(01-11-2017, 01:23 AM)Spalea Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 10:27 AM)Vinay Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 02:47 AM)Pckts Wrote: The lion for one.
Essay? It's not that long of a read and you can always skip to the results. Measuring a zoo cat is also misleading since there are variances between captive and wild skulls same with muscle mass.

Are you expecting lower or higher psi for lions?? As a semi scavenger in African savanna it is more than enough for lions.

Zoo animals findings are more reliable than fiber in any day.BTW did you read the report? in the report no Panthera Leo  and no Panthera Tigris Tigris or Panthera Tigris Altica are measured.

*This image is copyright of its original author

What a stupid answer ! About the african lions:
1) false assertion: the  scavengers have often, if not always, the strongest bites.
2) what you think is not an approved scientific fact. Only a biased opinion.

(01-11-2017, 02:29 AM)manedmauler Wrote:

(01-11-2017, 01:23 AM)Spalea Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 10:27 AM)Vinay Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 02:47 AM)Pckts Wrote: The lion for one.
Essay? It's not that long of a read and you can always skip to the results. Measuring a zoo cat is also misleading since there are variances between captive and wild skulls same with muscle mass.

Are you expecting lower or higher psi for lions?? As a semi scavenger in African savanna it is more than enough for lions.

Zoo animals findings are more reliable than fiber in any day.BTW did you read the report? in the report no Panthera Leo  and no Panthera Tigris Tigris or Panthera Tigris Altica are measured.

*This image is copyright of its original author

What a stupid answer ! About the african lions:
1) false assertion: the  scavengers have often, if not always, the strongest bites.
2) what you think is not an approved scientific fact. Only a biased opinion.

Yeah they're both going to have a similar bite force considering their head size.  Its also not just about the bite hold, but how you bite, lions are better biters with their jaws then tigers.  A lion can bite in multiple places before you even know what happened, and then hes gone.  If the tigers going for that bite, its going to clutch and try to hold on usually, the lion will bite in so many different ways in so many different places stepping back from the opponent to protect itself and then going back in.  You see thi,s with gang ups each lion takes its turn going in for a bite then ripping and shaking the head to inflict more damage, then they jump back.

(01-11-2017, 01:23 AM)Spalea Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 10:27 AM)Vinay Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 02:47 AM)Pckts Wrote: The lion for one.
Essay? It's not that long of a read and you can always skip to the results. Measuring a zoo cat is also misleading since there are variances between captive and wild skulls same with muscle mass.

Are you expecting lower or higher psi for lions?? As a semi scavenger in African savanna it is more than enough for lions.

Zoo animals findings are more reliable than fiber in any day.BTW did you read the report? in the report no Panthera Leo  and no Panthera Tigris Tigris or Panthera Tigris Altica are measured.

*This image is copyright of its original author

What a stupid answer ! About the african lions:
1) false assertion: the  scavengers have often, if not always, the strongest bites.
2) what you think is not an approved scientific fact. Only a biased opinion.

(01-11-2017, 08:40 AM)Vinay Wrote:

(01-11-2017, 01:23 AM)Spalea Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 10:27 AM)Vinay Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 02:47 AM)Pckts Wrote: The lion for one.
Essay? It's not that long of a read and you can always skip to the results. Measuring a zoo cat is also misleading since there are variances between captive and wild skulls same with muscle mass.

Are you expecting lower or higher psi for lions?? As a semi scavenger in African savanna it is more than enough for lions.

Zoo animals findings are more reliable than fiber in any day.BTW did you read the report? in the report no Panthera Leo  and no Panthera Tigris Tigris or Panthera Tigris Altica are measured.

*This image is copyright of its original author

What a stupid answer ! About the african lions:
1) false assertion: the  scavengers have often, if not always, the strongest bites.
2) what you think is not an approved scientific fact. Only a biased opinion.

Hyena's majority diet come from scavenging and that too they mostly depends on crushing the bones so no doubt their bite force is higher. 

2.For your kind information i provided two links (Scientific facts) above.

(01-11-2017, 12:14 PM)Spalea Wrote:

(01-11-2017, 08:40 AM)Vinay Wrote:

(01-11-2017, 01:23 AM)Spalea Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 10:27 AM)Vinay Wrote:

(12-17-2016, 02:47 AM)Pckts Wrote: The lion for one.
Essay? It's not that long of a read and you can always skip to the results. Measuring a zoo cat is also misleading since there are variances between captive and wild skulls same with muscle mass.

Are you expecting lower or higher psi for lions?? As a semi scavenger in African savanna it is more than enough for lions.

Zoo animals findings are more reliable than fiber in any day.BTW did you read the report? in the report no Panthera Leo  and no Panthera Tigris Tigris or Panthera Tigris Altica are measured.

*This image is copyright of its original author

What a stupid answer ! About the african lions:
1) false assertion: the  scavengers have often, if not always, the strongest bites.
2) what you think is not an approved scientific fact. Only a biased opinion.

Hyena's majority diet come from scavenging and that too they mostly depends on crushing the bones so no doubt their bite force is higher. 

2.For your kind information i provided two links (Scientific facts) above.

We have proved on an other thread that The lion's bite force you quoted was one of the subadult. Thus an adult lion's bite force is clearly higher. In fact it is a little bit smaller than the tiger's bite force.


And when you say "as a semi scavenger I think it is more than enough", your assertion is not scientific at all. Only a biased opinion, yes...

(01-11-2017, 07:18 PM)Pckts Wrote:

Right here @Vinay 


So I assume you now know that the estimates in your videos are not the actual numbers. You may want to adjust your stance on the topic.

Quote:"For unscaled models, the highest bite forces in Newtons (N) were obtained at the second molar from P. boisei (2161 N), followed by G. gorilla (1723 N), P. troglodytes (1511 N), H. sapiens (1109 N or 1317 N and see below), P. pygmaeus (1031 N), A. africanus (831 N) and H. lar (136 N).

We found that bite force was broadly proportional to body mass (as predicted using a method based on cranial data that provides body mass estimates most comparable to those generated on the basis of postcranial reconstructions (Aiello & Wood 1994)). Predicted body masses for the hominid specimens ranged from 30.6 kg for A. africanus to 127.5 kg for G. gorilla. The relationship between bite force and body mass showed slightly positive or near-positive allometry, depending on bite point (see electronic supplementary material, figure S5). Relative to predicted body masses, P. boisei (67 kg) generated the highest bite forces and G. gorilla the lowest."
The craniomandibular mechanics of being human


"FE simulation accounting for 3-D muscle architecture generated bite reaction forces at the caniform teeth of 2337 N (T. carnifex) and 2906 N (P. leo). Bite reaction forces at the carnassials were 2819 N (T. carnifex) and 5612 N (P. leo)."
Cranial mechanics compared in extinct marsupial and extant African lions using a finite-element approach

The lion in the above article was estimated to weigh 267 kg; I have discussed before how this is a gross overestimation; I will use the more realistic number of 210 kg instead.

The gorilla was a female estimated to weigh 127.5 kg. Scaling it up and assuming isometry, that leads to a molar force of 1723 * (210/127.5)^(2/3) = 2403 N.

The lion's carnassial force: 5612 N.

(01-11-2017, 09:53 PM)Vinay Wrote: OMFG 

You are saying like ALL SITES got result from only one fk** arabic written mobile video ... Boss there are MILLIONS of African LIONS IN ZOO'S. 


If you have doubt ask them not me 

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/the-top-20-worlds-strongest-animal-bite-forces-measured-in-psi-new.2393047/

http://thechive.com/2015/09/17/the-strongest-bites-in-the-animal-kingdom-25-photos/ 

I can give you one Guinness book of world record and say AVERAGE BENGAL TIGER weight is 389 kg because i have ONE proof.   

Don't know how that semi scavenger got 691 psi.

(01-11-2017, 10:32 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(01-11-2017, 09:53 PM)Vinay Wrote: OMFG 

You are saying like ALL SITES got result from only one fk** arabic written mobile video ... Boss there are MILLIONS of African LIONS IN ZOO'S. 


If you have doubt ask them not me 

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/the-top-20-worlds-strongest-animal-bite-forces-measured-in-psi-new.2393047/

http://thechive.com/2015/09/17/the-strongest-bites-in-the-animal-kingdom-25-photos/ 

I can give you one Guinness book of world record and say AVERAGE BENGAL TIGER weight is 389 kg because i have ONE proof.   

Don't know how that semi scavenger got 691 psi.

Do you know what Sherdog and The Chive are?
Sherdog is a mma news sight and forum and The Chive is a local site devoted to cool pictures and t shirt sales.

And you cannot not give a guinness would record and say "average," you can give a world record and say World Record, it's right there in the name.


The last part you wrote is ridiculous