I have a 32" TV and I'm fine with it. My space is small, I am small, and my need for a home theater experience is pretty much nonexistant (I'll go days without turning the TV on). I just hope the 32" size is still available when the time finally comes for me to replace this TV.

In 2004, we still had our 19" that was a hand me down. In 2005 we upgraded to a 23" lcd. This year, we got a 40" LED lcd (it's the same frame size as most 37") & it seems enormous in our living room! Watching the oscars last night (and all sports) has been fantastic. I wouldn't want any larger of a tv in our current living room that's 24X13.

It's still gone up, but your 27" TV from your childhood is a 4:3 ratio, which is comparable to about 33" widescreen HDTV. The 46" median today is almost a 40" in 4:3 standard.
I think people want large screens and 40" to 50" is a comfortable large size. I don't think the average family want an 80" TV.

We have a 40" in the living room and it is more than large enough, anything larger and it would be obtrusive. 80" is just plain ridiculous.

I have a 32" and it's still an eyesore in my living room.

We have a 19" flatscreen that works well for our lifestyle. Our space isn't very big, so we can't put the TV too far away from our couch. A 46" TV five feet away would be too much for me, but our smaller set is perfect for that distance. Plus we can stow it away when it's not needed.

My largest TV, purchased last year, is 32 inches. I have a small house, so I can't imagine having anything larger.

I honestly believe that Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 is going to come to pass one day. At least parts of it. Wall size televisions where they watch shows that are not scripted and require little or no imagination were a main part of the story. Even Bradbury himself said the book was more about criticizing TV and the damage it does to society than about censorship. I have two older TVs and I see no need to get anything newer or bigger because these still work. But you might notice that if you have an old TV your screen formatting cuts off some of the pictures. We are becoming that society that doesn't read for entertainment, but rather watches Jersey Shore on screens mounted on walls once reserved for artwork.

I have a 50" and it does the job perfectly. I thought I was too close to it at first, but you get used to it.

We had just one TV for years (32") and our kids would sometimes use the computer (20") to watch DVDs. So our TV became known as "the BIG TV." Last year we added a 46" TV to the basement den for them to play Kinect on, funny thing is, the kids still call the 32" TV the BIG TV LOL. Personally I prefer the smaller TV.

Couple of thoughts - this is the average sized purchased over the years, correct? so it likely has more to do with the costs of larger sets coming down in price. And I agree with Summilex35 - a lot of people I talk to just want to get the biggest they can afford with no respect to what is the optimal size for their TV room...

We just "sized up" to a 32" HDTV. We live in a 2 bedroom story-and-a-half house built in 1907. Our house is charming and "dollhouse" like, and the scale is small. We thought about getting a large tv, but I'm glad we went with 32" because it is perfect in our living room. Our furniture is small, the room is small, and would just look ridiculous with a giant tv.

My living room is 13x17, and I think my 32" TV is about as big as we could go without it being an eyesore. I don't like the idea of the TV being the focus of the room, and I think anything bigger than that would overwhelm the space.

If people can watch videos and movies on their 4-inch iPhones and 12" laptop screens, why can't they enjoy the same content on a 32" screen in their living room? Crazy.

Meant to add, our living room is 12' x 14'.

We just upgraded from a 25" old school TV to a 32" flat screen. It was the largest would fit in the built-in space and is definitely large enough for our small living space. I'm always amazed when I go in to others' houses and see the monstrosities taking over the living room. There is a point when size is just silly IMO.

Nintendo? Get off my lawn, you young whippersnapper.=^)

We had an Atari 2600 and a 11" CRT, with the switch screwed onto the leads on the back to switch it between television (all 13 VHF channels of it -- be careful not to knock the rabbit ears out of alignment while setting the switch) and the Atari. (Before that, I had a pong game)

My husband's techy friend, who has a bigger living room, had recommended an extra large TV to us. I used the following three links (assuming they transfer correctly) and our living room's dimensions to calculate the much smaller max TV size that would fit our home. We compromised by buying the model his friend recommended in the smaller size.
http://hdguru.com/lechner-distance-the-number-you-need-to-know-before-buying-an-hdtv/21/
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-pTzRwQNA0K7/Learn/learningcenter/home/TV_placement.html
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1017835

We have a 32" but a 40" would work better in our 15 x 17 room.

My TV is definitely too large for my living room from an aesthetic standpoint. However, I frequently watch a smaller TV (that is the same brand/similar model) from a similar distance and it's just too small for some things. As has been mentioned, size of the room and surroundings are important, but so is content.

if i hadn't been given a 32" plasma as a hand-me-down, i'd still be happy to watch tv on my 20" crt.

We've had our old TV (26") since we got married ~20yrs ago. At Christmas, we broke down and bought 2 new LCD TVs, a 32" for our living room and a 46" for the basement.

Ironically other than the kids using the 46" for video games, everyone seems to be watching TV and movies on their laptops or tablets.

The kids are also suggesting that I cancel cable as no one watches it any more.

P.S. To answer the post question, the biggest TV size I'd want is what we bought, a 54" HD 1080p plasma TV for our 12'X25' living room. It's bigger than would be aesthetically pleasing, but the guidelines are more for comfortable viewing. Besides, my husband prefers big TVs, and keeping the peace is more valuable than an inconspicuous TV.

But isn't it easy and cheaper to install a projector with or without a pull down screen? Surely a 900 to 1000 dollar projector is smaller than even a 19 inch TV. A screen can stay hidden on the ceiling or just be a painted wall.

I thought you were supposed to choose a TV size based on how far away from the screen you sit? If the screen is large and you can't sit far enough away, watching is uncomfortable. Personally, I am thinking of getting a smaller TV -- I don't like how the small sitting area in my studio apartment feels like a movie theater, and only use it to watch a DVD once a week.

Wow, most of you people would hate my 130" "humble" projector. lol No it's not too big, matter of fact, somewhat bigger would be ideal for a nice blu-ray grab-the-popcorn-bucket movie night. For everything else, there's either our phones or computers. I have a 32" tv, merely for netflix shows or video games (and trust me, anything smaller would be ridiculously uncomfortable while playing games with Kinect). Even with all this media, we only spend about 6 hours a week watching stuff, but when we do, there's no guilt or regret about screen sizes (and thanks to the "disappearing" projector) it's not an eye-sore in the living room. I'd say it's the best of both worlds.

The bigger, the better!

I love a big tv. And you have to consider that you can't compare the tube tv's to today's widescreen tv's in size. A 27" tube tv has a much bigger screen than a 27" slim widescreen because they measure diagonally. So it seems natural the avg size would increase .

I upgraded from a 40" box TV to a 46" flatscreen a couple years ago, and when we got it home everything was great until we tried to watch regular broadcast TV on it, and it turned out the picture was *smaller* than on the old-school 40, because the rectangular TV was shorter vertically than the square TV, even though it was generally bigger.

So then we went to a real store and asked how to size a TV, and he said that since we were sitting 20' away from the TV, we needed a 50 at least. So we sent back the 46 and got a 50. It was much better.

My dad, however, is constantly annoyed. He had a giant, gorgeous, solid-wood TV cabinet built into the wall along with the bookshelves and paneling back in 1990, and it was designed to hold the biggest TV on the market. In 1990. Now he's all, "Garh! There's all this empty space behind my relatively tiny flatscreen, and I can't go bigger because it won't fit in the cabinet.

My lounge is 13x11 and have a 50" mounted on the wall. Just need surround sound now and it will feel just like a cinema :)
42" screens just look small now compared to it.

We've got a 46" because it fit into our existing entertainment center, but I'd prefer a 55-60". Unless I had a dedicated home theater room, anything larger would seem excessive...

We got a 46" last year and love it. I considered a 55", but couldn't justify the extra cost. My husband and I love watching movies together (it is one of the few activities we actually agree on) and dont feel like we are missing out not going to a theater all the time. With saving close to $20 a pop if we get popcorn, and being able to snuggle under a blanket on our comfortable couch, I'll say it is one of the best buys we've made. (The TV is about 12' away from the couch)

Optimal viewing distance should dictate the size of the TV. Most suggestions are between 3x & 4x the size of the screen. So if you have a 48" TV you should sit between 12' - 16' away for optimal viewing. Because LED and LCD TV's now offer such clear picture from any angle and distance (as was not the case with old Tube and Projection TV's that became blurred or pixilated at the wrong distance), people just think the bigger the better and the sky is the limit.

I would still default to the optimum viewing distance because it allows for your screen to be in proportion with the overall size of your room in my opinion. Some people are more comfortable with techonoloy as their home's focal point, however.

We only replaced our 24" CRT because (a) it didn't have proper PC and HDMI inputs, making it a PITA to hook up our computers to it, and (b) it was insanely heavy, and we were worried our baby daughter would pull it down on herself. We got a 46" flat screen and secured it to the wall and furniture. It is a little big for the room, but it was the one on sale at Costco.

I bought a 42" last year to replace my 26" set. The guidelines I saw online suggested 58" at the 10' distance I usually sit from it, and I thought that was ridiculously large and just hype to get me to buy a bigger set. I didn't want a huge thing taking over my whole room.

When I first got the set it seemed enormous, but now I regret not getting a bigger one. Maybe not 58", but if I could do it again I would get a 52".

I am perfectly happy with my 9 inch black and white TeeVee with custom rabbit ears..sure its a little "snowy" but hey there is nothing on television anyway.
Please.. The room I watch television is 14x17 the television is 50". My furniture arrangement is designed in such a way that the tv is not dominate feature of the room.
I have a number of programs that I enjoy, record and watch at my convenience. It is a luxury, I know that, but I do not think it is a moral failing to enjoy what a large screen TV can deliver to my living room! My only regret that I didn't spring for the 60" model!

Frankly, if I could go back in time and play Atari on the old 14" black and white we had when I was a kid, I'd happily do so.

I think any TV is an eyesore (and the bigger the TV, the bigger the eyesore). My current TV was purchased sometime in 2003 (I think, I don't recall the exact year) and it is the typical old style (i.e. "full screen" 27" (I think?). Actually, I measure it just yesterday because a friend of mine just purchased a 32" high definition TV and we were wondering if it would fit into my Chinese armoire (where I currently house my TV). My TV weighs half a ton and it is a pain in the @$$ to move but it will stay as long as it is working. THere are finer things in life to spend money on than TV's and surround sound.

I guess in some time when vision impairment becomes a growing ailment, we as a society will scale back.

I don't understand what you mean. Vision impairment has been a growing ailment for decades, and we as a society haven't scaled back yet.

P.S. Increasing visual impairment is mentioned in Wikipedia, which is not to say that its cause is bigger TVs: "...Myopia is common in the United States, with research suggesting this condition has increased dramatically in recent decades. In 1971-1972, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey provided the earliest nationally representative estimates for US myopia prevalence, and found the prevalence of myopia in persons aged 12–54 was 25.0%. Using the same method, in 1999-2004, myopia prevalence was estimated to have climbed to 41.6%.[64]..."

Perfect timing for this post! My boyfriend and I just succumbed to a 47" LCD HD tv at Costco this weekend...for our small one-bedroom. Surprisingly though, it fits perfectly. Any bigger, and we would have issues, but this one works...

I'm happy with my 32", but I was sure that, when I got the console I got, it could handle a 42-46". In a bigger space? Yeah, I may upgrade, but not until the screen completely goes out on mine.

I think people who put massive 55"+ TVs in small living rooms are the same people who think a laptop with a screen smaller than 17" is useless. If your living room is huge and you're sitting far away, then yeah it totally makes sense, and I'm very jealous that you have that much space --makes me wish I had a roommate so I could have a bigger place while staying in the heart of the city.

I sit about 5' away from my display, if I pushed my chair back much farther it'd bump into my desk on the other side of my apartment. With that, it probably isn't surprising that I use a 24" computer monitor as a "TV" (netflix and an xbox 360).