WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Wildlife Pictures and Videos Gallery
Wild carnivores and humans compared
Wild carnivores and humans compared
|
Wild carnivores and humans compared
|
Sharad Bandhavgarh
Mahaman male #Bandhavgarh #2017  *This image is copyright of its original author Rajbehera subadalt cubs June...................2017 #BANDHAVGARH #  *This image is copyright of its original author
A medical check on our leader Big Mak 2008.
 *This image is copyright of its original author
Cougar and Jogger captured on the same camera trap within minutes of one another.
 *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Jogger was closer to the camera  (12-07-2016, 01:40 AM)Pckts Wrote: Minh Ha Wow..never seen this!
I'm 6'5'' and the lions and tigers I have seen are usually a bit lower than waist level for me.
 (11-02-2017, 05:01 AM)Pckts Wrote:(11-02-2017, 04:35 AM)Rishi Wrote: @Pckts @epaiva The Gypsy has a bonnet-top height of 115 cm at safari configurations. The guy seems more like 5'7"... I had this idea of comparing with vehicle from an article in an Bengali amature travelogue at '14-'15. The author specialised in wildlife-safari stories... He said, among the ones he has seen, Khali almost crossed the bonnet height..followed by T-28 of Ranthambore, who came close to it.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
This is what I've been saying for very very long time.
Check my post 195 in Tiger directory. Northern and Northwestern tigers are bigger framed. They are taller and longer than our general well known central Indian tigers. Central Indian tigers appear more robust (massive bodies). This robust appearance is partly contributed by their smaller stature. The north (northern and northwestern) tigers even when gorged won't appear very robust coz of their bigger frame (longer limbs and bodies). This is easily observable The confusion occurs when fan boys starts to make absurd claims, especially Kanha fan boys. I've seen few reputed fan boys claiming Uma male to be the biggest tiger. This is an insanely stupid claim. Uma was never the biggest even in its home Mukki range let alone Kanha and the entire India. The claim of Uma killing KF and Bheem without a single scratch is also unbelievable (I'll talk about this later in Tiger directory thread). When it comes to Mukki the bigger framed tiger was Late Bheema he was taller and longer among the 4, but the heaviest was KF coz he was closer to Bheema in frame size but much more robust in built. Uma male is a above average tiger with bigger head and muscular body. Among central Indian tigers Waghdoh is a big framed tiger in Tadoba, Jai is a big framed tiger from Umredh, Bheem is a very big tiger (taller and longer than Waghdoh and Jai, but less robust than prime waghdoh) he fought and injured his brother Mangu twice recently in Bandhavgarh. In Ranthambore T28 aka star male was considered to be the bigger framed tiger followed closely by T10, Jhumroo, X male, Fateh etc (this group is generally the taller group) and there is T24, dollar male, T57, T58 etc (this group is slightly shorter at the shoulders in general). Here are some pics and a vid showing T28''s height and massive size. Star male crosses the bonnet height.  *This image is copyright of its original author |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 7 Guest(s) |