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 ---

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A General Theory of the Size of Tigers

LonePredator Offline
Regular Member
***
#12
( This post was last modified: 07-07-2022, 10:14 PM by LonePredator )

(07-07-2022, 09:25 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:
(07-07-2022, 09:14 PM)LonePredator Wrote: Isn't the tail length already given though? There is a tail length of 3 feet 9 inches already given in that document.

By the way, even when length is taken over curves, the tail is still measured straight right?? So can simply subtract tail length from total length and will will that give us the head-body length over curves??




As for my weight estimation, if I consider the HB length of 229cm like you said and the height as 109cm as given and chest girth as 160cm as given and make an isometric calculation by taking a 190cm long, 100cm tall, 130cm chest girth, 200kg Tiger as surrogate then...

229÷190=1.205
(1.205^3) x 200 = 351

109÷100=1.09
(1.09^3) x 200 = 259

160÷130=1.2307
(1.2307^3) x 200 = 372

(351+259+372) ÷ 3 = 327kg

So I make a final weight estimate of 327kg

Yes, that is exactly what I have done, took the tail length, substracted it for the total length and latter made the correction of the 20 cm.

And yes, the tail is always taken straight, is the only form as it is just a single straight line from the base to the tip. That is why I told you that using the tail length we can also try to get the approximate head-body straight and like in the example that I showed, the difference is not too much (229 against 231).

About the weight, I personally think that 327 kg is too much, 300 is already extreme for any modern cat. I prefer to be conservative in this point with my 290 kg estimated from the Nepalese male of 320 kg, assuming a stomach content of 30 kg, although I honestly think that it should be less, may be 20 kg as the tiger was still runing and jumping before been shot, something that a gorged tiger could not do.

Yes, 30kg might be too much to subtract and I understand where you are coming from regarding the conservative weight estimate but the Tiger literally had prehistoric dimensions and also had a 160cm chest girth so I also don’t think it was that frail either so maybe we can agree to disagree on this one :)

And I had some time on hand and I drew an unfinished Bengal and Amur.


*This image is copyright of its original author
1 user Likes LonePredator's post
Reply




Messages In This Thread
RE: A General Theory of the Size of Tigers - LonePredator - 07-07-2022, 09:36 PM



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