WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Wild Cats
›
Lion
Lions in Central and East Africa
Lions in Central and East Africa
|
Lions in Central and East Africa
|
  *This image is copyright of its original author Don't worry Guate I have actually always doubted The possibility of that Lions weight as I do with all old records of big cat's exceeding 300 kg's, also The lion on The picture looked fake atleast taxidermised. but that's some great pictures and records that U haven't seen before. that Timbawati lion is incerdible and even though The woman pressent say's it's an estimate The wet almero said it was weighed at 280 gorged and later gave The figure of 250 kg. Here is another amazing lion from timbawati which actually Looks even bigger 
Not saying anything about the Timbavati weight itself, but the contradictory confirmation and refutation of the data is similar to the 272 kg lion. That's why I wish people published more often.
The main reason I distrust the 313 kg. lion and the 389 kg. tiger is in the comparison Guate made. If you see a 400-pound big cat close to a 6-foot human, the size of the cat already is quite staggering. Now imagine one in good shape of 500. And 600.
Guate based his comparison (referring to the 705-pound male Nepal tiger) on what could have been an actual record, but I've some doubts. I agree a very large male tiger might get to 220 cm. in head and body and even a bit over in a straight line. I also agree a very large big cat could possibly get to 600 pounds empty, but anything over, say, 650 pounds is just out of this world. I bought Smythies' book and agree with Waves, who said he was so grateful for the job the Nepal ruler offered him that he decided to forget about all basic questions. I think a Nepal tiger could have reached 10.9 'over curves', but 705 pounds would only have been possible when the giant would have been fully loaded. Remember they didn't have collars in those day, so he probably had to be baited. Maybe they offered him a young buffalo and maybe they shot him only after he had finished everything. Here's two photographs of large lions in good shape. The first one is very long-legged and has a large skull. They didn't give details, but I think he wasn't much over 500 pounds, if he reached that weight at all. I've seem them bigger, but that was a result of an extended stomach in most cases. This lion is as fit as they come:  *This image is copyright of its original author Here's another one I like (and Pantherinae). About as large as they come, but in good shape :  *This image is copyright of its original author In spite of the large size, I like most average-sized lions better. Same for tigers. The reason is they usually are more athletic. This is a photograph taken by the Jouberts. Okavango delta:  *This image is copyright of its original author
I agree with everything You say here Peter,
I personally think a head and body length of 220 cm is Max, atleast just a few centimeters from The absolute Max. To me a lion of 200, kg and a tiger like Munna or bamera etc (don't wanna estimate any weights, that's made people un popular before) are The most stunnig looking of their kind, take tigers like wagdoh and Lions like ceasar from The Notch coalition they are stocky and fat, hard to imagen even running, so yes great post @peter
One important note. Stocky does not equal fat. Stocky, in a natural setting, is a robust specimen. Bears are very stocky, but they're the strongest mammalian carnivore in history. Running, and running fast, is not a problem for bears either.
If a predator can't run, it's dead. These hefty cats are dominant males, so they can run, they're athletic enough.
Haha I'm not that stupid @tigerluver, my comment was a wink, wink comment. Ofcourse wagdoh and Caesar is strong and fast! much faster than any of us.
but they are as Peter stated much less athletic looking cat's for sure!  (06-09-2015, 01:43 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote: One important note. Stocky does not equal fat. Stocky, in a natural setting, is a robust specimen. Bears are very stocky, but they're the strongest mammalian carnivore in history. Running, and running fast, is not a problem for bears either. Take it a step further, Kaziranga tigers are as Stocky as they come. They have massive skulls and huge muscles and mid sections. We know for a fact that they are anything but unathletic, proof comes in the form of the massive tigress leaping out of tall grass to the top of a elephant and the other is a massive male running through water about chest high and chasing down catle with ease. We know cats can get stocky but the end of the day, they can only be as large as nature allows. They can only scavenge some times, they need to hunt and they need to hunt large animals to maintain that size. Nature will not allow an obese animal, it will eventually dictate that animal needs to work and work hard to eat. Its just he way of the world for predators. (06-09-2015, 02:17 AM)'Pantherinae' Wrote: Haha I'm not that stupid @tigerluver, my comment was a wink, wink comment. Ofcourse wagdoh and Caesar is strong and fast! much faster than any of us. Its hard to determine a "wink wink" comment if you state it as fact. Our standards of "athletic" have nothing to do with the standards for nature. Waghdoh is a proven hunter, a successful one at that, a guar killer and he even kills for his family and allows them to eat first at times. We walk a thin line when we try and put our ideaology of "fit or athletic" to what nature produces in its Survival of the fittest.
I said it's hard to even imagen they run... I think he ment that, and also can't see that as an attempt to state a fact. And yeah I know I should have answered more deeply and said I know over average lions/tigers are muscular and athletic in their own way, but my phone started to f$@& up and I could not edit my comment on my computer before you had replyed so my apologies @tigerluver I did not mean to sound rude, as it does when I read it now, horribly sorry. And Great you take care and comments on that @Pckts
I never said that wagdoh isen't a athletic cat, neither Kaziranga tigers, I said they do not look as athletic as average tigers, although they might be. And I think you can agree on that? Think the tigrer jumping on the elephant is a tigress, and that's a different thing though,
I didn't find it as rude at all, @Pantherinae, no worries. Just avoid the explicit words, please.
By simple physics, a lighter cat will be a faster runner and higher jumper, that's true. Sure, some exceptionally athletic big specimens can break this rule, but that can be said for many things.  (06-09-2015, 12:08 AM)'Pantherinae' Wrote: That looks like a pretty big lion. 
I think this male lion is the same male with the woman, both are the male of 250 kg, at least is what I think.
About the tiger of 705 lb (320 kg), I have state previously that I firmly believe that this tiger was baited, this because as far I know, all the hunted tigers from Nepal were baited, after all, Nepal was the place where this method was invented. We know that tigers in Nepal eat between 14-19 kg in a period of 24 hours, but in exceptional cases they can eat up to 35 kg, in the largest males. In this case, the empty belly weight of this Nepalese giant was probably between 285 - 300 kg empty belly, still a real giant. The paint in the book shows a true giant cat, so a figure of c.290 kg is very real, in the case of this Nepalese giant. The dimensions of the large tiger in my image with the Rusty-spotted cat where those of the giant of Brander (221 cm in head-body and 110 cm at the shoulder), but this size constitute the maximum recorded in modern tigers, in fact, even the Jankovski's Amur tiger of 330 cm "between pegs" probably measured c.220 cm in head-body too. Animals like that surely weighed no less than 272 kg (600 lb) "empty" and I think that the maximum figure that a wild tiger would be able to reach is c.300 kg, but this were probably very exceptional cases. A tiger of c.220 cm in head-body, c.115 cm in shoulder height and up to 290-300 kg is the maximum that an exceptional tiger could get (up to 330 cm including the tail), but in these days I think that a tiger of c.200 cm in head-body, c.100 cm in shoulder height and up to 250-260 kg is a really big animal.
@GuateGojira i really admire you're knowledge about cat's and that you have answers and know almost everything from baiting in Nepal to the amount of weight a tiger eats per day, althoug there are many knowledgable members here, it's very great for us to have people like you and @peter here, who are experts.
Thanks (06-09-2015, 05:55 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote: I didn't find it as rude at all, @Pantherinae, no worries. Just avoid the explicit words, please. This is and isn't true, running fast and jumping high require power and agility. You don't need to sacrifice one for the other. I don't like using human beings as an example for animals, but I think it works well in this case. 100m dash runners or 200m dash runners are considered the fastest men alive. When you look at them and compare them to a 800m or 1600m runner you can see the difference. Short distance runners have absolutely massive lower bodies and even their upper bodies are large as well. I:E: Barry Sander or Ricky Henderson type of body. Compared to a long distance runner who is much more enlogated an thin body, simple reason, muscles require oxygen, long distance requires endurance, oxygen is a higher premium than speed. Now on to Verticle jumps, I know 350lb power lifters with a 60'' box jump, just take a look online and you will see tons. JJ Watt is one that comes to mind, not a power lifter but a massive human being. So when comparing this to the world of tigers, being robust and muscular may mean they are not quite as agile but certainly doesn't mean that they aren't every bit as fast or jump as high. The prey they take down is large, they sacrifice agility for speed and power. They prey the hunt isn't as agile so they don't need to be either. 
Question to Guate, Peter and other lion experts
According to classification of Lion (I read first from Gaute posts) Barbary Lion is same as Asiatic Lion. But when I see images of Barbary Lion (in captivity) Their physical appearance seems to be different from any other lion sub species including Asiatic. And its clearly very visible. Look at the following images Barbary Lion form Hillside  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author And finally sultan  *This image is copyright of its original author Look at the face cuts. Certainly they are different then any other lion sub species. I know science prove them same but the mind and vision do not agree on this. Scientifically I am convince that they are same species but heart and vision say did science make error in this case ? I want to hear your views, Apart of science |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |