# What’s the Ideal Quad to Calf Ratio? (Explained!)

So, you want to know the ideal quad to calf ratio.

I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of people worry about their calves lagging behind their quads.

This definitely describes me.

However, there are those who may feel that their calves are huge, but their quads need to catch up (you lucky people).

So, is there a specific quad to calf ratio that you should aim for?

Allow me to reveal all.

### 1. The Different Quad to Calf Ratio Formulas

I will say that trying to find the ideal quad to calf ratio is enough to drive you mad.

In fact, if you research this for long enough you’re likely to find some of the most complex and “out there” formulas.

So much so, you’ll probably want to give up trying to get a straight answer.

With that being said, I have found a number of scenarios which appear to be fairly accurate.

So, let’s have a look at a few of these now.

#### Quad to Calf Ratio For Women

As you’ve probably guessed, the ideal measurements for a variety of body parts will differ for men and women.

It’s simply how we are constructed as humans, and the fact that our bodies are very different to each other.

However, there seems to be a specific ratio that women should aim for, which also includes the ankle measurement.

This is known as the 5-3-2 ratio.

Okay, clearly no-one would have these measurements, barring a genetic freak, but hopefully you get the idea.

In fact, if you halve these figures it should fit quite well with a number of women.

Another way to look at it is that your calves should be 1.5 times the size of your ankles, whereas your quads should be 2.5 times the size of your ankles.

So get to measuring.

#### The “Complicated” Quad to Calf Ratio Formula

I guess this formula also focuses mainly on women.

In fact, electrical goods giant Braun came up with the “perfect leg formula” based on Jennifer Anniston’s legs.

Braun’s formula also included skin feel and texture, as well as semi-gloss sheen.

I’m no expert, but I don’t believe most gym-bros would be particularly interested in this.

The actual formula is:

(T/C) x (F + S) = L

Basically, the idea is to come up with a number which is the “perfect score”.

See, I did say it was complicated.

However, to save you a great deal of time and grief it turns out that the ideal quad to calf ratio is 1.63:1.

#### The “Simple” Quad to Calf Ratio

Now, we’ve got the complicated stuff out of the way, there is actually a very simple calculation, which is also more specifically aimed at men.

That’s it, very simple indeed.

With that being said, an inch or two either way won’t make a great deal of difference.

However, once we’re into the realms of a 6-inch difference or lower or 10-inch or higher difference, this may point to a disproportionate imbalance.

Why Can’t I Feel My Quads During Squats?

### 2. The Steve Reeves Symmetry Theory

I guess if I’m speaking of body part ratios it makes sense to look at the views (and statistics) of the man with the original “classic physique”.

I am of course talking about late professional bodybuilder and actor Steve Reeves.

Steve proclaimed that the perfect physique starts with the neck, upper arms (biceps and triceps), and the calves all being approximately the same measurement.

And just to prove his theory Steve had an 18.5 inch neck, an 18.25 inch upper arms and calves.

Steve was known for his roles as Hercules, Goliath, and Sandokan, all of whom were famed for their muscular and hulking physiques.

It just so happens that at the peak of his career Steve was the highest paid actor in Europe.

So, you could say that an aesthetically-pleasing physique and almost perfect stats were the reason for his fame.

Now, interestingly Steve’s quads measured 26 inches.

Therefore, his quads were 7.75 inches larger than his calves.

So, in effect, Steve almost managed to perfectly achieve the status quo of his quads being 8 inches bigger than his calves.

If it’s good enough for the man with the perfect physique then it should be good enough for the rest of us.

### 3. Genetics Play a Role Too

I mentioned earlier that many of us have a set of calves that appear to lag behind our quads (and the rest of our body too).

And of course, there are those who have huge calves, which seem to be disproportionate to the rest of their body.

In truth, when it comes to calf size, this very much comes down to genetics.

And unfortunately, some of us (yes, me included) are predisposed to having tiny calves.

In fact, no amount of training seems to make your calves budge.

I will say that calves typically respond best to much higher rep ranges.

The main reason for this I guess is that we spend the vast majority of our days using our calves.

Whenever you stand up, walk, run, etc. your calves are activated.

So, in effect, your calves are being “trained” constantly with “high reps”.

Therefore, it makes sense that in order to elicit growth you’ll need to focus on higher rep ranges.

But, as I say, if genetics has gifted you with smaller-sized calves, irrespective of how much work you do, it’s going to be very difficult to get them to literally “blow up”.

### Final Thoughts

I hope you understand that there is no exact quad to calf ratio, but rather theories.

Plus, your thigh and calf measurements will vary depending on whether you’re male or female.

For women, the aim is to achieve the 5-3-2 ratio for quads, calves, and ankles.

Another ratio popularized by Braun and their study of Jennifer Aniston is that your quad to calf ratio should be 1.63:1.