B2 and Other Great Tiger Pics from India

[peter]

There have been many debates on the differences between lions and tigers. Most, so it seems, agreed lions of large subspecies could be a bit taller than tigers of large sub species. My take is the difference between both is close to zilch in absolutes. Lions seem a bit taller because males in particular have a different posture. They also are a bit shorter. They could be relatively taller, but I'm not sure as there just are no data.

Anyhow. This post has a few photographs of well-known male Indian tigers. They were not known because they were exceptionally tall, but because they were impressive to many who actually saw them.

This is Raja. A tall tiger? Difficult to judge, but he seems more about muscle than something else.

*This image is copyright of its original author

     
Here he is again, now between two Jeeps.

*This image is copyright of its original author

For those not quite convinced about the length of his legs:

*This image is copyright of its original author

One more. Wagdoh also isn't known for being exceptionally tall. But he apparently is well over average:

*This image is copyright of its original author

 

The point I want to make is tigers, or more accurately, Indian wild tigers, could be on a par with lions in South Africa regarding leg length. If not, they are very close. Mental pictures often are a result of perceptions. Head length and head posture have a positive effect, whereas body length and stripes have the opposite effect.    

  Reply