Remove this ad

#41 [url]

Feb 4 16 10:25 AM

Lions and tigers have similar biteforce I believe, both can be over 1,000lbs, it probably depends upon the individual cat and head size. Both cats seem to exceed the other in different areas of the skull.  The lion's teeth are actually stronger yet shorter, by being a little shorter they wont break as easy.  The tigers teeth being a little longer are not designed for pulling and ripping or fighting constantly.  Their designed to pierce through medium size prey and kill it quickly.  The lion's teeth are designed to pull and tug fighting for food, fight other lions hyenas, and as well their teeth is designed to hang on to large powerful prey like the black buffalo for hours.  It was tested and, the lion's teeth can withstand more pressure and resistance than the tigers.  Probably one of the strongest teeth of any mammal.  The lion's skin and hide is also stronger than the tiger, the tigers skin is softer and loser.  So this would offer more protection in combat for the lion, along with the mane, this is according to a Duke university zoologist.  Because of the Africa's harsh ground and environment, hot sun, the lions skin is designed to handle the scorching suns rays, its designed to handle sharp thorns in Africa that cut like knifes, rocky jagged ground.  The tigers environment is soft decaying leafy shady jungles, so it does not need as tough a skin. 

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#42 [url]

Feb 4 16 12:09 PM

Hey thx for the info Starfox. Yeah I was also thinking lions have over 1000 lbs biteforce, but everwhere I search the bengal and siberians are around 1000 lbs and that of the lion around 700.




Accoeding to this tigers have the second strongest bite among carnivorous mammals  & not only hunt medium prey but also very large prey. And  tiges hunt gaur  . The gaur is the biggest bovine, even bigger than the african black buffalo.
So I'm sure the tigers got some pretty vicious teeth also. 

Good point you made about tigers' skin being loose , yeah i nticed this on the siberian.   And aren't there thorns in India in the jungles? I mean India is hot as well and  has more of a jungle than the african savannah right? And that's just the Bengal. The Siberian lives in a freezing belowsub- zero temp. environment. So even the loose skin gotta be thick lol.  
There have been tigers introduced in Africa on the Zondolozi reserve. And imo from the programme Living with Tigers  these tigers accustomed quite well  to  the hot sun and harsh jagged thorny terrain.  


Last Edited By: Ryo Feb 4 16 12:30 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#43 [url]

Feb 4 16 1:35 PM

Your beginning to sound kind of dumb.  It is well known that a sub-adult lion has a bite-force of 690lbs, and an adult lion can have over a 1,000lbs. 

A young lion not full ground just touching a peice of meat with his jaws for seconds register a biteforce of 690lbs.  Think if the lion was clamping down for longer

trying to kill prey or pulling against the jeep.  Its obvious this lion barely even had time to grab hold of the meat and the biteforce was almost 700lbs. 

Its clear in this video as well the lion has scored a biteforce well over 1,000lbs, 1,786lbs.  The Crocodile has the strongest bite-force, 2,125lbs, and they have long jaws.  So it makes sense a large lion's head that is also longer than the tiger will have the strongest bite-force.  It also should be noted, lions are wider than tigers at the cheekbone area the zygomatic arch, their lower jaw is stronger and larger, so all that helps with a higher bite force additionally to the longer jaws. 

The lion has the stronger masseter muscle bite force and canine bite force.  


And no the environment of Africa has much tougher terrain with more rocky jagged ground and deadly thorns, so sorry, I'm quoting a Duke University Biologist on this and I can post the direct quotes here if you want.  The lion's skin must endure the scorching hot African sun, the tiger is often in the shade, or cooling down in the water. 

Gaur's also have thin necks and their not as aggressive as the black buffalo in Africa.  Tigers rarely hunt large animals, gaur included.  

Quote    Reply   

#44 [url]

Feb 4 16 2:07 PM

LOL then all these authors who wrote aboute the PSI are dumb . No need to get angry Starfox and use the word dumb.  Asia has harsh terrain and a hot climate also. There are snakes , dholes, leopards , elephants there also. This info I found isn't talking about a sub-adult lion , but a fully grown lion. If the biteforce thats been stated is for a sub-adult lion then its fair to say that the biteforce stated for the tiger is of a sub-adult tiger.

I disagree with you . India has rough terrain and thorned trees. Not sure lion is much of a swimmer is he? I've seen lions afraid to get into water. Not saying all lions are , but ost don't. Tigers not only are very expert swimmers but hunt in water as well. 

Last Edited By: Ryo Feb 4 16 2:14 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#45 [url]

Feb 4 16 2:19 PM

And again on the bite force of the crocodile I disagree with you . I assume u are referring to the saltie and the biteforce of this croc is well over 3000 ilbs. Nat Geo says 3700 lbs after a test.


You have your table there and this is my table from     [b]Bite Club: comparative bite force in big biting mammals and the prediction of predatory behaviour in fossil taxa.  By Stephen Wroe et al[/b]


Tiger's BFQ IS 127 and Lion's is 112.

Last Edited By: Ryo Feb 4 16 3:01 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#46 [url]

Feb 4 16 2:58 PM

Yeah I know there are wild dogs in India, and guess what, the tigers don't like them and have a lot of difficulty handling them. 

And its only a subadult tiger or lion if it says so, the video I posted showed a real reading of a young lion hitting 690lbs barely biting the meat. 

Screenshot (55)

Quote    Reply   

#47 [url]

Feb 4 16 3:05 PM

That's a good snap there you put up. Yeah I heard the tigers have a hard time with then , but according to Sir David Attenborough's Tiger documentary filmed in India , there is a scene where the dholes are trying to steal a tiger's kill and when the tiger approaches they flee.  Its in the videop , not my opinion. Says here in your post the tiger will kill a bear. Interesting. 

Quote    Reply   

#49 [url]

Feb 4 16 4:05 PM

Excuse me? Who the hell are you talking about and again isn't this a debate? Aren't I allowed to post in the same fashion as you or Starfox or any other lion fan for that matter?  Pckts isn't the only 'hyperfanatical' tiger fan out there. There are many , but I try to debate in a friendly way. And tha true document has been written by Stephen Wroe, an associate professor of zoology at the Univesity of New England. So would pcks have a degree in zoology and be Stephen Wroe. That would be coincidental.

Quote    Reply   

#50 [url]

Feb 4 16 4:44 PM

Keith wrote:
Ryo, are you pckts?

The document you show is a vomitive panflet from hyperfanatical tigerfans.

Yup, its Pckts no doubt, under another one of his million aliases.

Keith, check Prime's site, he just posted some new accounts. Pretty stunning.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#51 [url]

Feb 4 16 5:00 PM

There's a way to resolve this so you all know this isn't pckts. I shall enquire with admin here and see if they can compare my IP with that of pckts. They obviously don't match so everybody jas a right to post and their opinions my friends.


Last Edited By: Ryo Feb 5 16 4:45 AM. Edited 2 times.

Quote    Reply   

#52 [url]

Feb 4 16 5:11 PM

Ahh yeah that's nice.  Still doesn't matter, you can keep trying to debate about the tigers teeth or its supposed higher bite-force all day.  In the end, if your talking a fight, the tiger is on average going to lose vs the lion.  

Screenshot (53)

Male vs male fight, the trainer has to beat the lion off the tiger.  The male tiger was pinned to the ground with the lion on top of it biting the tiger. 
Had this trainer not broke this fight up, this probably would of been another dead tiger. 

Screenshot (54)

Quote    Reply   

#53 [url]

Feb 4 16 5:27 PM

Awesome. glad you feel that's nice. As for tiigers losing on average to lions, I have mixed opinions. I opened up that link you postred and tbh those posts the tiger fans left there are pretty dashing as well.

(The Tribune Hiksville Ohio 30 Sep ) 




Quote    Reply   

#54 [url]

Feb 4 16 5:56 PM

We've all seen that account, the tiger had a chain around its neck.  The trainer had to beat the lion off the tiger, not the tiger off the lion. So its obvious that the lion was getting the better of the fight and the tiger was the one in danger.  The chain also around the tigers neck would helped cause the lion from getting a good choke hold on the tigers neck. 

Here is another description of the same account.  Note as well how young Falkendorgh's lions were, I have yet seen an adult lion that he used.  Many of these old trainers at this time
used younger lions as they were far easier to handle and much safer.  So was this a younger lion, yet again?

Falkendorgh:   Trainer at Bostock's, beats lion off tiger.  If the tiger was winning, why did the trainer beat the lion, why not the tiger?

Its obvious, the cat that is being beaten and is on top of the other cat, that is the cat that is having the immediate advantage.  The reports
are the tiger got the better of the lion by injuries, but it still remains to be seen, what would of happened to Mongul had the trainer not beaten the 
lion off him.  Because the trainers used heavy long bars of iron, to beat the lion, there is little doubt this would damage the lions body. 


Before 1,500 people last night , with mogul, a new Bengal tiger, chained to a cage in the ring he turned his back to a lion named Caesar and Caesar jumped at him. Falkendorgh half turned and jumped foward and the big lions claws only ripped down his back and sent him to the gound; but then as women screamed and attendants, firing blank cartridges, ran into the ring, another of he seven big lions, Prince, sprang with a roar from his pedestal straight at Mogul. 

Mogul, Snarling and crouching, was ready. The two beast struggled together, biting and striking with their claws. They snarled and roared and filled the air with sawdust as they twisted and strained, each trying to get on top, lashing with their tails. Falkendorgh, swinging his long whip, beat Caeser back to his cage, but Mogul and Prince, striking and biting fought on in spite of the attendants, and several women fainted. many screamed and one was taken with a rift. At last with bars of iron and long whips, they beat Prince off from Mogul and drove him snarling and limping, his flanks streaming blood and his face torn and bitten, to his cage. Mogull, in spite of his chain, had got the best of the fight.

Quote    Reply   

#55 [url]

Feb 4 16 6:09 PM

Nice , Good articles. I need to surprise you my friend ,  looks like you have seen all the accounts lol. Could you tell me though why the lion has been labelled a great bluffer by Roman Proske? 
(Popular Mechanics October 1939)



Captain Roman Proske says the lion is a great bluffer. He will roar first to scare a man and in that roar there is a warning. But a tiger never utters a sound before he springs. He may appear to be deceptively sleepy before he lunges, but when he does it is silent and with lightning speed.

Quote    Reply   

#56 [url]

Feb 4 16 6:28 PM

Notice Proske says the Siberian is the least dangerous, ok so that means their not as tough right, so then a larger tiger might not mean its deadlier in a fight compared to a sumatran. 

As far as bluffing, Proske is talking about the aspect of training, hes not talking about a lion fighting a tiger.  Lions and tigers often have a natural fear of man, so the lion is intelligent enough to know that he probably has to test the trainer to see what he can get away with, it being a social cat, would have more variety of depth in different forms of confrontation and assertiveness.  The tiger being a loner completely non social would be easily more skittish and unpredictable at times lashing out without notice.  This doesn't have anything to do with a fight.  Proske has also said the lion is much more deadly during mating season, so go figure that one out. 

Hey Prime nice one, and great new accounts, its amazing how you come up with this stuff.  I had never thought the same lion with Falkedorgph was still alive in the later account and article, do you have any proof of that.  I think also, these lions may not have always been full grown.  As some of these older trainers before Beatty used a lot of younger lions.

Quote    Reply   

#57 [url]

Feb 4 16 7:26 PM

Most tiger kill lion accounts often in the end turn out to be a lioness, a young lion, a sick lion, an old lion, an unusually small weak lion, or some other advantage like a chain around the tigers neck, or trainer stabbing lion giving the tiger an advantage during the fight.

 For instance, the Darwin account that we all know to well, a lion gets its stomach ripped open, yet the manes saves its throat and neck. 

It turns out this lion Darwin was talking about was way past its prime, very old, with bad teeth, most likely broken and gone.  The tiger was in the prime of its life and powerful. 

For years we didn't know this, but now we do.  Yet still, this old lion with bad teeth, its mane still protected its neck completely.  It would now make further sense, the other account where the lion dies very quickly that Beatty mentioned, very well likely was not a full grown full maned lion. 

Edmonds Menagerie account below is the same account cited by Darwin in his book. 

{ 1857}

Edmonds Menagerie. 

Large aggressive Bengal tiger kills old lion way past his prime.  The lion had teeth that were in very poor condition.
So its obvious this fight was not fair at all.  


Monthly Chronicle of North-country Lore and Legend

1888 - ‎Read - ‎More editions
A few years later I was surprised to see in the newspapers that the head-keeper Scott had been killed by a large grizzly bear which had escaped from its den. ... MrsEdmonds during her peregrinations frequently visited the North with her menagerie, which always contained some rare ... it from a fine South American jaguar, which it had attacked and killed by ripping up its abdomen with its claws. The same tiger some years before had killed a full-grown lion in a similar manner.

Here is the proof below that this lion was in poor condition not able to defend itself. 

The Large and Small Game of Bengal and the North-western ...

With further insight and investigation, it also appears that Darwin in his book the decent of man, also cited the same account. With the same exact description, taking place in the same country England, at the same time and year.  Several years ago from 1860 is exactly 1857, to which Mrs Edmond stated the fight happened.  Edmond's menagerie was in England, and it was a 
traveling menagerie, covering various towns and cities. Bromwich is in England. 

“In 1857 a tiger at Bromwich broke into the cage of a lion and a fearful scene ensued: ‘the lions mane saved his head and neck from being much injured, but the tiger at last succeeded in ripping up his belly, and in a few minutes he was dead. -The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Charles Darwin” 

Darwin states that the mane dose work, and even sites naturalist saying a young lion will not fight an older full maned lion, he states the fights are vicious.  But with this new information, we now can assess, this lion Darwin is citing is most likely the same old lion from the Edmond's account.  Which again, is not a fair fight, it had bad teeth, and was very old. Yet its mane protection worked.

Quote    Reply   

#58 [url]

Feb 4 16 7:36 PM

Perhaps the Siberian isn't the most aggressive. And likewise perhaps some tigers that lost to lions were old , female , and without teeth as well. Who knows.Talk to you soon ,. Enjoyed the debate.

Last Edited By: Ryo Feb 5 16 4:33 AM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#59 [url]

Feb 4 16 7:49 PM

Its possible that some were, but not all 60 that we have, and I address all that are and do not post females.   Vice versa, almost every single lion killed by a tiger that we know of, is either female, young, old, sick, or has bad teeth. Or again some other advantage aids the tiger in fight, like the trainer stabbing the lion with a fork. 

This is the sad truth, as more info has come out, it appears extremely difficult and highly unlikely for a tiger to kill a full grown full maned healthy adult male lion.  Yet we have many accounts of lions killing full grown aggressive very large tigers.

Quote    Reply   

#60 [url]

Feb 5 16 4:24 AM

So you're telling me you are 100 percent sure everytime a lion has been killed by a tiger there has been an advantage to the tiger . Were you present ? I strongly disagree with your opinion. But hey that's just it right .. I have read the truth in a different context from many credible sources. This also is the upsetting truth about tigers killing fully grown maned lions. 

In some videos people have said that the lion was helped when he was losing in a fight with a tiger .For example , one clip where ammonia was sprayed on the tiger when he was obviously winning , To you this is untrue but to me I try to rationalize it.

So with all due resprect to you , I have my own truth which sadly differs from yours.   Good info all around though.  

Last Edited By: Ryo Feb 5 16 4:55 AM. Edited 3 times.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help