There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---

  • 2 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Closed 
Overrated size of Munna aka Langda of Kanha National Park

United States Pckts Offline
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#10
( This post was last modified: 07-18-2014, 03:29 AM by Pckts )

(07-18-2014, 03:11 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote: I've no opinion on the debate, you guys are the modern tiger tracking experts. The only thing that bothers me about all these estimation from eye witnesses is the "much bigger" phrase. In pictures, all these cats look equally robust, so they're not referring to that. If they're referring to dimensions, no dominant male can be truly "much bigger" than another unless one can differentiate 8 inches (roughly 60 kg of weight difference) accurately from a distance on a moving target without the last tiger in front of him as reference. Just look at Khali, supposedly a giant tiger of modern times in this video. There's a clear size difference, but no dwarfing in dimension (obviously the weight is different story).




 

 

 

 

You can definitely see difference between robust tigers and not so robust tigers, IMO.
Waghdoh looks massive no matter what, in person or film. Patewala, Munna, Bamera, katezari, Jai etc..
Those tigers look huge,
tigers like
Raja and Shivaji look very muscular but not as bulky, then when you see the gaur hunt video or raja walking infront of the Jeep, you realize how massive they really are. Shivaji is said to be massive as well but looks to be a shorter stockier tiger, so it depends.

Thats why I like to take as many eye witness accounts as I can and compare to see if the facts line up.



Copters has far more expierence with Tigers than I do, and he knows way more about Indian tiger personalities, but I don't think he has seen any of the Kahna Tigers in person, correct Copters?
That is why I prefer to take these eye witness accounts and claims.
If you have seen them in person, I would quickly take your word on it.

 Also, Khali looks far larger in the video. Much more massive, taller and longer. Remember, you aren't talking about differences in feet, but rather inches. So you'll never see a complete mismatch, these tigers need certain size to even attempt to usurp a resident male from a territory. That being said, Waghdoh is always quoted as being untouchable outside of the Kaziranga monsters which I think the unanimous consensus is, they're the largest tigers alive today.
1 user Likes Pckts's post




Messages In This Thread
RE: Overrated size of Munna aka Langda of Kanha National Park - Pckts - 07-18-2014, 03:26 AM



Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social     Subscribe  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB