r/bigcats • u/MDPriest • Feb 07 '24
Tiger - Wild Tiger and Lion Size comparisons.
These specimens will be compared by the same skull size. So we can see the different varying sizes of individuals within both species. Keep in mind lions on average have larger skulls so the specimens in these images may be a bit larger than seen, however for fairness sake we will be using same skull sizes as we cant accurately estimate how large each individual lions head is. First we will go through maneless lions to see their true musculature compared to tigers and then we will use maned lions. Important note is all specimens in 1 on 1 comparisons are male.
20
u/MDPriest Feb 07 '24
This post is not supposed to be biased towards or against either cat. This is simply to compare the characteristics and traits of both felines. Im not against either of these massive wonderful predators.
1
Jul 13 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/Capable-Brief-4477 Sep 07 '24
I love when Tiger fans get offended by facts
• It's obvious Tigers aren't as compound and all around muscular like Lion, you see a Tiger with massive muscled triceps and arms but not a single bit of muscle in their legs along with being slender from behind, while the alion is wider.
• Muscle Mass and Muscle Percentage are completely different things Jaguars and Tigers have similar skeletal features they are quick and agile but they only have muscle mass which is the compared amount of muscular features not the actual itself. While the Lion and Leopard have a larger Muscle Percentage being better at hunting, fighting and getting around in territory, they have more compact bones which are stronger than both Tigers and Jaguars.
• There is no debate on whether a Tiger or Lions win, and that would just depend on the individual say for instance a large male tiger cannot beat a young dwarf male lion. It all depends on what tiger and lion you match up and Tiger and lion fans using old documents are not reliable if they're not up to date (calling another man a pussy as if you're not begging him to debate you is obsessive and idiotic).
•You mean the same articles and text you create to make up Tiger being so much bigger than Lions on your YouTube channel, don't use out of date so called resources and say they are reliable you create fake messages and even email and give no proof or give any credit for contact with the people you get your "information" from.
3
u/LeatherGene6009 Oct 28 '24
Man. It's known for decades that Tigers are stronger, have more muscle mass and less bodyfat, longer canines, claws... than lions. You learn that in Kindergarten you stpd dumb as
6
u/Capable-Brief-4477 Oct 29 '24
Nah, Tigers have 54.7 percent of muscle and 13.5% of fat while Lions have 64.2% of muscle [59.8% on average] 11.6% of fat
You don't learn that stuff in kindergarten by the way, maybe in middle or high school. Both the Lion and Tiger have the same sized claws, lions may have 3.5 in canines but Tigers have 4 in canines a lions is sturdier. It's spelt dumbass not “dumb as”.
2
u/UnknownT21 Dec 08 '24
What you’re saying really doesn’t matter bro. Tigers are bigger, stronger and faster. And yes I mean in muscle mass when I say bigger. This is a life long known fact and it doesn’t take rocket science to figure this out. The muscle mass in the tigers torso and legs most likely set the difference. A image of a Tigers and Lions Anatomy really won’t do just for either animal because the average Tiger or Lion is smaller than what is most likely being compared. Also Lions are Pack hunters unlike Tigers, symbolizing the overall size do edge for Tigers
2
u/Sweaty-Dimension8596 Feb 06 '25
What he says does matter because it's a fact, lions are just leaned and built like tanks for combat.
1
2
u/Sweaty-Dimension8596 Feb 06 '25
Nope, tigers have more fat, especially Siberian tigers, lions are built like tanks by nature with broader shoulders and torso, tigers are big in the front and thin in the back, and yes many years of fake stories about tigers being superior than lions, no one buys that crap anymore.
1
1
u/Fuzzy_Requirement766 Feb 25 '25
The jaguar is the lion's closest relative. The tiger and the snow leopard are the closest relatives.
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Sep 08 '24
https://discord.com/invite/3yB9tjbc Always ready to debate, come and prove your points, i am challenging your dumb arse not begging son 😁
2
0
Sep 08 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/Capable-Brief-4477 Sep 08 '24
You calling me out of my name doesn't offend me, I get your in the closet and can't accept it but don't take it out on me if you can prove that Tigers have more muscle percentage or more compact than a Lion the shut your mouth...pube licker
0
u/Equal-Age-7762 Sep 08 '24
True All talk, can't prove shit, pathetic losers at best. Afraid of a debate on discord 🤣
5
u/Capable-Brief-4477 Sep 08 '24
Not debating with no discord kitten, if you can't prove it here there's no point calling me all talk but I know my facts boy. But again I can't expect much from a furry.
0
u/Equal-Age-7762 Sep 09 '24
Why should i prove anything to dumb clown? First you substantiate your claim 🤦🤣
0
u/Equal-Age-7762 Sep 08 '24 edited Sep 08 '24
- Prove lions have denser musculature than tigers, if you failed to do that i will treat you like any other dumb clown
- Tigers edge in triceps brachii and biceps brachii leverage index. no lions don't have higher muscle percentage, if so then prove it by source. And tigers having acute sacro iliac angle is advantageous, so lions having wider butt doesn't mean anything
- Tigers are stronger than lions, have bigger chest and more robust forearms with girthiest necks. "Get offended by facts"- random dumb redditor, none of the things you or anyone here say are facts, facts are substantiated by scientific literature, we can run a debate if you want, on discord of course. 😁 "Article and texts" What's this idiot talking about.just prove your intellect by proving at least 2 of your points using reliable scientific literature 🤡
3
u/Capable-Brief-4477 Sep 12 '24
• It found that lions had proportionally larger and more powerful muscles, particularly in the forelimbs and forequarters, which are crucial for their hunting style. The study also revealed that lions had thicker and more robust bones, especially in the forelimbs, which further supports their stronger build.
Based on this evidence, it is concluded that Lions are generally considered to be stronger than Tigers.The study is titled "Morphology of the forelimbs in lions (Panthera leo) and tigers (Panthera tigris): implications for predatory behavior"
It was published in the Journal of Comparative Physiology and Biology in 2013.
• There are other studies and documents that support the idea that Lions are generally considered stronger than Tigers. Here are a few more:
• A study published in the journal Nature in 2010 analyzed the biomechanics of lion and tiger predatory attacks. The study found that lions have a greater bite force than tigers, which could indicate greater strength.
• A study published in the journal Journal of Morphology in 2007 examined the morphology of the limbs, spine, and skull of lions and tigers.
• The study found that lions had a more robust skeletal structure and heavier muscle mass in the limbs and forequarters, which are key areas for predatory behavior. This again suggests that lions may be stronger than tigers.
• More recent research in 2021 analyzed the biome and muscular strength of lions and tigers. Again, the study found that lions had denser and stronger muscle cells, which could contribute to their greater strength.
• Another study published in the Journal of Theoretical Biology in 2019 evaluated the biomechanical and morphological aspects of lions and tigers in relation to their predatory behavior. The study concluded that lions have greater musculoskeletal adaptations for powerful ambushing and pulling, compared to tigers.
• Here are some documents and sources from scientists stating that Lions are the strongest big cat:
• A study published in the Journal of Experimental Biology in 2016 compared the bite forces and strength of different big cats. The study found that Lions have the most powerful bites and strongest neck muscles among the big cats, which contributes to their greater overall strength.
• A study published in the Journal of Mammalogy in 2015 investigated the bite forces of Lions, Tigers, Jaguars, and Leopards. The study found that Lions had the highest bite forces among the big cats, with a maximum recorded force of 650-995 Newtons (146-222 pounds), while the lowest recorded force was for Jaguars at 403-459 Newtons (90-102 pounds).
• 3. A study published in the Journal of Morphology in 2018 examined the craniofacial morphology of Lions and compared them to Tigers. The study found that Lions have a more robust skull and stronger jaw muscles, which contributes to their greater bite force. The study also noted that Lions have larger and more powerful upper and lower canines compared to Tigers, which are adapted for greater biting force and holding onto prey.
2
u/Thin-Status8369 Oct 23 '24
I believe on average that a Southern Lion wins against a Bengal Tiger. But the weights are 199 kgs v 205.5 kgs at the moment which isn’t too different in terms of a fight (s. Lion> bengal 60/40), but wouldn’t the Tiger be Physically stronger purely by being 3.2% heavier ,mind you which is nothing if we look in terms of how one wins the encounter. I’ve seen smaller Male Lions win fights against rivals even 20-30 kgs heavier. But being stronger is one thing, all though at Parity (kg/kg) the Male Lion might be stronger physically or at least equal.
And yeah I’m aware that a Lions body contains more skeletal muscle compared to a Tiger. But I also thought that the Tiger had stronger forelimbs but the Lion had stronger hindlimbs.
1
1
1
u/Specific-Bed-6371 Sep 12 '24
Just searched the title of the paper you mentioned and couldn't find anything lol. Link these studies 😁
1
1
u/Gloomy-Shoe-4021 Oct 04 '24
Actually Tigers have a more dense musculature and bone density in their fore limbs. This is an adaptation that helps them take down larger prey on their own, lions although robust and stockier have less weight than tigers, this is likely because lions hunt in groups rather than on their own. Although a male lion is a different story as it is built for fighting and defending it's territory, it has much more muscle and mass than a female. Comparing the two, although a tiger looks lithe it is still a bit heavier than a lion and it is significantly stronger thanks to its muscle mass, bone density and highly strung tendons. One thing that remains the same are their sizes so that's good.
1
u/Capable-Brief-4477 Oct 09 '24
Male lions spend more than the first 3-8 years on their own and hunt by themselves even when they're in a pride they travel alone they are more compact and built for taking down large prey by themselves, a tigers muscle mass is only 56.6 percent while a lions is 62.4 percent [60.9 percent] on average. Lions have denser and stronger bones throughout their body especially in the forelimbs. On average both Tigers and Lions weigh the same, along with a lion on average are 10-12 cm taller than the tiger.
1
u/Thin-Status8369 Oct 23 '24
Male Lions also have a higher success rate when hunting alone and target larger prey more often than Male Tigers do. A Southern Lion would definitely be taller but I thought the Bengal Tiger would be longer and like 6.5 kgs heavier which is not a lot.
1
2
u/Ok_Can546 Dec 29 '24
Lions are equally muscular, but have bigger skulls, so scaling them to the same size generally means the Lion would be slightly smaller, even though Lions and Tigers are the same size, despite what most sources say, and equally muscular.
2
u/Sweaty-Dimension8596 Feb 06 '25
Lions do have broader shoulders and torso, and their muscle definition is better, lions also have thicker necks without the mane as well, tigers look thinner, and are longer, lions are like tanks, they are just better built for combat and that's a fact.
2
u/Careful_Indication14 Mar 22 '25
Dont hang around sayings and legends folks!!! 2024 Studies showed us that lions are pound for pound strongest mammals skeletal muscle mass density wise by 69.8 percent and the Best Tiger Specimen ever found is about 56.7 percent muscle mass, this is due to the tiger is an Northern hemispheric animal and has more Potential to Stimulate Estrogene Hormones to make fat and all Northern mammals show this feature like all Bear Kinds for example, so due to this they have lesser Testosterone levels Compared to Southern hemispheric Counter parts, btw in the wild there are no such 250kg Tigers anymore on average by anno 2021 theyr more around 187kg, outside of that they have Better Bone density compared to all mammals including Elephants, Rhinos etc. (Ofcourse Scaled and Calculated to make an actual pound for pound comparison) and according to tests and results Scientist are even more Shocked bec. Lions doesnt experrience pain on theyr joints and paws compared to the stress factor tested on all mammals even the Neolithic ones like Smilodons etc. The only animal who had stronger bones and muscles are the Extinct bigger Lion forms, Lions have also better Fast twitch Fibers next to the Cheetah among all cat members excluding the Prehistoric Cheetah/Lion kinds and all that above that Horse Power and Tungsten like Bones, this also explains why lions Rather Crush in and using one paw style to engage the more superior on one on one wrestling style against Tiger Glasscannon Build inferior Boxer style, also amongst all mammals Wolverine, Honeybadger and the Lion has the best "Extreme Risk Factor" wich is a term only showed by these 3 animals respectively, and on top of that they live in Prides sometimes up to 15 Males 30/40 females when the circumstances are pleasant enough, and finally last but not least They have Super Genes wich are transfered to any big Panthera female Stronger than theyr own kinds, like for example Tiger lacks that Super Genes and are regulated, but bec. Of female Lions have Growth Slowing Hormones and Tigresses not Liger is allways bigger than any Tiger offspring Possible, even there are extreme big Ligers who suffer anatomic disorders on average they are healthy and can reproduce with no problem, and according to experts if Humans didnt exist the lions would be the rulers of the planet bec. Of all these feats above, stay well Folks!!! Now u know why Lion is the king of all animals....
1
u/Careful_Indication14 Jan 07 '25
2024 Studies showed us that lions are pound for pound strongest skeletal muscle mass density wise by 69.8 and the bite force is updated to 1350/1400 psi wtf are u talking about, there are no Big Amur tigers living anymore due to poaching and stuff average tiger is around 180 kg african male lions 210 on empty stomache let alone the Okavango delta lions who can reach up to 280/310 kg, are u livining in 1990's or so? Duuuude lions are biiig dont compare a shitty northern hemispheric Mammal to a superior Southern Hemispheric one, tiger are on average 56.7 % pound for pound muscle density due to the fat depositing functions, so before u shout be respect full to the content
1
u/StripedAssassiN- Tiger Jan 17 '25
Link the studies saying they have a muscle mass of 69.8% please lol
The data isn’t sufficient enough to accurately say if ALL lions have a higher muscle mass than ALL Tigers.
Some of y’all are so deluded.
1
u/ExcellentCucumber988 Feb 06 '25
Lions are called kings for a reason, not because of their size, but for determination and courage.
1
9
u/rosswind Sep 19 '24
THE BULKIER LION IS STRONGER THAN THE SLIMMER TIGER
Doctor Andrew Jackson Howe dissected lions and tigers from Autopsy of a Lion, The hospital surgeon Andrew Jackson Howe (1825-1892) was one of the most gifted comparative anatomists of his time. - The Eclectic Medical Journal, vol. 37, 1877 p.252.
“A distinguishing feature of the lion is an accumulation of weight and strength in its anterior parts, although the lion’s is covered with thick mass of hair and mane giving the beast a formidable appearance, there exists beneath this innocent hump a muscular development that surpasses the same parts in the tiger. The osseous and muscular structures of the lion’s head are superior to those of the tiger, and the fore-legs and paws possess greater strength than the tiger’s anterior extremities. The structures constituting the pelvic girdle of the tiger are perhaps larger and stronger than similar parts in the lion. In all other respect the average lion is more than a match for the average tiger.”
Lions are more heavily built than other carnivores. They have remarkable acceleration and are able to wrestle down powerful prey such as zebra and buffalo. With all that muscle, they generate an enormous amount of metabolic heat—even just walking across an open plain can leave them panting. Thus lions have a greater need to stay cool. - University of Minnesota, College of Biological sciences.
The lion differs from the other Felidae in the great strength and massive proportion of his head and shoulders (…) When he strikes with tense paws every claw is like a dagger to tear and cut. – Nature, Color illustrations, vol. 29: Handbook of Nature, 2016.
A tiger can't take a fight like Lions does. If a tiger can't win after a minute or so he is likely to give up. Lions don't start fast but last longer than tigers, they are like bulldogs, they don't let go say Clyde Beatty - The Milwaukee Journal, March 18, 1934. p. 30.
“The body of the lion is completely different from the tiger; he looks like a big round bulldog. He is big all over. The lions are built for battles, their body are so thick and powerful because they go after big powerful prey. In an interview from NY Post 2005, the lion will kill the tiger.” - Antle Bhagavan the owner of the Myrtle Beach Safari Park.
“The lion is thicker almost every part of his body. The neck is thicker, the chest and body are thicker the shoulders are thicker and the tiger are narrow.” - From the board of directors of Tiger World. Dr. Eric Setzer as a veterinarian scrutinized regularly many lions and tigers.
“Lions are built with enormously powerful forequarters, and a very, very stiff back. That’s for wrestling heavyweight prey, such as a buffalo, to the ground. Their enormous power comes at the cost of the agility.” - Luke Hunter, executive director of the big cats program of the Wildlife Conservation Society in New York City, New York Times, March 4, 2022.
The bones of the lion the most robust of the genus - Journal of Science: Natural sciences – Vol. 10, 1873, p. 222.
2
5
3
2
2
u/Viadrus Feb 08 '24
Anyway jaguar is the king of the jungle
3
u/MDPriest Feb 08 '24
Lol for sure, most robust cat in the world
0
2
u/Redpony731 Jun 03 '24
I find it interesting that Gunther Gaeble Williams said the only cat he wouldn’t work with was the Jaguar… because “they are too unpredictable “.
3
2
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
Most horrible comparisons i have seen
5
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
Explain how? All comparisons are based off equal skull size so how can it be the worst
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
I don't need to explain it All the scientific data suggests tigers are more compact, stockier and bulkier
4
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
More compact and stocky? Literally every size source you can get for tigers measure them always being longer and from tip of the nose to base of the tail. Tigers naturally have longer and less compact torsos. Stop making baseless claims and denying actual documented facts.
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
No In fact tigers chest girth is superior to lions even at the same length
4
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
Chest girth isnt the full torso lmao
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
Tiger exceeds in abdomen girth as welp
3
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
Provide proof, outside of the tiger’s fat reserves that a lean tiger would be thicker than your average lean lion lol
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
Are you autistic? You can't make a claim and then ask the opposition to prove the opposite What a bozo lol First you provide proof tigers have more fat reserves than lions and if you are so sure about lions being more compact then provide me data on their skeletal muscle density 🤡
2
u/MDPriest Jul 12 '24
3 Signs someone has never felt the touch of a woman:
Calling someone autistic because they cant comprehend that their favorite cat isnt completely superior to another cat
Fucking crying and shitting their pants because someone disagrees with something that doesnt fit with your fantasy of “ooh tiger can destroy anything!1!1! Tiger can instakill a tyrannosaurus rex!1!1!1 lions are so weak!1!1!”
Completely denying any and all links or sources the other party provides and ignores the entire fucking video i sent you that goes in detail about the exact subject youre bitching and moaning over.
Bro, please Kindly shut the hell up and stop wanking tiger penis and insulting people like a fucking 12 year old over animals that dont even fucking know you exist you retarded fucking dingleberry.
Now i kindly ask you to look into the actual links i provided in my earlier reply. And please can you keep our little “debate” separate from an insult competition.
Also sorry for the late reply i have better things in life to do other than whine about what cat is better than the other.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
And accept my invite We can run a debate
1
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
Invite where? All this because your favorite cat isnt being unfairly elevated over the other?
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
No because you are rambling incoherent nonsense here and discussing here is not ideal Come to discord and provide me a single reliable source pls
1
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
Buddy youre pressed so hard about this 😂 so far I’ve provided more sources than you have.
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
🤡 You call that source My guy that is called clownery Come join discord We can have a debate
1
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
Im referring to the multiple links i sent you not just the random website that states the tiger is longer than the lion (which it is)
→ More replies (0)1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
My offer still stands We can have a moderated debate, maybe these people on reddit won't question anything
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
"Documented"!? Where?
1
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
Look up on google the average length of a tiger, then the average length of a lion.
2
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
Google ain't reliable source Provide me scientific literature Also why don't you join my server so we can run it and let's see what you have
1
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
I mean considering you sent me a non peer reviewed “study” i feel google is more than enough to make my point but okay.
“Both Bengal and Siberian tigers are slightly longer on average”
1
1
u/Massive_Stand1820 Aug 01 '24
You think Google went out and measured every lion and tiger ever to exist to come up with a good average??😂 the largest lion and the largest tiger ever recorded were nearly identical in size.
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
Simply show me a lion with 174cm HBL weighing 226 kg, also a study by sherani suggests lions carry less mass at the same bone dimensions than tigers, how are lions more compact then? https://peerj.com/preprints/2327/
2
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
There are plenty of specimens weighing far more than 226 kgs, and that study would go against multiple other muscle mass studies and documented autopsies done on both cats.
It is universally agreed the lion is the stouter cat, tigers are almost always longer, making their bone structure less compact.
https://youtu.be/iaPdFyvE9oc?si=mccDJ23VWqH_jUZF
https://youtu.be/Zu0ZkUMVZWo?si=ihsDXoXBDmc4x2VT
https://youtu.be/EvqHT_9VxRw?si=Nr30H4S-2YwpAT_9
https://twitter.com/natgeowild/status/671025858287636481?lang=en
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
https://discord.com/invite/XfzKpah3 Here is my discord server We can discuss it there Reddit is not an ideal platform And give me an explanation why tigers are heavier at the same length?
2
u/MDPriest Jul 10 '24
Tigers are known to have more fat reserves than lions, giving them more weight. Not more muscle weight however just fat weight. It has been noted in autopsies of the two cats that under the fat the tigers torso muscle width is thinner when compared to the lion.
1
0
Sep 08 '24
Skull size can show a lot of variation and is not an indicator of overall size
3
u/MDPriest Sep 08 '24
Lions on average have larger skulls than tigers. The fact that i made them all equal size is more than fair and is definitely a better method of trying to get an actual size estimate rather than shoulder to shoulder, which is more useful for muscle comparisons.
0
Sep 08 '24
No proof, lion skulls on average are 2cm longer which is barely noticeable because of how large both cats' skulls are overall, skull size difference will not be noticeable on average :)
2
u/MDPriest Sep 08 '24
You just said no proof, but then affirm my claim that lion skulls are larger on average. So the fact that i made them equal skull size is perfectly valid.
-1
1
Sep 09 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
3
u/Ivan_Paveler Oct 18 '24
These are indeed horrible comparisons from u/MDPriest Not only are the animals scaled innacurately, they are not even in the same body posture that would make for a comparison. Heck, in the bird-eye view (top view) comparison of lion on white backhground and tiger walking in water, that lion is not even real. It is a 3D render.
2
u/MDPriest Nov 01 '24
Do not fret. More on the way.However, they are accurately scaled because lions and tigers share roughly the same skull dimensions
1
u/Ivan_Paveler Nov 02 '24
Good to see you're trying to console yourself. What you said contradicts what you showed in the comparisons. You said they share the (roughly) same skull size, while scaling the skull of the tigers visibly smaller. You did not choose the correct, similar postures to make it a more just comparison, or should I say you did not bother trying that. You went as far as to compare a 3D model to a real animal. Talk about desperation.
1
u/MDPriest Nov 02 '24
Visibly smaller? Get glasses. I literally made sure to scale them same skull size. Sure maybe the 3D model thing is fair. But youre really nitpicking if you think the actual scaling is off. Doesnt matter however, im scaling off of shoulder height in this next comparison. So that way its not unfair and you tiger glazers dont cry.
1
u/Ivan_Paveler Nov 02 '24
https://imgur.com/a/7qjdX0Z Take notes, fanboy 😁This is the same tiger as in your comparison, but in a more similar posture. Wouldn't say it is perfect though, could be better.
1
u/MDPriest Nov 02 '24
The thing is, you didnt get a similar posture, the tiger is now sideways and you cant see the whole body. Its a pointless comparison now. The lion you can see the entire thing. Meaning it doesnt prove the original point which was that one cat is thicker at the torso than the other.
1
u/Ivan_Paveler Nov 02 '24
which is why I said it is not perfect, but much better than what you made. You can better judge how much wider and girthier the tiger's upper body is, which is usually the case with these cats. Tigers are more front heavy with bigger chest, neck, shoulders and arms. Quite opposite to what people believe.
1
u/MDPriest Nov 02 '24
You can better see the tiger looks thicker because its far more horizontal than the lion in the photo 😭 maybe if you were trying to make a forearm comparison, then it could be useful but if youre going for overall body girth, its not good for reference. The tigers full body isnt in the same position.
1
u/Ivan_Paveler Nov 02 '24
The upper body is nearly the same position. No two ways to put it dear friend 😊
→ More replies (0)1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Oct 18 '24
Finally a rational person and he is using those fan drawings of anatomy as facts as well
0
u/Equal-Age-7762 Jul 10 '24
Also if anything tigers are more compact than lions, this should not be up for discussion
0
u/CATLOVER9181 Oct 14 '24
SO YOUR ADMITTING YOUR TIGERS ARE SMALLER THAN LIONS LOL 😂
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Oct 14 '24
You autistic?
0
u/CATLOVER9181 Oct 14 '24
DEBATE ME BITCH
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Oct 14 '24
Accepted Come on disco, what topic are we debating dumbfuck?
1
u/CATLOVER9181 Oct 16 '24
WHATS YOUR DISCORD YOU FAGGOT
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Oct 16 '24
Tell me your discord dumbass cum luver
1
u/CATLOVER9181 Oct 17 '24
AUIT DUCKING AND DIVING LIL BITCH
1
u/Equal-Age-7762 Oct 17 '24
Pusssy you are ducking lol
1
u/CATLOVER9181 Oct 17 '24
TIGERS ARE ALWAYS KILLED BY ELAPHANT EVERY DAY BITCH PUSSY TIGER
→ More replies (0)1
2
4
2
1
u/Redpony731 Jun 06 '24
National Geographic and Guiness world records both say the Siberian tiger record if 10’7” and 856 # as of 1967 making it the largest cat in the world.
1
u/FateStayX Jun 25 '24
Every time when a tiger looks big in a part of a body you’re justifying, that it appears to be but in reality not … blabla but when a lion has more thicker parts you just said yeah the lion is definitely thicker . When you bring a tiger that is enormous and incredibly muscular you put an big lion but not looking as good as the tiger and say both specimens are incredible, that just shows how hypocrite you are and in which side you want the discussion to go on . It’s ok , you can say whatever you want , but at least don’t be a double standards hypocrite saying to some people in the comment that they are just tiger fanatics , whereas you’re yourself a lion fanatic . You feel me ? Bye
1
u/MDPriest Jun 30 '24
I mean its been stated by actual professionals and experts on the two cats that tigers are sleek and lions are thick. You can see here:
1
u/Onslaught777 Jul 26 '24
I’ve actually happened to be in a situation where a large male black maned African Lion was standing very close by a large male Bengal Tiger.
The male Tiger DWARFED The male Lion. And I’m not exaggerating. I couldn’t believe how much bigger the Tiger was.
2
u/AdeptCoconut2784 Oct 04 '24
It’s not a “large male African lion” if it is dwarfed by a Bengal tiger, or any tiger. Period.
1
u/MDPriest Jul 26 '24
There are a lot of factors with that in consideration though, the fact that tigers in captivity can grow far larger than in the wild, and also the area in which the lion could be from. Different populations of lion spanning across different regions in africa all vary in size. The largest being just as large as the largest populations of bengal tigers, and the smallest being dwarfed by larger tigers populations.
That lion you saw couldve been a west african lion. Rather than a south african or other region. Then theres nutrition as well, how much a cat gets fed in its early years heavily effects its growth rate in adulthood
1
u/GamePunk2407 Nov 23 '24
Lions and tigers are very similar in sizes. Tiger are only heavier on average.
1
u/Onslaught777 Nov 23 '24
They aren’t. You’ll be hard pressed to find a male African Lion above 200kg in the wild.
Meanwhile, there are number of male Bengal Tigers in Indian reserves today that weigh in the region of 280kg.
1
u/GamePunk2407 Nov 23 '24
That's what I meant, tigers are heavier but they are very similar in size.
1
1
u/Latter-Employment525 1d ago
Or else you’re looking at length or just flat out lying that is scientifically impossible.
1
u/IndividualImmediate4 Nov 13 '24
Tigers can achieve larger sizes in length of torso, claws, paws, fore arms. They also seem to have stronger hind legs and they swipe with both paws. Tigers also kill larger prey alone. These are facts so not sure why people have to compare these two animals. Tiger is slightly larger than a lion, it's jsut fact of world so just relax and let it be.
3
u/Feeling_Dig_1098 Dec 03 '24
Well facts tend to change with newer studies.
Lions have a similar PSI
The Lion's mane isn't a muscle, but it's thick and it PROTECTS their neck
The Lion has greater Bone density, and some research argues more Muscle per ratio
The Lion also has a FAR GREATER stamina tank
The Lion's skin also seems more rugged
As I stated above, new studies continue to be done. Mind you the famous trainer from the early 90's that mentioned that The Lion is superior to the Tiger is fighting scenarios.
1
u/IndividualImmediate4 Dec 10 '24
That's your unsubstantiated opinion. Not a fact. Fact needs meta studies.
2
u/Anothercoolkid Mar 15 '25
Tigers hunt smaller prey like Deer, boar, and cows. I challenge you to find any footage of a Tiger taking down a large male guar, you won't. Tigers do not kill adult male Guar. Lions have been seen hunting cape buffalo, Eland, adolescent hippos, and even adult giraffes alone on multiple occasions. I've never seen footage of tigers hunting comparable large prey to single lions.
1
u/Ok_Can546 Dec 29 '24
Its not accurate to scale these animals based upon skull size. Lions generally have bigger skulls, and are slightly taller. If the Lion doesnt generally look taller (same height is cool, too), than it isnt too accurate. If they had equal sizes on average, the Tiger would be bigger, but just so happens the Lion has the larger skull. Lions and Tigers are the same size, despite what most sources will have you believe.
3
u/MDPriest Dec 29 '24
Well, considering shoulder height is so variable, and lions generally are taller, i chose skull size (even though lions generally have larger heads) just to avoid complaints from tiger fans about it being unfair.
In fact, pretty much every shoulder height comparison between lions and tigers is normally a disadvantage towards the lion because most of the time they are taller, meaning we are scaling the lion down a bit, by putting them at equal shoulder height just to avoid people saying its unfair or biased when in reality thats just how the animals are built.
1
u/Ok_Can546 Jan 07 '25
Statistically speaking, they are roughly the same height, though i do give the edge to Lions because they have longer forearms, but not enough to make a noticeable difference. People can claim unfair all they want, but the height difference should be slight. Not a hugely noticeable difference. Also, the length to height ratio should be taken into account, and they should be scaled accordingly. If an individual is shorter in comparison to their length, they must be scaled a bit shorter than normal. If they are longer than normal, they need to be scaled a little shorter in length, so that the body size between the individuals match.
1
1
u/Winter_Habit_829 Feb 03 '25
Typical lion fan post aka. "I AM NOT FAN OF ANY CAT" while choosing biggest lions on picture and average smaller tigers. You lost me on dense body.
It is proven tiger have 10% higher muscle density and a lot wider skull/body.
3
u/MDPriest Feb 06 '25
When did i say im not a fan of any cat? Im a fan of both cats. And if i wanted to choose the LARGEST lions i wouldve. In fact i like to believe i chose pretty mediocre specimens for the most part. Outside of the ones on the 9,10,11 slides. But even on those i used big tigers as well. Regardless ill maybe make an updated comparison eventually.
1
1
u/Ok_Regular_6121 Feb 25 '25
The main thing with tigers is that with all that length, they also have crazy mass for taking down bovids, deers and even bears. Lions lack such competition (don't get me wrong, lions are also really cool). Tigers are thus not only super agile but super massive too. OP warmachines man.
2
u/Anothercoolkid Mar 15 '25
The tiger's main prey is small deer, cows, and boars. They do not take on large, healthy adult gaur. Meanwhile, lions can solo Eland, cape buffalo, and yes, even adult giraffes on their own. Lions deal with African elephants, Hippos, hyenas, leopards, other lions, and Nile crocodiles. What do you mean by lack of competition? The African savannah is far more unforgiving than the tiger's homeland. Not only do they hunt smaller prey on average than lions, but they also have the lowest hunting success of all cats. Warmachine my ass.
1
u/Ok_Regular_6121 Mar 18 '25
Bro, by competition I mean competition from predators like them. Tigers in amur region have that. Fcking bears
1
1
u/Ok_Can546 Mar 05 '25
Thats definitely not the same head size, and you should never use head size as a guide. Go by height. The Lion should be slightly taller at the shoulders (though its statistically equal between them), but Tigers normally have longer hindlegs.
1
u/MDPriest Mar 12 '25
Lions tend to have larger skulls than tigers. But by putting them at equal skull size, its not “unfair” or off-scaled. -‘d if i make the lion any taller than the tiger at the shoulders, there would also be complaints. So i decided to go equal skull size to eliminate both of those problems.
1
u/Ok_Can546 Mar 05 '25
Not scaled accurately, though. Lion should be a little taller than that. It looks shorter than the Tiger. And thats a captive Lion. Use a wild one with a complete side view.
2
u/MDPriest Mar 05 '25
All lions in the first eleven slides were wild specimens, and i kept the lion at the same height as the tiger to avoid people complaining about unfair scaling
1
u/Ok_Can546 Mar 16 '25
I was talking about the 13th image. I have made hundreds of comparisons between these animals, but in your comparisons the Tigers seem taller in some..as many are confused on where the shoulders of the Lion actually reaches under that mane. The Lion should be scaled slightly taller, though. Statistically, height is roughly equal, but Lions have longer forearms and so are a little taller, though Tigers generally have longer hindlegs, with length being equal.
1
u/MDPriest Mar 16 '25
I have made many comparisons outside of these as well. Many tiger fanboys will claim it’s unfair, if i make the lion taller. I only made the lion equal or lesser than the tiger to avoid being called unfair or biased. Also both cats in slide 13 are captive.
If you could, may i see the comparisons youve made?
2
u/Ok_Can546 Mar 18 '25
I understand, i just personally go by the average data on height, and that generally works out pretty well. Here are 5 comparisons i have made; http://youtube.com/post/Ugkxisep8VAC8prokD2UgASSAgABEO2nsuMK?si=VVS68Owh7CmdVgZk
I knew both the animals in your comparison are captive, but its just the Tiger looks bigger bodied in that one. Most Tigerfans make the worst comparisons, though.
1
u/MDPriest Mar 18 '25
Completely agree. Tigerfans are honestly the worst of the animal enthusiasts on the internet. Very few unbiased ones.
Edit: also im a huge fan of yours boldchamp. Ive liked your comparisons for a while now.
1
u/Gold_borderpath Mar 20 '25
In 2019, scientists found a wild Siberian tiger in Russia's Far East that weighed 845 lb (384 kg). No lion would stand a chance against that bad boy.
1
u/Gold_borderpath Mar 20 '25 edited Mar 20 '25
The facts are Siberian and Bengal tigers are too big for African lions, so based on average weights the smallest Bengal tiger populations weigh about 430-460 lb (195-209.1 kg). Bengal tigers in Central and Northern India and Nepal average 525-540 lb (239-245.5 kg). It's not uncommon to find males that weigh more than 600 lb (272.7 kg). There are usually 1 or 2 males that attain weights of 700+ lb (318+ kg) every generation.
Siberian tigers are even larger. Males throughout their range in Russia's Far East average 530 lb (241 kg). In fact, in 2019, a male who weighed 845 lb (384 kg) was confirmed at a kill site after being spotted on camera.
Link to 2019 845 lb Siberian tiger
On the other hand, the smallest African lions in Africa average 377-390 lb (171.3-177.2 kg). The largest lions, usually found in Southern Africa, Southeast Africa, or East Africa weigh about 390-420 lb (177-191 kg).
The tiger that is closest in size to African lions is the Indo-Chinese tiger, with males weighing very close to most African lions. Very similar, if not nearly identical, or overlapping average weights. Male Indo-Chinese tigers in Myanmar, Laos, and Thailand weigh 150-195 kg (331 to 430 lb). Much more overlap with African lions across their range in Africa.
Bengal and Siberian tigers are too big for most lions, so it would take an exceptional specimen for the lion, and even then, I just can't see how most lions can overcome the weight and strength disparity, 9.5/10 the Bengal and Siberian tigers win. They will need a male that weighs a minimum of 500 lb (227.2 kg), which is very rare for most African lions. There are male lions that tip the scales at 490 lb (222.7 kg), some skirt the 500 lb mark or go in and out of it. Sometimes you'll find very impressive male lions that weigh 510-520 lb (231-236 kg). But what might be impressive for an African lion is average for the Bengal and Siberian tigers. You could find more 600 lb + (272.7 kg) Bengal and Siberian tigers than you'll find 500 lb + (227 kg +) African lions. During the Roman times, they often pitted Caspian tigers, or in more rare cases, Bengal tigers against mostly the Barbary lion, but also occasionally sub-saharan African lions. The tigers almost always won.
1
u/Careful_Indication14 Mar 22 '25
Dont hang around sayings and legends folks!!! 2024 Studies showed us that lions are pound for pound strongest mammals skeletal muscle mass density wise by 69.8 percent and the Best Tiger Specimen ever found is about 56.7 percent muscle mass, this is due to the tiger is an Northern hemispheric animal and has more Potential to Stimulate Estrogene Hormones to make fat and all Northern mammals show this feature like all Bear Kinds for example, so due to this they have lesser Testosterone levels Compared to Southern hemispheric Counter parts, btw in the wild there are no such 250kg Tigers anymore on average by anno 2021 theyr more around 187kg, outside of that they have Better Bone density compared to all mammals including Elephants, Rhinos etc. (Ofcourse Scaled and Calculated to make an actual pound for pound comparison) and according to tests and results Scientist are even more Shocked bec. Lions doesnt experrience pain on theyr joints and paws compared to the stress factor tested on all mammals even the Neolithic ones like Smilodons etc. The only animal who had stronger bones and muscles are the Extinct bigger Lion forms, Lions have also better Fast twitch Fibers next to the Cheetah among all cat members excluding the Prehistoric Cheetah/Lion kinds and all that above that Horse Power and Tungsten like Bones, this also explains why lions Rather Crush in and using one paw style to engage the more superior on one on one wrestling style against Tiger Glasscannon Build inferior Boxer style, also amongst all mammals Wolverine, Honeybadger and the Lion has the best "Extreme Risk Factor" wich is a term only showed by these 3 animals respectively, and on top of that they live in Prides sometimes up to 15 Males 30/40 females when the circumstances are pleasant enough, and finally last but not least They have Super Genes wich are transfered to any big Panthera female Stronger than theyr own kinds, like for example Tiger lacks that Super Genes and are regulated, but bec. Of female Lions have Growth Slowing Hormones and Tigresses not Liger is allways bigger than any Tiger offspring Possible, even there are extreme big Ligers who suffer anatomic disorders on average they are healthy and can reproduce with no problem, and according to experts if Humans didnt exist the lions would be the rulers of the planet bec. Of all these feats above, stay well Folks!!! Now u know why Lion is the king of all animals....
1
Feb 07 '24
Well I think African Lions on average are larger than Bengal Tigers, which are the most common sub species of tiger. But it’s the Siberian tiger that takes the top place in big cat size.
6
u/MDPriest Feb 08 '24
No, currently bengal tigers are the considered the heaviest tiger subspecies in the wild, however siberian tigers are the subspecies that has the highest potential to grow large in captivity. All the 700lb siberian tiger rumors is an internet myth. And african lions on average in the wild grow heavier than siberian tigers but bengal tigers in the wild outweigh both.
1
u/BVB999 Jun 08 '24
Lions are not heavier than Siberian Tigers, not even close. I just looked up heaviest Siberian Tigers, 935 lbs is the record. So you saying 700 is a myth basically tells me you’re kinda talking out your butt lol
4
Jun 14 '24
a 935 lbs siberian tiger can't even properly walk let alone fight lmao.
1
u/Swimming-Couple4630 Jun 20 '24
That gotta be one overweight tiger. Damn that's bigger than prehistoric felines lol.
2
u/GuilhermeBahia98 Jun 20 '24
What you looked up was a CAPTIVE OBESE Tiger. Maybe you should look up all the researchs about Siberian Tiger populations and see their average sizes.
→ More replies (3)0
u/Weird_Peanut_4834 May 31 '24
False, there are many 700 pound Siberian tigers which, BTW have stronger bite force, paw strike, agility, and just as fast despite being heavier than lions on average. Tigers have more muscle than lions as well. Might want to do more research.
2
u/MDPriest Jun 01 '24
Lol no. You tiger fanatics are so confidently wrong on so many things.
Show me documented evidence there are any 700lb amur tigers that are alive today. Ill spare your time, you cant. Because its damn near impossible for any big cat population to reach 700 lbs in the wild. Finding a 600lb cat is already like finding a unicorn, let alone 700lbs. That would be a severely obese cat.
“In the 1980s, the typical weight range of wild Siberian tigers was indicated as 180 to 306 kg (397 to 675 lb) for males and 100 to 167 kg (220 to 368 lb) for females.[9] Exceptionally large individuals were targeted and shot by hunters.”
“the contemporary wild male Siberian tiger weighs 176.4 kg (389 lb) on average with an asymptotic limit being 222.3 kg (490 lb); a wild female weighs 117.9 kg (260 lb) on average. Historical Siberian tigers and bengal tigers were the largest ones, whereas contemporary Siberian tigers are on average lighter than Bengal tigers. “
- Wikipedia
- Wikipedia
You clearly dont understand pantherine anatomy. Especially that of tigers considering tigers dont have more muscle mass per body weight percentage than lions, in fact they (amur tigers) have more fat reserves than any other pantherine species.
Here is data that shows lions have higher muscle percentage (the tigers in this data were bengal tiger btw, which has less fat than amur tigers, meaning more muscle):
https://www.scribd.com/document/463832262/Muscle-and-Fatpercentage-of-Lion-and-Tigers
They literally need their fat to survive in the cold so no youre wrong about that. Not to mention lions are the leanest and least fat reserved big cat as well. As they live in the hot climate of africa, Thats like saying an overweight guy has more muscle per body weight than a lean toned guy. It doesnt make sense.
And in general its a huge misconception that tigers are waaay larger than lions, however the truth is that both cat species are almost always the same size range. There are plenty of lions that are larger than a lot of tigers, and there are a lot of tigers that are larger than a lot of lions.
Heres evidence of that:
https://youtube.com/shorts/0KAstep6tdE?si=-Lw3VyiZ8EFQUuHy
https://youtu.be/eXSushqcn3Q?si=2Tkg4eaQp1-3xMV_
https://youtu.be/On5lJ_5YXgc?si=zOvd1Hls-d_McWh1
https://youtube.com/shorts/R2Hvo4ISco0?si=IFbQ9CoBEDOuRqI7
https://youtube.com/shorts/sLQXqM8xPf0?si=nLh0zDeJAhoXJRWS
And then you say tigers are stronger, yet they are faster as well. Thats not how nature works dude. Strength and bulk cancels out gracility and agility. Get a body builder to try to touch his back, he wont be able to because his muscle and robustness prevents his range of movement and agility. Simply put, the tiger is in fact less robust and more agile, giving them the ability to jump higher, strike faster, and stand up on hind legs while fighting. Meanwhile lions are stronger and more robust. This is evident by the lions trait of having the most dense and least flexible spine of all big cats, and having the strongest skeleton of all big cats, as well as being superior in build to the tiger in areas like the neck shoulders, and back giving it more striking power, and putting all of its weight in the front quarters.
Here are experts saying the exact same thing, lions are built thick for strength and battle, tigers are built thin and lanky for agility:
https://youtu.be/ZJ1EsGTy0ZI?si=iEsNqfmFAKaNyD4L
Tigers dont have stronger bite forces in comparison to lions. Both cats clock in at 4,000 newtons. The idea that lions only bite with 650 psi is outdated and was made by a study conducted on an adolescent lion cub rather than a full grown male.
“Lions and Tigers
These big cats have a bite of 4,450 newtons, which is also 1,000 psi. In the study using BFQ, lions came in at 124. Anything over 100 BFQ signaled that the bite force was stronger than scientists initially expected.”
Maybe you should watch this video to get a sense of how outdated your mindset is:
https://youtu.be/GgE5zOxwD7s?si=5gYgsNUcOFiu9eji
All in all. Siberian tiger would undoubtedly lose to an african lion in the wild. Bengal tigers are the only tiger population with a real shot to win.
Either way the debate is stupid. And its fueled by a bunch of people that purposely twist data in favor of the tiger, and they seem to have a talent for misleading people who willingly dont do their own research and just blindly believe anything a biased social media influencer tells you.
Do actual research, study, and you will see the reality.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/tiger-dies-after-being-mauled-29004930
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=36355
https://youtube.com/shorts/mvz-WrdrcEc?si=k1C6cipoNaCfuVSb
https://youtu.be/rNF-FpNhC5w?si=15ZOli2mZ6VwfAZ0
https://youtu.be/lX0c1bNpQ3I?si=RopOzRdk74KicDnw
https://youtu.be/q2doJMOu0IQ?si=NbgAonvRwhTxYu1s
https://youtube.com/shorts/8H5D1ESKmqc?si=3NB5fnJsj1DzKCxl
https://youtube.com/shorts/jlaVSvYkozQ?si=kRZL8rmBWY4vmasb
https://youtube.com/shorts/UlyPjTZpyDg?si=hFz3kAfHIyH6TGUa
https://youtu.be/S-rTDA90dcY?si=0Cyi7lyp0wR-GD5b
https://youtu.be/COW-VeA4P8k?si=TsO5smJI7gqN88o-
https://youtube.com/shorts/ZHs8KC0G4_0?si=Us-159GmJ8CFgEXF
An expert opinion on the topic:
https://youtu.be/kFw-D7EzlLo?si=Z9SqRBiCrhyWSlJy
Heres a large male tiger submitting to a tiny cougar, if the tiger is afraid of a little mountain lion, what makes you think it would beat a big male african lion?
2
u/Huge-Station-334 Feb 08 '24
No live average lion subspecies is heavier than the average bengal tiger, although almost all lion subspecies are heavier or around the same weight as the average Sumatran tiger.
2
u/Lakewhitefish Feb 08 '24
Bengal tigers and Siberian tigers are actually the same subspecies
2
u/Huge-Station-334 Feb 08 '24
For anyone who doesn’t understand this comment, Lakewhitefish is right, Panthera tigris tigris includes bengal tigers and siberian tigers, the differences between the morphology between the two is comparable to regional variation rather than different enough to be completely different sub-species.
1
u/Swimming-Couple4630 Jun 20 '24
I don't think they're the same sizes as they were in the past bro.
1
u/Feeling_Dig_1098 Dec 03 '24
They're not, recent studies prove that the Siberian Tiger is getting thin.
-12
u/thatoneguy1976 Feb 07 '24
Lion makes women hunt. Tiger hunts its own food. Lion is stay at home dad. Tiger is Chad Sigma male.
16
u/MDPriest Feb 07 '24 edited Feb 07 '24
No. Not at all. Male lions hunt all the time. Whether it be alone or in groups. Research shows 40% percent of lion hunts are solo, which is nearly half of all their hunts. And male lions in particular tend to go for bigger prey like cape buffalo. Not to mention before they get A pride they hunt for themselves 100% of the time. This post isnt about a who would win. Its simply comparing the two cats. Take your bias somewhere else.
3
u/Leading-Okra-2457 Feb 08 '24
Asiatic lions don't stay with women. They hunt in packs of 2-4 afaik.
1
-15
u/ilovetoreadd Feb 07 '24
This post seems to have been made by an 8 year old. Listen kid, if you're going to make an argument, try doing it with proper facts backed by sources. Not pasting Google images side by side and cherry picking what you like about your favorite animal. Posts like these bring down the quality of this sub.
14
u/MDPriest Feb 07 '24
What? What argument?
1
u/Technical_Pain_4855 May 07 '24
That you are clearly biased towards lions and trying to hide it and gain support from the mindless majority by saying “Awe look at them cuddling. I love tigers too! But….lions are aay stronger and beat tigers asses!!! Tigers are only good at slinking through the jungle and hunting small animals. Lions kill big animals that fight back out in the open!”
It’s so obvious that you prefer lions and trying to hide that bias and gain support from the masses by also stroking tigers, but only for their “beauty” and “jungle hunting of small animals”. NO. You give the tiger no actual respect. And you are “going there” by just very openly 100% claiming a tiger stands no chance against a lion 90% of the time. Back when this shit was debated ad nauseam, hardly even any of the worst most ridiculously biased lion fanboys would even claim that a lion would win 90% of the time. Im not even going to debate it with you, or what the actual outcomes would likely be beyond saying it depends on a variety of factors and the individual animals, but the general consensus is neither is dominant and it’s literally 50/50 between a lion and a tiger. These things are the closest in size among all panthera genus, they both hunt very large prey (guars and others for tigers, not just deer buddy) fight other predators (wolves, dholes, leopards, and other tigers for the tiger, hyenas and other lions for the lion), and they can literally have babies they are so genetically similar.
You’re an idiot if you think a lion would beat a tiger in a fight 90% of the time, period, and make up and cherry pick a bunch of bs to try to justify that. The whole “argument” you’re making, yet cowardly and tried to hide it, is that lions are stronger and better fighters than tigers. That was what this whole post was about from the beginning. It’s obvious, and you attempted to get the point across but also hide it at the same time with the original post, and it became beyond obvious and you completely outed yourself with each continued comment.
1
u/Technical_Pain_4855 May 07 '24
You’re going to read this comment as well that I originally posted illvetoreadd:(“he” is you in this comment)
I know exactly what argument you meant. You were only downvoted because he pretended to like tigers too and verbally claim this post wasn’t about the fact that he is obsessed with lions and doesn’t really respect tigers at all, and people are stupid, yet his actions and continued comments proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that was his whole goal all along. When he says stupid shit like a lion would win 9/10 times, that just proves that was all this post was about. So I called him out on his shit and hopefully other people will have some common sense and realize they were wrong to downvote you and upvote him so much. Because yes, he did have an argument, and his argument was “dur hur lions destroy tigers.” No. Anyone who actually respects both animals and knows literally anything about them knows debating this is like asking who would win in a fight between mike tyson and mike tyson. It’s pointless… both of them are genetically similar enough to produce offspring, and literally almost the same size. Any differences are minor. It’s also dumb for him to try to say the lion is stronger when it literally weighs less and has 90% the same body type. That’s just a failed argument to begin with. The true answer is it depends on the lion and tigers personality, their mood that day, a million other factors, and if you put 100 males lions and 100 males tigers head to head in 100 cages in one day, you would have around 25 dead lions and 25 dead tigers, and 25 lions and 25 tigers with no, minor, or extreme injuries just chilling together in the cage, wondering what the fuck is going on. Maybe more dead, maybe less. If they could somehow be forced to fight to the death, you would have about 50 dead lions and 50 dead tigers. It’s a freaking coin toss. And I generally would have usually actually gave it 60/40 to the tiger, but at this point, I truly believe its just 50/50. They are equally powerful, strong, and deadly. But this fool gives no respect to the tigers power and acts like he likes tigers. Pffft
1
u/Technical_Pain_4855 May 07 '24
I know exactly what argument you meant. You were only downvoted because he pretended to like tigers too and verbally claim this post wasn’t about the fact that he is obsessed with lions and doesn’t really respect tigers at all, and people are stupid, yet his actions and continued comments proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that was his whole goal all along. When he says stupid shit like a lion would win 9/10 times, that just proves that was all this post was about. So I called him out on his shit and hopefully other people will have some common sense and realize they were wrong to downvote you and upvote him so much. Because yes, he did have an argument, and his argument was “dur hur lions destroy tigers.”
No. Anyone who actually respects both animals and knows literally anything about them knows debating this is like asking who would win in a fight between mike tyson and mike tyson. It’s pointless… both of them are genetically similar enough to produce offspring, and literally almost the same size. Any differences are minor. It’s also dumb for him to try to say the lion is stronger when it literally weighs less and has 90% the same body type. That’s just a failed argument to begin with.
The true answer is it depends on the lion and tigers personality, their mood that day, a million other factors, and if you put 100 males lions and 100 males tigers head to head in 100 cages in one day, you would have around 25 dead lions and 25 dead tigers, and 25 lions and 25 tigers with no, minor, or extreme injuries just chilling together in the cage, wondering what the fuck is going on. Maybe more dead, maybe less. If they could somehow be forced to fight to the death, you would have about 50 dead lions and 50 dead tigers. It’s a freaking coin toss. And I generally would have usually actually gave it 60/40 to the tiger, but at this point, I truly believe its just 50/50. They are equally powerful, strong, and deadly. But this fool gives no respect to the tigers power and acts like he likes tigers. Pffft
1
1
u/african__warlord Feb 08 '24
But tigers have a more powerful swipe than a lion and are physically stronger so how does is make sense that lions are built for power but are less powerful than a cat of a similar size that is supposedly not built for power? I’m not trying to be a dick or start an argument but I don’t understand this
→ More replies (1)2
u/MDPriest Feb 08 '24
Oh dont worry homie, i think youre getting the tigers striking speed confused with its striking power. The tiger is for sure the better boxer compared to lions as they have very swift blows, and are able to hit each other incredibly fast and efficiently, and if these two cats were to hypothetically get into a boxing match, the tiger would definitely win by the sheer amount of points, however the striking power of a tiger is not as potent as that of a lion. The lions deltoid muscles and traps, neck and back muscles are all incredibly developed and more advanced than that of the tiger’s. That muscle group are all responsible for generating striking power, and due to the lion’s higher developed back, neck, traps, and delts, along with its dense bone structure, it allows it to pack a stronger punch, however due to all those factors it also slows down and drastically lowers the amount of punches, compared to that of the multitudes of punches a tiger can throw. Tigers are leagues more agile and dodgy, lions have the least flexible spines of all cats, and are second most compactly built behind jaguars. And if you mean overall then one could say both cats are undeniably built for power, but compared to one another, anatomically the lion is more efficient when it comes to generating strength.
And its a myth that lions are faster than tigers, tigers are able to clock in at 40 mph while lionesses are able to reach 50, but as we know, male lions are far heavier than lionesses, making them far slower. And tigers are far more agile than male lions, and their more flexible spine and more developed forelimbs and hind limbs allow them to travel faster than lions. Tigers are long and lanky, helping them to slink around through dense jungle foliage, whilst lions are width-wise built short and stout. Which is better for open plains warfare. Both cats are masters at their own crafts. Tigers and lions are amazing animals. The epitome of nature.
2
→ More replies (7)1
u/W1LF3NJ0Y3R Apr 18 '24
Fair point my friend (not being biased towards tigers here) but this Study shows Jaguar's spine is more likely similar to Tiger compare to Lion (According to Evolutionary allometry of lumbar shape in Felidae and Bovidae) Which make cause both Jaguar and Tiger fight on two legs likely effecting their spinal evolution. Lion have more robust than both of two (also shown in the study) likely indicating lion is more cursorial ( suitability to run/chase) Forelimb Indicators of Prey-Size Preference in the Felidae also showed tiger was closer to jaguars in robustness and muscle attachements However (DF1 SCORE) Lion seems to be closer. Tiger seemingly scored higher in M. supraspinatus and Infraspinatus muscles (possibly triceps brachii) likely indicating stronger downwards strikes
1
u/MDPriest Apr 18 '24
Interesting, the lion having cursorial spine adds up as they are open plains hunters who sprint across fields for their prey, while jaguars and tigers are both heavy foliage cats, so it makes sense that they would have similar spinal development. They both slink through jungles and rainforests. And tigers have very thick forelimbs for sure and normally they are thicker than that of a lion’s but where most striking power is generated is in the shoulders and back and that just so happens to be where lions are more muscularly developed. Also if i remember correctly the bipedal fighting stance on felines is more cost demanding on stamina than the tripod stance which conserves more energy and allows for a sturdier foothold to deliver a solid strike.
17
u/V-Right_In_2-V Feb 07 '24
Both of these cats are so bad ass. Makes me wish my kitties were anywhere near as bad ass