My wrist is 14 inches (5.5cm) so I'm small boned. However, I feel that I have larger bones in my lower half because my ankle bones are much thicker.

My shoe size is 8.5-9. My height is 5'4'' (weirdly, both of these numbers tend to fluctuate a tiny bit).

I always had large feet for my height as a child and everyone predicted I would be much taller than I actually ended up.

Measuring your elbow breadth is more accurate, for anyone who is interested. It's kind of a hard measurement to take though.

Per Shiny's request, my hand measures 8 inches. I seem to be the giant of the group. :)

I'm somewhere between 5'4-5'5" and usually wear size 8.5 (US) shoes. According to the finger-thumb test, I have a large frame. :( I like to think that my big Italian bones are the reason I've never broken a limb! (Of course that has no scientific or medical proof, but it's a nice thought.)

Will have to come back with actual measurements tonight when I'm back in my apartment, where my tape measure is.

I am 5'6", and my foot is a little bit longer than my forearm. As far as shoes go, I wear anything from 8.5 to 10, it all depends on the manufacturer. According to the wrist test, I have a large frame, which is not surprising. I do have big bones, and they weigh a lot too. :-)

Eva, if it makes you feel any better, being large framed means you are allowed to weigh more than your small and medium counterparts and still be healthy. As a small-framed chocoholic, I envy you!

Angie, if you can measure 5'8'' out of me, I'll owe you a pot of tea :) I don't mind being taller at all.

My shoe-size is 9W. I am a little over 5' 2" with a 29" inseam. I am small-boned according to the wrist-overlap test.

That said, I have wide shoulders and a wide pelvis and the smallest I ever was post-puberty is 120 lb so definitely not on the delicate side.

Hmm. Using the non scientific fingers around the wrist method I qualify as large boned. I'm 5' 3 1/2" and I wear a size 7.5. I honestly have never thought of myself as large boned so that's a bit of a suprise.

I am 5"4. My wrist span is 14.5 cm or about 5.5 inches. According to one of those calculators that means I am small framed. However I am medium frame according to the hand wrapping method and that is what I would have thought of myself as.

Weight wise I am in the high end of small/ lower end of medium. I don't think weight is a great indicator in itself. What if you were over or underweight? Frame size would be something you would take into account to work out what you should aim for.

I have small feet. Size 6 Australian. (possibly 5 1/2) I have just asked Imogen about US/Aus shoe sizes and she says she thinks US are about 1/2 size bigger which would make me a 6.5.

I am 5'9, my wrist measures about 5.5 inches, and I wear commonly a size 10 in shoes, sometimes a 9.5. My feet did grow (or spread?) when I got pregnant with my first child, fortunately, did not grow any more with my second. I think I have a medium/average frame.

I don't think the measurement of fingers around the wrist is a great measurement, as you may just have short fingers instead of big bones!

::reemphasizing elbow breadth::

I'm telling you, it's much more accurate!

http://www.am-i-fat.com/body_frame_size.html

I don't know how accurate any of these tests are. I do know that I can wrap my fingers around my wrist now, whereas 50 pounds ago I could not. At my goal weight, maybe I will have an overlap. My bone structure isn't changing, so weight certainly affects that. According to wrist measurement, I am large boned at 5 foot 5 and a wrist measurement of 6.5.
I know that when my husband and I were taking Rock Climbing classes, there was a lot of discussion about 'Ape Index" (which is the height to arm span ratio or maybe vice versa?) My husband has a negative ape index, which means that his arm span is longer than he is tall- like Michael Phelps. This is supposedly a good thing for swimmers and rock climbers. Most people are slightly taller than their arm span.
Back to the original question- according to the wrist wrap method I am medium framed, but according to wrist measurement I am large framed and I wear a 9.5 wide shoe. I have actually gone down in width of shoes (I used to wear a double wide), and slightly in length as well. I'm hoping that trend also continues.

This is fun and interesting. Went to that website listed a couple of posts ago...and it says 'small frame' for me. I didn't realize you could be average height, but with a fairly small frame. What I'd really like to know is if you can be petite on top and regular on bottom. All my sleeves are way too long, but that could just be part of the weight loss process. I've gone from a size 24W down mostly 8's now.

I'm pretty sure my arms aren't shrinking...

Hmm, I've been really skeptical of the "frame size" measurements. My wrists are just under 6" and my elbow breadth is about 2.5". At 5'5" this puts me at "small framed", which is just a joke! I think my arms/wrists are proportionately the slimmest part of my body, which probably makes either whole measurement system inaccurate.

My shoe size is 8 or 8.5 US.

I haven't got anyone to take my arm measurements yet as per Angie's post.

Just as a general rule, self-measuring doesn't seem to work unless it's somewhere easily accessible. Just as my shoulder measurements turned out wrong, so did my wrist measurements. My wrist is actually closer to 5 inches. 5.125 maybe. It was easier to measure in centimeters since I got a more precise measurement (13 cm).

I was wondering how I was able to wear Angie's watch at a (relatively) large 5.5". That makes a lot more sense. Also, the wrist thing is just a general idea of frame size. Elbow breadth is the accurate way, because it is an independent measurement and doesn't rely on your fingers being "average" or proportionate. It's still hard to measure without a caliper, but for me at least, it was pretty accurate.

I think thew problem with any of these measurements is that there is flesh on top of your bones, which means that you are measing the flesh on top of the bones as well as the bones. I thought my wrists would not change size, since there doesn't seem to be a lot of fat there- but I have lost half an inch on them.

Ladies, Maya is on to something . But you must check wrist, knee, and ankle circumference. Some women have small wrists, but are large boned.

My wrists are slightly over 5 inches., my ankles are only 7 inches. My feet are about 6 1/2 or 7...I am 5'4 and very small boned, and have never reached the minimum weight for my height. I always attributed this to my small frame.

Also, I wonder if you can be large boned in one area of your body? Perhaps your legs have larger bones than your upper half, or something like that. Just a thought.

I had my mom measure my wrist the second time to get the 13 cm measurement, and I measured hers and she has the same measurement but is shorter, so she is medium. But her elbow joint measures out to a small, which is what I would have thought.

Khris, I think one of the reasons the elbow measurement works is because most people just don't have a fleshy elbow joint at any weight.

Perfect example would be my Mom. We have the same size wrists and fingers...(I have some of her rings). We are about the same height, although she is shrinking now in her 70's.

My mother is large boned. Wide and large hips, knees , ankles, and pelvis. I guess you would say wide framed and heavy boned. So, although our wrists are the same size, our structure is totally different.

Having grown up with her was an eye opener to the struggle some women have with weight. It made me very sensitive to it.

I think there is a lot of misconception about frame size. Having a large or small frame has nothing to do with whether YOU are large or small. You can be big boned and slim or small boned and large. My mom is small boned, but she is not small. Marianne is medium boned, but she is very slender. Frame size isn't even a perfect indicator of ideal weight. My mom knows she is overweight, but I don't think anyone could realistically expect her to get down to her "ideal" weight (110 pounds).

Haha this thread is kinda weird.....here's my contribution

5"8, shoe size 10, wrist-test: medium boned (but I would say med-large)
tallest finger height = less then 3 inches, totoal hand length 6.5 inches. I have always thought I have weird "too-small" hands for my height, now I am quite convinced!!! ahah