Your 60 inch round will seat 8 max....the rectangular one will seat 12...14 in a pinch.
Have you ever used a 60 inch round table? that's 5 feet across. unless you are taller than I am you have practically crawl up on the table to reach the center. To be able to get in and out of a chair you have to allow 18 inches minimum....so that makes the table space nearly 100 inches, which leaves 12 inches behind each chair at the short end of the room.
The rectangular table will open to 84 max with 2 leaves....add 32 inches for chairs and you are at 116 inches length, and 78 inches wide.
Both tables are too large for your space to allow a server too without being very crowded...
UNLESS...the room opens into another room with a very wide opening.
Linda C

I second the round-table-being-a-pain motion and add the question -have you ever had a glass dining table?

When the hubster and I were first married, I fell in love with a glass dining table. Little did I know I would be seriously irked by having to clean both sides of the glass. And that they would never both look clean at the same time. And that the glass shows off all of the dust on the table legs....grrr. Can you imagine how happy I was to give it away 20 years later?

We now have the rectangular table much like you describe. It is placed diagonally in the dining room to help folks get around it better. We do not have any other furniture in the room, but may add a small silverware chest. It is definitely crowded, but nice to be able to have lots of folks in there occasionally. Plus it is cool to find banquest sized tablecloths on sale. those get pretty deep discounts cause there are always lots of them left over.

Remember that you need somewhere flat to store the leaves. I put mine under the bed. If you put them on edge behind the door, you run the risk of them eventually warping and becoming useless.

Another thing that makes this huge table work for us is the 2 doors to the dining room. When your guests are seated, someone has to be able to leave gracefully and "fetch" drink refills, desserts, seconds, etc. But adding a server would make this nearly impossible.

Good luck with your decision.

You might want to put it on graph paper or use one of those furniture arranging sites (I think Boyles has one) to get a feel for the size of the pieces and your room space. Or you could take string/tape and mark out the furniture on the floor of the room.

My dining room is about the same size as yours, we just changed out a rectangle table for a round 52" table with a leaf. I was going to get a 60" table and it was just too big for my space, which is fairly closed in. Even now I could not comfortably add a server, the table fills the space. The rectangle table I used to have was 46x68 and I kept running into the corners of it, it was too big and clumsy to walk around. It all depends on how open your room is but you definitely need enough comfortable space to pull chairs out and walk around. Plus if you add the server you really need to know where/how it will fit in the room. I find that it is so easy to underestimate size/proportion of furniture by just looking at it, you really have to map it out against your floor plan.

Good luck!

I have been having same problem with a table for my eat in kitchen, and I don't have a dining room, so the kitchen is it. After the cabinets and countertop, the remaining "floor space" is about 9.5' x 12'. I have a 42 x 60" table in there now, and it is a little wide, but there is enough room that in a dining room the same size, I could fit a shallow server without too much problem as long I didn't plan to add the 2 leaves to it. One leaf would be very tight but might be doable. However, because it is a kitchen, not a dining room, and I want more room to walk around while I work in the kitchen than I would need in a dining room, I want to go even smaller. In my case, there is a door from the garage leading into the kitchen and I also don't want the table to obstruct traffic flow. This is what I found in researching my options, which are even more restrictive than yours:
Some manufacturers (like Nichols and Stone) make a 38 X 60" table that might be more comfortable in that room. You might even consider an oval, which is what I am considering for a kitchen table, to help that bumping into the corners thing, also. If I could find a 38" round with a couple of 18" leaves, I could have the best of both worlds. It would give me the narrower width, I could keep one leaf in it to make to a small oval, have no corners to bump into, and another leaf to extend the table only when I need it.

With the price of nice sets like N&S and Canadel, I am wondering if I could have one custom made by a local creaftsman.

Anyway, I would not try to put a server in it, too. If hubby is handy or you could hire someone, you could get a built in hutch or something. That might make a serving area more comfortably "doable".

If you really are set on getting a server, I would go with the smallest round you can find and a shallow server at the long end of the room, or a rectangular table like you describe but know you will not comfortably be able to use the leaves.

JMHO

Sue

You could get away with a round table only if it was smaller than 60". You definitely want the long table. And the next time you entertain you'll be glad you chose it!

I find round tables to be more conducive to entertaining and more enjoyable to sit at...you can see everyone and conversation seems to flow more easily (no neck-craning to so what someone at the other end is saying, etc.) Also, you can more easily squeeze another person with a round table than with a rectangle.

That said, I think 60 inches is too large for your space, however. I'd go with a 52 or 54 inch wood table with a couple of leaves. That way you get the best of all worlds - for the majority of the time that you're not entertaining, you have a table that works better in the space. Then you get the flexibilty of having additional seating when you need it. I have a similarly-sized dining room and we got rid of our rectangular table and got a 54 inch round instead. I've never looked back.

I also second the glass-free existence. I much prefer wood or stone to glass.

My diningroom is same dimensions. I bought Martha Stewart's (Bernhardt) 60" round table, seats 6 comfortably and it is perfect for the room. Additionally, there is a section to insert that creates a pretty big oval and this seats 10. I really love it and the the 60" round if great for most gatherings.

Do the math. A 66" table with 2 18" leaves is 9' long. Your guests might like to have a chair to sit on. The round is your only option and a 60" round is a BIG table. I have a 52" round in a 12'x14' room with 4 chairs and it is all it will hold comfortably. Remember, you have to center your table under a light and the rectangular table is going to be impossible to fit in their properly. You also have to have room to slide the chairs in and out from the table. With the 60" round you only have 30". That's pretty tight