-ons than oval hard-ons, probably because the third chamber, the aforementioned corpus spongiosum rounds it out in most men.

The variations in size of these three erectile chambers make all the variations in penis sizes and shapes.

cylindrical my tool's best feature (or so i've always thought)