Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
tiger with mane
#16
Even Okavango and Namibia lions don't get that big on avg either.

Go look at some scientific data, those lions are only slighlty larger than lions of other areas.

They are not "fanciful" or "pathetic" - they are factual.
Reply
#17
^ You have no idea. Sumatran tigers are shrimpy, puny, runts by comparison to even poor ol' Asiatic lions..
Reply
#18
(05-16-2019, 07:58 AM)Mondas Wrote: ^ You have no idea. Sumatran tigers are shrimpy, puny, runts by comparison to even poor ol' Asiatic lions..

LOL... your credibility is so bad.

You are either blind or stupid if you think a prime male Sumatran tiger is  "shrimpy, puny, runty" by any means.

According to Charles Fredrick, male Sumatran tigers - despite not being as heavy/strong as Bengals/Siberians were still strong enough to break the legs of a fully grown horse with their paws - something your precious lions would struggle with.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Sher Khan's post:
  • onlyfaizy786
Reply
#19
(05-16-2019, 07:14 AM)Mondas Wrote:
(05-16-2019, 04:40 AM)onlyfaizy786 Wrote:
(05-16-2019, 04:34 AM)Sher Khan Wrote: Yes. Believe it or not, if you see tigers in person,  they are surprisingly larger and heavier than you expect them to be.

Sumatran male tigers - although they are the smallest tiger subspecies, can sometimes rival male African lions in arm size and sturdiness.

Now, just imagine how large and muscular Bengal/Amur tigers would look in person...

i saw bengal and siberian tiger live,they were huge in sizes but never had a chance to see sumatran male tiger face to face.

^ Hilarious tiger-fancier hero-worship! S-K should see the Steve Backshall TV Program 'Fierce' where he gets up
'close & personal' with a wild, lean & muscular Nambian male lion who is then weighed, at 217kg.

Steve remarks on the size of this lion's "arm size & sturdiness" which makes that Sumatran tiger look real runty.
As for the mane comparison, the tiger's is also a fail. It's only a 'ruff', not a mane.

nice to hear that, now what can we do for your lion? we really don't care about lion lol.
[Image: t70ok8.jpg]
[-] The following 1 user Likes onlyfaizy786's post:
  • Sher Khan
Reply
#20
^ My lion? Dude, I wish...

Just don't try & deny that a Sumatran tiger is a mere pissant - compared to a prime pride boss lion - that's a natural fact.
Reply
#21
(05-16-2019, 04:42 PM)Mondas Wrote: ^ My lion? Dude, I wish...

Just don't try & deny that a Sumatran tiger is a mere pissant - compared to a prime pride boss lion - that's a natural fact.
In your fantasy world
[Image: t70ok8.jpg]
Reply
#22
[Image: _105571375_052002204.jpg]
                                                 [Image: giphy.gif]
[-] The following 4 users Like Leopard's post:
  • Godzilla2020, onlyfaizy786, parduscat, Sher Khan
Reply
#23
^ Ah, no... Sadly for your fantasies, the mathematics are unequivocal.

See the post by member here 'Waveriders', he personally inspected the 272kg officially-verified Kenyan lion exhibit.

By comparison, any Sumatran tiger, ever measured, is indeed, a mere shrimp of a big cat.
Reply
#24
(05-16-2019, 06:24 PM)Leopard Wrote: [Image: _105571375_052002204.jpg]
Wow lovely Sumatran tiger.
[Image: t70ok8.jpg]
[-] The following 1 user Likes onlyfaizy786's post:
  • Sher Khan
Reply
#25
African lions are stronger than Sumatran tigers, but that is only because they are larger. For their size, Sumatran tigers are stronger and have performed more impressive feats of strength. And of course, it is a known fact that the larger tiger subspecies exceed even the biggest South African lions in weight and muscle mass.


EDIT: As per post #26 (right below) - what a typical (and expected) reply from the forum's troll... LOL

EDIT 2: So, once again, Mondas pulls the troll card and posts some irrevelant video - how predictable.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Sher Khan's post:
  • onlyfaizy786
Reply
#26
^ Hilarious, S-K's trotting out of his classic claim, "known fact" which, along with his "universally accepted", is just
another example of his hubristic falsifications based solely on his own fantasies - which never stack up in reality.


Addit:

& I duly note that S-K has done a troll-edit/ex post facto addition to post #25, & sans acknowledgement, he's so sneaky.



Addit:
(05-16-2019, 03:29 PM)onlyfaizy786 Wrote:
(05-16-2019, 07:14 AM)Mondas Wrote:
(05-16-2019, 04:40 AM)onlyfaizy786 Wrote:
(05-16-2019, 04:34 AM)Sher Khan Wrote: Yes. Believe it or not, if you see tigers in person,  they are surprisingly larger and heavier than you expect them to be.

Sumatran male tigers - although they are the smallest tiger subspecies, can sometimes rival male African lions in arm size and sturdiness.

Now, just imagine how large and muscular Bengal/Amur tigers would look in person...

i saw bengal and siberian tiger live,they were huge in sizes but never had a chance to see sumatran male tiger face to face.

^ Hilarious tiger-fancier hero-worship! S-K should see the Steve Backshall TV Program 'Fierce' where he gets up
'close & personal' with a wild, lean & muscular Nambian male lion who is then weighed, at 217kg.

Steve remarks on the size of this lion's "arm size & sturdiness" which makes that Sumatran tiger look real runty.
As for the mane comparison, the tiger's is also a fail. It's only a 'ruff', not a mane.

nice to hear that, now what can we do for your lion? we really don't care about lion lol.


Yeah, well face facts, dude... 

A dominant male lion will just look at that tiger's scrawny ruff & sneeringly go,

'Look at that short-arsed punk kid & his scruffy, lame attempt, that's not a mane, I'll show him a mane!'

Like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POJtaO2xB_o
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)