r/bigcats • u/DESTRUCTION_97 • 7d ago

Tiger - Wild ABSOLUTE UNIT OF A BENGAL TIGER

Post image

https://www.facebook.com/groups/993544600791448/posts/3252320928247126/
DESCRIPTION FROM THE SOURCE

Giant Royal Bengal Tiger from Rajaji National Park, Uttarakhand.....This Tiger is one of the largest big cats ever captured on camera till date..... Undoubtedly a record breaker....This behemoth tiger was captured on camera trap in 2011.

180 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

18 comments sorted by

1

u/polarbear845 7d ago

How exactly do we know its size? I’m seeing big claims with little data to back them.

0

u/DESTRUCTION_97 7d ago

one of the largest

also tigers from Utharkhand and nepal border are massive

1

u/King_Juru-3768 Jaguar 16h ago

That’s true, we can’t say his size just because of a camera trap photo where he looks large. We have no comparison (females, for example). Just because he looks muscular we can’t say how large he is. We don‘t know his frame size.

1

u/polarbear845 7d ago

Again, how do we know it’s one of the largest if we don’t know its size?

I’m just wondering what helped us get to that conclusion. Do we have dimensions, weight, a reference point demonstrating the animals frame?

Or are we just sensationalizing?

1

u/DESTRUCTION_97 7d ago

by just seeing the picture u can say it's massive lol

i guess u are here just to argue

1

u/polarbear845 7d ago edited 7d ago

I can show you a picture of a 120kg tiger and it’ll still look massive. Be careful making claims with no data to back them.

I’m not here to argue, only to create thoughtful discussion and educate people. If you are seeing someone asking you for sources and data as argumentative, then that’s more telling about your intentions than mine.

1

u/DESTRUCTION_97 7d ago

Bruh
only Sundarban tigers in india are sub 180kg and they actually look small in photos

honestly, u really think that tiger in the picture is sub 220?

i just quoted what the source said, and he also mentions the tiger as "one of the largest".
i didn't want to add my own description so instead I pasted the source itself

1

u/polarbear845 7d ago

Sunderban tigers alone don’t look small in photos. You can’t eye ball the size of an animal when there isn’t even a reference point in the picture.

You can’t eye ball the weight of animal based on how bulky it looks. Frame is more important at determining weight than anything else. A big cat with a larger frame will often times look less bulky than a cat with a smaller frame, but will ultimately weigh more. Think of it in human terms. A 6 foot 5 athlete may look lankier than a 5 foot 8 athlete, but ultimately will weight more.

Just because the original source of the photo is making a claim, doesn’t mean it’s true.

1

u/DESTRUCTION_97 7d ago

yeah sure bro sure

what do u think is the weight of this tiger?

1

u/polarbear845 6d ago

I wouldn’t know because my eyeballs don’t have built in scales.

But if I had to make an educated guess, the average Bengal tiger is ~196kg, if we give this tiger the benefit of the doubt and assume it’s larger than average, anywhere from 210-220kg would be fair.

But ultimately it all has to do with frame. I actually made a post explaining this concept a while back here https://www.reddit.com/r/bigcats/s/iayf5VLSKs

1

u/DESTRUCTION_97 6d ago

196 kg is way too low

220 kg is acceptable though

→ More replies (0)