Animal Strength Feats

[Rage2277]

(09-21-2020, 07:27 PM)Shadow Wrote:

(09-21-2020, 06:34 PM)Rage2277 Wrote:

(09-20-2020, 02:29 AM)Yusuf Wrote:

(09-11-2020, 08:42 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:

(09-09-2020, 08:58 PM)Scout Wrote: Guate, I noticed that in the conclusive tables you made for lions and tigers at species levels, the HB-length of tigers is listed as 190cm vs 191cm for P. leo krugeri. So it means that kruger lions are actually slighly longer on average than bengal tigers in HB-length?

Actually the conclution will be that Bengal tiger and South African lions are about the same body length and height, but Bengal tigers are still more robust with larger chest girths and are heavier overall.

Also we most remember that the head of the lion is also longer than the head of the tiger, so that means that overall the body of the tiger is still longer than the body of the lion, if you take in count that from the same body length (c.190 cm), the head of the lion occupy 38.0 cm while the head of the tiger is of 35.3 cm.

 
Personally I disagree a bit. Especially at the claim that tigers are more robust which is nonsense in my opinion if you look at studies were the bones are analysed or fights were tigers bones got often destroyed by lions. 

First of all I want to share a reliable account. In would include them to the southern lions because they came from there.

*This image is copyright of its original author

You did in your tables miscalculations(which is normal therefore I dont want to attack you with that). The weight difference between lion and tigers is about 10 kg. 10kg is about 5% in the weight range were the lion and tigers are. That is nearly nothing. Like you comparing a 60kg to a 63 kg guy. Lions are therefore 2% taller.

Tigers have not more girth in the chest department. They overlap if you take a closer look. But I'm sure that lions have a more solid chest than tigers on average. Note tigers have a thicker skin and more fat than lions in the belly and chest area and this will surely add 1 inch or more. (I practice myself bodybuilding and I know how much girth I loose in cuts). About 3% of girth i loose from my biceps and that only because of FAT!

Look only at Volkel. Large and Robust looking lion(not really bulky). I think a 148cm chest with a solid shape is better than a 160cm lion or tiger who is overweight.

*This image is copyright of its original author

With the rest I agreed. Lions maybe gain 2cm extra length because of their skull. But this is the same with the overall length. Tigers gain many fake extra length because of their tails. Therefore Im focusing on Head Body lengths. As you said the tiger of Brander had the potential to measure much more overall. Proves again how much tails falsify the real length in my opinion.

But even then it's nearly the same length of we substract 2cm from the HB length.

But in captivity with similar amount of food tigers doesnt seem to be heavier. Some tamers told me that tigers have a bit more appetite.

I never saw a cat with such a robustness... holy crap. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

more little kid garbage,lions,bears,tigers are not breaking the bones of anything by striking,that is anatomically impossible for them and will never happen their power is better expressed by biting and pulling they have soft paws they're not designed like humans they can't throw punches with power like us.

They do brake bones with paw swipes. Very serious sources confirm it, that it happens sometimes. But it´s not something what can be seen too often. When people expect to see it all the time, then it goes to exaggeration. It´s one thing to for instance brake spine of a hyena or a wolf by a lion, tiger or a bear and another when for instance lion swipes another lion. In this I believe experts, who say it clearly.

I put just one source, because this is a thread concerning weights. 

Quote: "The bear kills its prey by biting it in the neck or back. It can also kill the prey animal with a strike of its forepaw, which is often enough to break the animal's spine. Often the bear will also bite its prey in the snout, which leaves deep canine marks that are clearly visible. The distance between the bear's canines is between 45–65 millimetres. The bear has also been known to bite its prey in the back of the neck to kill it."

Source: http://www.largecarnivores.fi/species/br...viour.html


I trust to this source more than any poster, so I don´t start to debate this more. I just point out, that it´s official site and information comes from serious people knowing wildlife.


"This website is the number one source of information on Finland's large carnivores. We offer objective and reliable information and help people coexist with these animals.

The website is maintained by Metsähallitus, the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, the Finnish Wildlife Agency, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke) and the Finnish Ministry of the Environment."


http://www.largecarnivores.fi/

those very serious sources are citing fairytales from the 1600s..if they're not designed like this there won't be any punching and bone breaking happening 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply