@Kachon123 and
@Shmeatywerbenmanjenson may I ask why do you guys think your method is the best here?
I have a few reasons why I believe the building method is the best to go with here
First however I would like to point out how we treat canon on VSbattles Wiki
Primary canon > Secondary Canon, in cases of secondary canon contradicting what is shown or stated in the manga it is commonly disregarded
The Guidebook would fall under secondary canon
1. The stated height issue - Goes hand in hand with what I said above but the point I'm making is; In every panel we see Beefcake he is drawn differently in size that is true, however even in his smallest panels he fails to measure anywhere near the 240 meter stated size. This is further supported by two feats that are done and attributed to his utterly gargantuan size; That being him destroying an
entire town with a swing of his arm and him causing the
destruction of an entire city with him falling over. Not only do the two panels show a far greater size than the stated one, it'd be an extraordinary stretch to say that these feats are even possible with a size stated as small as in the guidebook.
2. Why it's the best option to scale - At first glance you'd probably believe that anything we scale in the panel is inconsistent and prone to error and that would be true. Put plainly this panel has many inconsistently sized roads and buildings that things wouldn't line up no matter what you get for the per pixel value, so why use one object over the other? Well quite frankly we should use buildings because Murata doesn't know how to draw roads, at least in the chapter this happens in. I've already
shown above that even Murata's one-lane and two-lane roads result in dozens to 100+ meter results. That along with buildings being the primary focus of drawing cityscapes leads one to the conclusion that one should be used over the other. Even if you don't accept that, in the particular panel we are scaling the sizes of the roads
vary far more than the buildings ever do with them being as large as or larger than the dozen story buildings themselves. This along with them being lower detail than the building as well as there being no set size for roads (3.7 meters is the lane size which does not account for any barriers or the shoulders) leads me to the conclusion that the building scaling is better (as the floor average is far more common than US specific lane sizes). I'm not saying the buildings don't vary in size as it's very apparent they do, however they don't do it nearly as much as the roads do. It is still an assumption to assume a height of a building on panel however it is an extremely founded one as we have
numerous panels beforehand showing 10+ story buildings as well as two instances of
broken 10+ story buildings in the
direct vicinity of the crater.
It assumes that only the largest drawn building on panel meets this standard as a way further limit an size extrapolation whil also using the building directly adjacent to the hole as opposed to in the foreground or background which would alter size. And of course most importantly it results in a size consistent with the
skyscraper dwarfing hole we see
on panel.
