How much does a pair of truly massive tits weigh? For example, could you guess the arguably heavy boob weight of the most magnificent MM-cup breasts on extremely well-endowed super busty black beauty Cheron 32MM from the TopHeavyAmateurs site…
…well, to take a scientific approach to estimating breast weight using breast volume cup-size conversion as our standard of reference and knowing that an average pair of C-cup breasts displace one litre of water each as a rule, we can guess how much Cheron’s big boobs weigh backwards! A litre of water weighs a kilogram, but breasts are made of fat and are thus less dense, so we need to multiply our result by a 0.9 density factor for the boob fat to water weight difference. Thus, with C-cup tits weighing in at 900g each and C- being the third cup-size up the bra-sizing scale, we can reasonably assume each full cup-size volume converts to a boob weight of 300g per cup. M-cup breasts would be 13th up the scale, so let’s go with a multiplier of 14 since MM-cup boobs are bigger thus 300g times 14 cup-sizes up = 4.2kg or 9.26lb per breast times two boobs gives us 18.52 pounds of big black tits in total! So, does our lovely massive mocha mammary maiden in fact have eighteen pounds of breast flesh between her two tits of MM-cup proportions? Well, lets get Cheron to weigh her boobs on a scale to see how close our breast guess was via these beautiful big black breast weighing photos from TopHeavyAmateurs.com…
…okay, so we were a little over a pound of flesh shy considering that Cheron’s right tit weighs 10.8lbs all by itself and both breasts weigh 21.2lb in total. Then again, weighing your boobs on bathroom scales can’t be all that accurate anyway. After all, how does an extremely chesty girl know when to stop applying breast pressure so she’s only weighing tits? Or, alternately, get enough of her huge boobs on the scales so the weight of her pendulous breasts isn’t being supported by the bits of her tits hanging from her chest instead? Meh, I prefer the breast volume water displacement test myself, but I’ve yet to see an example of this manner of breast measurement employed in porn. But back to our sexy and super busty black beauty Cheron so we can go through the whole breast weighing escapade all over again but, this time, in video form! Oh, and I’ll also include a couple of hypnotic huge hooters boob jiggling videos so we can see the breast dynamics of MM-cup massive mammaries in motion as unfeasibly undulating udders indeed! Here’s ever lovely Cheron and her luxuriously large breasts in enormous ebony boob weighing videos from TopHeavyAmateurs.com:
Do you know why she never shows her face? I bet she is good looking. It feels kind of weird to not see her face.
32MM…wow, that’s hard to comprehend. But….I’m……(uh!)…..trying……my……BEST…..AAAHHHHH! Comprehended!
They are undulating udders indeed! I prefer that last clip. I’d call that “knocker knocking” action in slow mo. Sends shivers down the spine thinking how gigantic those boobs really are. Forget the science guys. Those tits are MA-SIVE!
I really cannot comprehend why this girl does not have her own site. It makes absolutely no sense.
she featured on top heavy amatures and topheavy dot com websites.
she is still using hotel rooms as her backdrops.
there have been some house shots early on.
but now for the strip down photos she uses the hotel.
Hi Reese,
where did you get the measurement that an average C-cup breast could displace one litre of water? My long-term research yields quite different result, leaving 75C breast at average of 0.4-0.6L… Me and my friend have talked about 30 girls into sinking their breasts of various sizes into a bowl of water and the results are quite interesting, yielding about 0.2L per cup size, so one-litre breast should be 75E and this really worked (the sizes ranked from 70A to 90H in EU sizing).
The weight is quite difficult to measure, as you stated in your blog. We’ve come to the result that weight = 0.6 x volume, but it significantly depends on the body type of the lady – the more BBW she is, the higher is the coefficient, probably resulting from the different type of fat the breast consists of in thin girls compared to big ladies. Could you point me at the source of your data above? Thank you in advance.
Anyway, your blog is excellent, it’s my before-breakfast morning refresher ;-) and I love to find any new blog entry here… Keep your outstanding work!
Kind regards,
Ray
Cheron’s tits have always been phenomenal, but after MaxiMOOM, I decided to never again pay to see tits with a blurred out face. Can’t deal with it. If she unmasked she’d be way more popular and I’d be in line with my $.
Hiya Ray~
In the blog, I included a link to this article and, if you scroll down to the How To Weigh Your Breasts section, the last bullet point states that, “A breast which displaces one litre of water weighs around 0.9kg and is on average the size of a 36C.” Thus, I’d tend to trust your empirical results moreso than something cited without further reference.
~Reese! :~)
If you are allowing the breast tissue to be naturally buoyant, applying any correction factor for boob density whether 0.9 or 0.6 or in between is wrong. The weight of water displaced by any buoyant object such as breast tissue is exactly equal to the weight of that object. In this case 1 liter of water = 1 kilogram = 2.2 lbs. This is Archimedes’ Principle, which has been around for over 2000 years. Only if you forcibly submerge the breast tissue in water do you need to apply a correction factor for density.
Weighing them is difficult – some of the weight of the body also presses down on the scale if they make good contact and therefore the results are too high; otherwise they don’t make good contact and it’s too low as some weight is held by the body. My visual estimate of Cheron is between 240 and 280 and so both breasts should weigh 17-19 lb.
The one liter for a C cup figure is certainly wrong – the article linked to gave Susannah’s breasts as that size (correct), and she’s supposedly a D (I think UK cup sizes are a bit smaller than the same US one also) – The average breast is less than half that.
Ray – you know I’ve been interested in this a long time and I should like to look at your data, although it’s probably not of high quality. EU bra sizes can be converted to US ones, though I’m sure not perfectly as bra sizing is so goofy.
As you found the weight is not easy to measure; there’s no way the density can be 0.6!
What do you mean by density Andrew? One thing I learned from my busty wife is that breast weight fluctuates according to time of the month due to hormone cycles and broader biorythmic cycles; have you noticed how they change size and shape during these natural cycles? To complicate things, density does not rely on fat alone. Depending on a wide range of factors breast density owes some of that to the numbers of clusters of milk producing glands in the breast and they are heavier than fat and considerably heavier if lactating. I am still working out how to extract average figures from that extrapolation. At her largest my wife weighed 175lbs and she had HHcup breasts. She claims that she should weigh 154lbs without her boobs. Hmm. Perhaps she’s right, it’s only guesswork, but it sounds about right.
They look great from any angle, but especially splayed out all over the scales like that.
These images and videos give you an idea how much mammary meat she’s rocking. And I would definitely call ~5.27kg per voluminous breast ample, especially on a slim and attractive girl like that. But obviously it’s not just the weight… they look great too.
I’m a fan of bronze-skinned slim’n’stacked girls with big puffy aureolas, and she is a gold star example. That last video where we see them in slow motion… deliriously pretty, squishy titty mass, engulfing her wonderfully slim stomach. Very hypnotic.