Dalil8:


Tigers don't like taking risks and they are not sociable. They mostly feed on injured or sick animals.

Lions on the other hand can take down any animal no matter the size. They are fearless and they have stronger bones than tigers even though tigers weigh more.

Lions bully tigers alot when confined together. So it's not by chance they got the title "King of all Beast".

Dalil8:


Take a group of Siberian tigers to the savannahs of Africa, i bet you they won't last a week.

Stop arguing. It's an already proven fact.

Dalil8:


Well at least they were fearless enough to take it down as a group. But a group of Siberian tigers wouldn't even dare. They are not risk takers.

A single Lion/lioness would easily take down same prey a tiger would so....

Heavance:

One of my favourite animals.
I wish I can have it as pet, but this guy doesn't care. It holds the record for being the most fearless animal

jagorinho:


This is false, Tigers are better hunters than lions, lions hunt in pride while tigers are solitary, on Nat geo wild " ultimate cat challenge " out of five big cats tested in various abilities, the tiger came top, mind you lions, leopards , cheetahs were also there, Google Tigers vs lions and see for yourself, don't let the hype surrounding lions deceive you, the tiger is an assassin far more brutal than the lion.

During the roman empire, the Tiger always came top killing the lions in the final when the animals are made to fight in a tournament format, in a Turkish zoo, a tiger killed a lion with a single strike to the neck, the lion died in a pool of blood.

Due to its solitary lifestyle, the tiger is a trained killer, an efficient killing machine, the only country (India) where lions and tiger are found in the wild, the tiger reigns supreme....... do not buy the hype, the tiger is the real badass, the Siberian tiger is the current apex predator, it will thump any lion with ease, it weighs 20kg more than an average African lion.

ZACHIE:
School the unschooled.
Teach the unlearned.
Leave Dalil8 alone to regurgitate his ignorance.

Lions are formidable animals, no doubt. They are top predators, agreed but, they are not alpha animals.

Hyenas hate them with a passion and for good reasons too. They randomly steal their kills.
But, I'm yet to read of any animal stealing from Tigers and leopards.

VerifiedStalin:
I would advice everyone arguing about Tiger vs Lion to read the wikipedia article below. It's an interesting read. From what I can glean from the article, neither animal is always superior to the other. Lions have killed Tigers and vice versa.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_versus_lion

nathdim:
I dey pity the lion wey one pass his boundary

FlordFlorez:


No doubt about that but the Tiger always kill Lions. Cases where Lion can kill a Tiger is where the Lion is bigger than Tiger. Even some cases where the former is bigger the latter can still kill. Tigers are more technique and physique than Lion anyday, anytime except you are comparing with a much younger tiger.

nams77:

Bullying? Yes. Lions have their kits and kins to fall back on when they are injured but a tiger is a loner, so he is wary in picking up a fight to avoid sustaining needless injury and going hungry. A lion can so afford to be aggressive
It is more harder to hunt in a forest than in a Savannah. Try chasing a prey in a forest and see how difficult it is to achieve full burst of speed to take up your prey.
The Savannah is a perfect terrain for a lion. Tall grasses to hide in and open expanse of land to run on and catch your prey. A lion will like starve in a jungle except it adjusts its hunting pattern.
You said the tooth has no role to play? Lol. Ask the jaguar. It has the biggest bite force, even more than a hyena. Its bites can pierced and crack skulls.with such terrible bite, death comes quickly, than the strangulation method employed by lions, waiting for the animal to suffocate to death. The jaguar is smaller than a tiger but hunts crocs and alligators.

Cc. Heavance, zachie

Dalil8:



[b]You need to get back to school kid. When i was your age and still fascinated by wildlife, i knew better.

An Average African Lion weighs roughly 260kg, A Siberian Tiger 300kg

In my opinion Tigers are overfed Lions. Lions get to share their kill with the pride and go hungry most of the time. But Tigers have the whole kill to themselves.

But when fed with the same amount of calories in captivity, they weigh the same.

Below are photos of Lions and Tigers of same sex in captivity. Which one looks bigger? [/b]










I'm done here.

nathdim:
I dey pity the lion wey one pass his boundary

nathdim:
I dey pity the lion wey one pass his boundary

VerifiedStalin:


You clearly didn't read the article.

VerifiedStalin:


A fully grown lion is taller than a Siberian Tiger. The Tiger in the picture is a Bengal tiger. Bengal Tigers are generally shorter than Siberian Tigers.

A Tiger is often larger, and more muscular than a Lion, but shorter in height.

hidhrhis:

Bro go and learn

VerifiedStalin:


A fully grown lion is taller than a Siberian Tiger. The Tiger in the picture is a Bengal tiger. Bengal Tigers are generally shorter than Siberian Tigers.

A Tiger is often larger, and more muscular than a Lion, but shorter in height.

FlordFlorez:


Clark (1838) said that a British officer, who resided many years at Sierra Leone, saw many fights between lions and tigers, and that the tiger 'universally' won.[29][a]
A newspaper Harper's Weekly in 1859, mentioning the same 10-minute fight in London[62][63] where a tiger named 'Gunga', who had previously belonged to the King of Oude, allegedly killed nearly 30 lions and after its arrival in England, made the keepers spectators to a fight where a lion was killed in 10 minutes.[64] A 1857 London newspaper talking about the same incident reported the lion was a "very fine lion, six or seven years old".[65] One source stated the lion was in confinement (captivity) for three years, implying the lion would be three years old at a minimum.[66] A newspaper talks about Gunga, whose name was also "Nina Shahib" and who, before the fight took place with the lion in London, had attacked its keeper, after which the keeper severely injured the tiger with a crowbar, blinding him in one eye, meaning the tiger would have been blind fighting the lion. The two animals were found fighting each other, in which the keepers made fruitless efforts to part the two animals. Towards the end of the fight, the lion gained a brief advantage, at which point the tiger, while on his back, with swift strikes and using his back legs, tore open the lion's stomach. The lion died after that. The tiger "Nina Shahib" was thought to have been mortally injured. However, the tiger did recover and became one of the biggest attractions of the establishment.[67]
In 1882, a fight started in a menagerie and the tiger fixed his fangs into the lion's throat with blood gushing out, killing the lion.[68]
According to the Gettysburg Compiler and The Baltimore Sun (1899), towards the end of the 19th century in India, the Gaekwad of Baroda, that is Sayajirao III,[69][70] arranged a fight in an amphitheater, between a Barbary lion called 'Atlas', from the Atlas Mountains between Algeria and Morocco, and a man-eating Bengal tiger from the Indian region of Shimla, both large and hungry (with their diets reduced before the fight), before an audience of thousands, instead of between an Indian lion and the tiger, as Indian lions were believed to be no match for Bengal tigers. The tiger was more than 10 feet (3.0 metres) long, over 4 feet (120 centimetres) feet at the shoulder, had strong shoulders and long teeth and claws, and was agile. The lion looked taller at the head than the tiger, and had a large mane, legs and paws. The tiger was seen as "the personification of graceful strength and supple energy," whereas the lion was seen as the "embodiment of massive power and adamantine muscle".[57] In the fight, both cats sustained injuries, and although the tiger sometimes retreated from Atlas, it would come back to fight it, and in the end, managed to scratch Atlas to death, though Atlas pushed it off in one final move before dying. The Gaekwad agreed to pay 37,000 rupees, accepted that the tiger was the "King of the Cat Family," decreed that Atlas' body be given a Royal burial, and that the tiger should have a "cage of honour" in the menagerie of Baroda, and decided to prepare the tiger for a battle with a Sierran grizzly bear weighing more than 1,500 lb (680 kilograms). The battle was to happen after the tiger recovered from its wounds.[9][57]


I guess you are the one that didnt read the article you shared.

VerifiedStalin:



Since you're clearly quoting selected parts of the article that favour your narrative, allow me to post a screenshot from the same article that directly contradicts the part you quoted.

You seemed to have completely missed the point of the article, which theorized that neither animals is always superior to the other in documented history.

Dalil8:


Not exactly larger. I'd say "fatter". But they grow to the same size when bred in captivity and fed with equal amounts of calories. And yes Lions are longer than Tigers.

FlordFlorez:


The height is useless in their encounter cause Tigers fight while standing (pound for pound).

Dalil8:


I get that they are Tiger lovers, i am too. But we all have to accept the reality of things which is; Lions are Kings.

I have searched every article on the web trying to prove otherwise but i have only found a handful of them.

90% of the time, Lions have always bullied and killed Tigers even in their own domain.

But they chose to ignore, the few other instances where Tigers have killed Lions is what they try to sell to us.

nams77:

Point of correction again. Tigers are longer than lions in length and heavier. Tigers have more muscle mass.
. Head to head, shoulder to shoulder, a lion is taller.
Dont be emotional when arguing.
Use facts

https://www.quora.com/Which-is-bigger-lion-or-tiger

Dalil8:


Not exactly larger. I'd say "fatter". But they grow to the same size when bred in captivity and fed with equal amounts of calories. And yes Lions are longer than Tigers.

VerifiedStalin:


I don't think so. Lions are taller, but Tigers are larger and lengthier.

Dalil8:


Lol that's not a verified source, that's Quora, just like nairaland where opinions are aired. He's not a wildlife expert.

Dalil8:


No sorry. Lions have more length.