Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers

[LonePredator]

(10-07-2022, 07:22 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(10-07-2022, 07:17 PM)Kk LonePredator Wrote:

(10-07-2022, 07:03 PM)Pckts Wrote: Here is a comparable male in all departments

*This image is copyright of its original author

213cm in HBL but taken over curves so around 208cm in a straight line.
His chest girth is 140cm *4 cm* larger than Wagdoh 

Shoulder height unknown but it’s safe to say it’s going to be at least as tall as Wagdoh since he wasn’t a very tall Tiger.

This males weight was 546lbs or 247 kgs.

213cm over the curves would mean 200-203 cm in straight which totally adds up with the weight of 247kg.

And like I have already stated, chest girth does not correlate with weight as much as bodylength does and also the fact that Wagdoh was so old his chest girth would have shrunk due to old age.

No it wouldn’t, generally you’ll see anywhere from 2-4” difference between the two. So assuming they both are fairly close in length, Wagdoh is outsized in chest and most likely shoulder. And Branders 600lb Tiger significantly outsized him in every department 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Completely wrong. The straight bodylength is about 0.94-0.955 times the curved bodylength. Your method of ‘subtracting’ 2-4 inches is invalid because the bigger the Tiger, the more you’ll have to subtract and the smaller the Tiger, the less.

Maźak even suggests subtracting 20cm (8 inches) for the largest Tigers so your method of subtracting 2-4 inches is completely wrong.

And even if you subtract 4 inches since this was a large Tiger, it would still mean 203cm in straight line so where did you pull out 208cm from??

And I am saying this the 17th time, chest girth does not have a good enough correlation between with weight and neither does height and Wagdoh was so old his chest would have shrunk anyway.

And the Brander example is invalid since that Tiger was never weighed on a scale. Reply