Kodiak Bear vs African Lion

[Silver Prime]

Following up on (the still open'd) Zebra vs Horse.


Just wanted to see others opinions (And some proof/evidence) to back up the basics on this specific challange of who people think would win, in a (Hypothetical) match up of wild and or arranged event such as amphitheaters an such.

(Keeping it short on here) But a full abstract of my take is based on facts; actual events that has taken place already...
http://teamauthority.myfastforum.org/African_Lion_vs_Grizzly_Bear_about729.html

But none were specificaly Kodiaks per-say, but still the evidence in the historical means leans twards the lion...even though statistics cant be verified since information is never properly documented and are more so just estimations and half baked calculations in terms the bears weights, who do you all think will take the crown on a average bout scenario.

The lion: Aka the King of the beast

or

Bruin: Aka the embodyment of Goliath.

[Edit:]

What I find funny is, the main argument is of weight factors on this topic, all day long we hear about people saying Kodiak 2,000 pounds>>>>>African lion 400 pounds, using decptive and un-truthful scaling like comparing apes vs humans; I could be deceptive as well, like this...

Man vs Silver-back Gorlia

Average humans height...8'11 feet tall...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5c/Robert_Wadlow.jpg/220px-Robert_Wadlow.jpg

Average humans weight...1,320 pounds
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Uribe

Then down scale the gorilla and say, the average gorilla is only 5'5 and 320 pounds; so humans can on average kill silver backs because humans are nearly twice the size and 4x the weight of gorillas.

Ha!

Thats exactly what people do when comparing lions vs bears...taking extreme figures and down scaling every possible out-look in there bias favor.

Closing this since the OP pretty much says in his last post that it is over. Member concensus is Kodiak beats lion.
admin allisolm

 

[MontyAC]

Kodiak and it's no contest:

http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html

 

[skyking]

Some sort of bug on that link above.

 

[Silver Prime]

Kodiak and it's no contest:

http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html

Big fan of lair web, but as for the section part of the bear vs big cats; Ms. Thomas did not fact check that source; the account she is basing her opinion from is the california gold mineing book, which has the same content in the great bear almanac...along with its same story on around 20 or so books edited and quoted for.

But...

It was not as the original story claimed, as I showed newspaper archives (People who were there) on that very link...showed that, that specific fight had no such bear kill no such lion, it was a draw.

And I have already adressed the web site ask-a-biologist...and there was no fights to source (Made up). Of course I can claim lions won a billion fights and then not source it, it wont make it true, reliable/creditable just because his title was a biologist, in fact a biologist wouldent even be knowledgable in that field/topic a historian would since it is dealing with the past, not biology.

So again, the score cards favors the lion, and I'd like to hear your own opinion of how you think its as you said "Its no contest".

I dont think posting a half illistrated site; and then turning it in to something compltetly irlevent to the subject, since one occaison cannot determine the universal answer; which again, your source is now unrealible since I showed more credability to the exact same fight you were alibing.

 

[KaOTiK]

No one fucks with bear cavalry

 

[Gibsons]

No one fucks with bear cavalry

Some do, or try to. They die quickly. Bear wins.

 

[Soundmanred]

Reported

 

[Silver Prime]

Following up on what Monty Ac...

In fact, everything sourced from lair web's catagorie on bears vs big cats are just shy away from hear say and pure opinonated...hence it states:

The Californians never understood why. We now know that it was enormously strong bone density meeting a low density skull. At a range of 4 feet the blow crashed in before the lion could apply the wind pipe lock, which is lion and tiger learnt behaviour for taking down prey animals.

The ferocity of this animal easily matches that of an unsettled*African lion.

and

Big cat biology is very different. They have evolved powerful elastic muscles over a low weight, low density bone structure to suit their purpose of chasing down prey.

Completely a opinion, scientist studys show that lions and bears have roughly the same amount of limb bone density's...
http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9344906/7/

The bear having denser parts of the femur and the lion having denser parts of the Tibia-fibula; while all the other parts of the bodys bones tested was basicaly the same amount of denseness...not to mention a lions skull is alot bigger, thicker, broader, robust and larger than any living bears skull, so if a bear cant cave in another bears skull, he wont do anything to the superior skull of a lions.

Grizzly bear pit fights:

The Californians of the late 19th century staged well-documented pit fights with grizzlies and spanish bulls. The grizzlies, using their paw as a club, shattered the unfortunate bull's skull or shoulder bones so easily that the betting became poor.

Eventually, and at considerable cost, African lions were brought in to raise the stakes. The most fierce of the adult males was sent in whilst the grizzly was already waiting in the pits. The lion was known for bravely charging straight in and looked good for the money, but the grizzly killed a male lion almost as easily as he'd killed the bull.

No base, no sources, no nothing...not even a relevance to the actual story that stemed from the californians, in fact it dident even take place in california, it was further moved to lerado mexico, I proved that with over 5 newspaper archives, and I just learned there are more sources that had other illistrations about that (single fight) as well...
http://www.historybanter.com/tag/bear-vs-lion/

yet still all articles I have provided, mentioned that the bear was more bloodied up, even in the instantaneous photograhic illistrations where the lion is on the far end of the cage and the bear is looking down it portrays and dipicts the bears fore head dripping with blood.

Its already been fact checked from multiple sources of credability, the bear did not win against the lion or the bull; in fact the bull is what killed both of them.

So your opinion of no contest has no merits or reliable proof.

 

[BudAshes]

Lions dead obvi.

How about Grizzly vs. Hippo.

 

[Soundmanred]

Squall Vs Cloud.
GO!

 

[Silver Prime]

Lions dead obvi.

How about Grizzly vs. Hippo.

Based on what, that the fact that I brought over 10 accounts of lions killing...

-Polar bears
-American grizzly bears
-Russian grizzlys
-American black bears
-Asiatic sloth bears

An you brought zero, just a opinion based on what you think there weight advantage is, which in no way has any kodiak bear above 1,500 pounds has been verified and confirmed other than a estimation, there are accounts that I mentioned of bears won as well, but its still far less than vice versa.

So far the only thing that was brought up backing the bear has been exposed an exploited to be all flawed and miss-guided information, not true, and or pure hear say.

Hippo vs bear?

A bear would get creamed, he is not designed to fight hippos, lions are...through thousands of years of adapting (evolving too) the size advantage the bear has over the lion is minimum; being that the average brown bear Kodiak/grizzly is only 100-200 pounds heavier than the average lion.
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/averageweightsofgrizzlybears.jpg

We talk about averages not rare cases that is only the extreme, at max no brown bear has been confirmed to be any where near the so call 2,000 pound or even 1,500 pound range, they are estimations not weighed weights with credability.

Name me feats that the bear has accomplished that out ranks an surpasses that of the lion? In other words what animals do Kodiak bears take on thats more formidable than...

-Rhinos
-Buffalo
-Hippos
-giraffes
-elephants
http://teamauthority.myfastforum.org/ftopic623-0-asc-30.php

Bull moose and juvi bison?

Ha!

The lion regularly takes on Bull buffalo, who has a much greater and larger weight/power factor than comparing a lion vs a kodiak, we are talking average terms...

Lion 400-600 Kodiak 400-800

While a bulll buffalo can have just as much as 2 times the weight of the bear and more than twice its power.

So what are you going by?

 

[pelov]

Call me crazy, but I reckon that Silver Prime might actually be a lion hell-bent on defending his species honor here on Anandtech.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Cape Buffalo hunts down and kills both, then feasts upon their souls.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Godzilla vs Bambi.

Megashark vs Crocosaurus.

 

[BudAshes]

Based on what, that the fact that I brought over 10 accounts of lions killing...

-Polar bears
-American grizzly bears
-Russian grizzlys
-American black bears
-Asiatic sloth bears

An you brought zero, just a opinion based on what you think there weight advantage is, which in no way has any kodiak bear above 1,500 pounds has been verified and confirmed other than a estimation, there are accounts that I mentioned of bears won as well, but its still far less than vice versa.

So far the only thing that was brought up backing the bear has been exposed an exploited to be all flawed and miss-guided information, not true, and or pure hear say.

Hippo vs bear?

A bear would get creamed, he is not designed to fight hippos, lions are...through thousands of years of adapting (evolving too) the size advantage the bear has over the lion is minimum; being that the average brown bear Kodiak/grizzly is only 100-200 pounds heavier than the average lion.
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/averageweightsofgrizzlybears.jpg

We talk about averages not rare cases that is only the extreme, at max no brown bear has been confirmed to be any where near the so call 2,000 pound or even 1,500 pound range, they are estimations not weighed weights with credability.

Name me feats that the bear has accomplished that out ranks an surpasses that of the lion? In other words what animals do Kodiak bears take on thats more formidable than...

-Rhinos
-Buffalo
-Hippos
-giraffes
-elephants
http://teamauthority.myfastforum.org/ftopic623-0-asc-30.php

Bull moose and juvi bison?

Ha!

The lion regularly takes on Bull buffalo, who has a much greater and larger weight/power factor than comparing a lion vs a kodiak, we are talking average terms...

Lion 400-600 Kodiak 400-800

While a bulll buffalo can have just as much as 2 times the weight of the bear and more than twice its power.

So what are you going by?

You are comparing yellow stone dumpster divers to Kodiak monsters. Anyway as you said elephant wins.

 

[pelov]

These furry stuffed animals are badasses

Few Kodiak bears have been weighed in the wild, so some of the weights are estimates. Size range for females is from 225 kg (500 lbs) to 315 kg (700 lbs) and for males 360 kg (800 lbs) to 635 kg (1400 lbs).[2] Mature males average 480–533 kg (1,058–1,175 lb) over the course of the year,[6] and can weigh up to 680 kg (1500 lbs) at peak times.[2] Females are typically about 20% smaller and 30% lighter than males[2] and adult sizes are attained when bears are 6 years old. Bears weigh the least when they emerge from their dens in the spring, and can increase their weight by 20–30%[7] during late summer and fall. Bears in captivity can sometimes attain weights considerably greater than those of wild bears.
An average adult male measures 244 cm (8 ft 0 in) in length and stands 133 cm (4 ft 4 in) tall at the shoulder.[6] A wild male weighing 751 kg (1,660 lb) had a hindfoot measurement of 46 cm (18 in).[6] A large male Kodiak bear stands up to 1.5 m (5 ft) tall at the shoulder when it is standing on all four legs. When standing fully upright on its hind legs, a large male could reach a height of 3 m (10 ft).[2] The largest verified size for a captive Kodiak bear was for a specimen that lived at the Dakota Zoo in Bismarck, North Dakota. Nicknamed "Clyde", he weighed 966.9 kg (2,132 lb) when he died in June 1987 at the age of 22. According to zoo director Terry Lincoln, Clyde probably weighed close to 1,090 kg (2,400 lb) a year earlier. He still had a fat layer of 9 inches when he died.[8] A mass of 1,500 kg (3,300 lb) was published for this subspecies, but further details were not specified.[9]

They have that skull structure that reminds me of those German Rottweilers. It looks kinda smushy-faced and cute, but you know it can snap your femur it a single bite

 

[Silver Prime]

You are comparing yellow stone dumpster divers to Kodiak monsters. Anyway as you said elephant wins.

No, Yellow stone bears have exceeded a 1,000 pounds in rare cases, but we take the averages of that speices, not the world records as I stated above as my very first post.

In this case a fair bout of strong and prime fitted combatants, would have a prime size'd lion at 600 pounds and kodiak at 850...both can get bigger, but in terms that would be there ideal brutes, anything bigger than 1,000 pounds for a brown bear is considered obese, just because the record human is 1,320 pounds and then you down scale to a 600 pound human (Half the weight) dosent mean that the 600 pound human is not considered obese.

I gave my explaination in the link, explaining why and how the bear can achive weights above 1,000 pounds more frequent than lions and tigers, thats because the bear can eat other means of intake/consumptions; if lions could eat grass, honey, poltry/abundent of fish-salmon, vegatables, fruits ect (on a regular basis/Rutinely)...he could attain more weight as well, since they hold different types of nutrients/carbs, and not to mention cost little to no energy to consume them, while killing things like buffalo not only cost alot of energy; they can be killed in the process.

Again a Kodiak above a 1,000 is just as common as 8 foot men, its rare, and not to mention its not usualy as you think, its not all brone and muscle, but a deformity that puts alot of pressure on the body causing multiple problems; as I already stated, if it were true about size rules, then fat people would own out Boxing, Pride fighting, Ufc ect...but till date, none do...this is a all out fight not a sumo match; but a fight using any and everything within there power to win, like Ultimate fighting.

As I stated, I base'd everything upoun

-Facts
-Feats
-Historical records/actual accounts
-Comparing all of the statistics

And now a word from a person who has worked with bears and lions, in fact every predator known to man kind, Mr. Clyde beatty; who favors big cats vs bears...

What did you bring?

 

[Agent11]

All bears aren't equal. I would pick an adult male Grizzly over most animals because they have so much brute strength... And those claws are no joke.

 

[Silver Prime]

These furry stuffed animals are badasses


Few Kodiak bears have been weighed in the wild, so some of the weights are estimates. Size range for females is from 225 kg (500 lbs) to 315 kg (700 lbs) and for males 360 kg (800 lbs) to 635 kg (1400 lbs).[2] Mature males average 480–533 kg (1,058–1,175 lb) over the course of the year,[6] and can weigh up to 680 kg (1500 lbs) at peak times.[2] Females are typically about 20% smaller and 30% lighter than males[2] and adult sizes are attained when bears are 6 years old. Bears weigh the least when they emerge from their dens in the spring, and can increase their weight by 20–30%[7] during late summer and fall. Bears in captivity can sometimes attain weights considerably greater than those of wild bears.
An average adult male measures 244 cm (8 ft 0 in) in length and stands 133 cm (4 ft 4 in) tall at the shoulder.[6] A wild male weighing 751 kg (1,660 lb) had a hindfoot measurement of 46 cm (18 in).[6] A large male Kodiak bear stands up to 1.5 m (5 ft) tall at the shoulder when it is standing on all four legs. When standing fully upright on its hind legs, a large male could reach a height of 3 m (10 ft).[2] The largest verified size for a captive Kodiak bear was for a specimen that lived at the Dakota Zoo in Bismarck, North Dakota. Nicknamed "Clyde", he weighed 966.9 kg (2,132 lb) when he died in June 1987 at the age of 22. According to zoo director Terry Lincoln, Clyde probably weighed close to 1,090 kg (2,400 lb) a year earlier. He still had a fat layer of 9 inches when he died.[8] A mass of 1,500 kg (3,300 lb) was published for this subspecies, but further details were not specified.[9]

They have that skull structure that reminds me of those German Rottweilers. It looks kinda smushy-faced and cute, but you know it can snap your femur it a single bite

wikipedia?

The same people who stated that a tiger would demolish a lion, yet only came up with a handful of sources (less then 30)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_versus_lion

Yet at the same time consealed the fact that theres like 500 more sources that proved the lion was superior...
http://teamauthority.myfastforum.org/ftopic623-0-asc-45.php

Hmm, some credability wikipedia has there; not to mention how many bears was weighed to get that average?...you dont know right...what were there ages? You dont know right. What was there exact locations and tags? You dont know right. These are estimations, not actual weighed weights, if so; show me the photos of these people weighing the animal, you know; like some proof that only a few man hoisted up a thousand pound bear (Rutinely) in order to weigh them, what were the scale types? You dont know right...I've seen photos of people weighing bears, an none past 1,000 pounds...all the rest are estimations upoun mass, and dimensions.

Which is 100% flawed, since a 5 foot man can out weigh a 7 foot man, being that weight can be distrubuted differently upoun individuals; thats all they went by, calculating mass x measurments, yet a 1,200 pound bear had the same measurements as Goliath a so called 2,000 pound kodiak...yet the photo shows he was only slightly larger than simba a 826 pound african lion, it should have showed a bear thats twice the size, not a 1,200 pound advantage yet still simba looked relatively of the same mass.

Thats the same type of sources (Ignorant) people like Professor haugton who published in over 30 books, that lions are 9 feet long and tigers can get up to 18 feet. Ha ha ha ha, yet the longest confirmed tiger was only 12 feet long, 6 feet....I repeat 6 feet=2 yards shorter than what a so call scientist alibied, pure balone; just like your weights you just cited.

 

[EagleKeeper]

One, the environments where each thrive are different.
Polar, Kodiak and Grizzly will dominate easily on their turf and probably on the lion's.

Realize the lion goes after the weaker of the herd and is willing to leave the herd and find easier prey.

While the lion skull may be thicker, the lion does not jump 4-5 ft off ground to get to the skull region of a bear. It kills by leaping on the back of a smaller animal and dragging it to the ground while holding on with a neck/back bite.

I have seen dogs stupidly grab onto the Kodiak bear nose. Once the bear recovered from the shock, the dog ended up 4-5 ft away, broken. The bear shuffled off with a bleeding snout.

The bears also have a lot of fur that makes biting difficult.

Wolves leave the big bears alone, as a pack. You should consider why.

Any of the three bears can demolish a full grown Shepard or husky with a single paw swipe.

While it may not kill the lion any claw swipe will cripple the lion and put it out if the battle.

Lions have claws about half the size of a bear, they are designed to go up against thin hides. Grizzly and Kodiak are designed for earth, rock and tree moving.

 

[Silver Prime]

One, the environments where each thrive are different.
Polar, Kodiak and Grizzly will dominate easily on their turf and probably on the lion's.

Realize the lion goes after the weaker of the herd and is willing to leave the herd and find easier prey.

Are you saying any one of those bears can survive in lion country? How so, all other predators go by the golden rule in africa; when confronted by a lion or lions with an s...you know; range's from 10-30 in a single pride? Other animals such as leopards, cheetah's; hyenas ect all co-existed because they oblige this golden rule....they run; a bear is a very proud animal and wouldn't fear a lion, but that would be his biggest mistake, since wolves; packs of 5 can hold off and tire out a brown bear, what do you think a confrontation with 1-4 male lions would amount up to? Two alone can kill 8,000 pound hippos...even a large bear is only 1/8th that size.

If you speak of averages, lions live in prides; if ousted, they form coalitions...and a single lion still takes on animals by far 2-4 x larger than the bears initial size of average to even max.

While the lion skull may be thicker, the lion does not jump 4-5 ft off ground to get to the skull region of a bear. It kills by leaping on the back of a smaller animal and dragging it to the ground while holding on with a neck/back bite.

Lions have frontal wise; attacked giraffe, a animal thats twice the height of any bear; you speak as if you have a confrontation to go by, any sources, any links, any alibied fights that can confirm what you stated? I already showed occaisons of polar bears and grizzlys sucumbing to throat bites from lions; not that it matters, standing bi-pedal would make it alot easier to knock the bear down, since all quadripeds have better balance than bi-pedal animals, your sense of gravity is cut in half when on two feet, a rushing lion could with minimum accord wrestle down a bear in the spring; which lions and tigers have clear'd 10 foot fences escaping zoo's, if they can wrestle down 800 kg around (1,600 pound) prime male buffalos, a 850 pound kodiak is no exception. It would even render the bears so call assest and back fire, since the full power swing by the bear cant be generated if the lion is on all fours (half the length down), yet the lions physiology is long-ated; so he is use to swiping in a angled stance allowing him to target not only up above... but a swift bite to the bottom limbs such as a bite to the leg/foot could end the fight; pro-longing a immobilize'd bear...waiting for the moment for a throat bite or dying from accumilations of wave after wave of tourcher.

I have seen dogs stupidly grab onto the Kodiak bear nose. Once the bear recovered from the shock, the dog ended up 4-5 ft away, broken. The bear shuffled off with a bleeding snout.

Dogs? Not useful here, since a lion is of 10x everything the dog is; a lion biting a bears nostril region could potentialy cave in the bears frontal area with a well placed bite or repeative bites, since he can open his jaws alot wider and has a greater radius, being he has bigger fangs/canines; bigger head/skull for a potentialy superior savergery upoun each lunge, even there muzzle is that of twice the bears size. I've seen the carnivora forum compare countless of bear skulls to that of the lions, and the whole skull of the lion is nearly twice that of any existing bear, even live speicimens show that the (Muzzle) of the lion is just about twice the size...

Brown bear:

Black bear:

The bears also have a lot of fur that makes biting difficult.

The bear is well protected, yet pumas dont seem to be weary of it, and there is more than a few accounts of pumas doing in brown bears if not more than african lion accounts;
http://www.freewebs.com/mountainlionsinfo/cougarvsbearsaccounts.htm

Not to mention that its only 1-3 inchs thick, while a lions battle mane that extends to the belly; comprimises of 1-3 feet longer...thicker; denser hair where it counts, the throat and belly; making him more durable and be able to endure more damage with a superior fighting ornament (Designed for fighting)

Wolves leave the big bears alone, as a pack. You should consider why.

Complete lack of knowledge on your part...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu6LskdU1QQ

Thats a small pack, it wouldn't matter even if it was against a world record size'd bear; thats still a small amount of wolves, they're packs can grow as big as 30 in a single group/pack, when the numbers are that large; no bear would ever survive a confrontation, exaughstion factors would be too great, they wouldn't run away neither because wolves takle bison who are by far deadlier and larger when they are in herds and adult stages, the wolves would be be-knownst of the out come and wouldn't flea; since they have the necessary numbers.

Similar numbers if not more hyenas, yet totaly different out-come...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUCxL3GHTIA

The bear always just try and grab and use his signature move (The bear hug) biding his time, you cant bear hug the lion and get the same results since the lion is as equaly as strong and lions are the most explosive fighters out of the animal kingdom; Hyenas are bigger, more powerful and more formidable than wolves, since they can get as large as 40 in a single clan.

Any of the three bears can demolish a full grown Shepard or husky with a single paw swipe.

A lion>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Any dog

While it may not kill the lion any claw swipe will cripple the lion and put it out if the battle.

Lions have claws about half the size of a bear, they are designed to go up against thin hides.

Any evidence of that magnimious claim? I showed; 20 accounts of bears fighting lions and not one of them had a 1 hit knock out swat; in fact thats not even how bears kill there prey, they use there weight and wrestle them down...after its a baragge of bites and twist's. The bears claws are longer for digging; the lions are retractable for holding on and wrestling better, in the clinch the bear is not significantly strong enough to out power the lion; since the lion has better feats.

Evidently you dont know the formalitys of (Tools) compared to weapons that are specific for its job; (Killing).

-Nail gun (Specifically made for/as a Tool)
-Shot gun (Specifically made for killing)

Both can kill a human no problem, but only one is made (Specifically for killing)

 

[Juddog]

Obviously the Kodiak bear would win. Anybody with even half a brain could see this.

 

[Gibsons]

Obviously the Kodiak bear would win. Anybody with even half a brain could see this.

Yes, bear wins. Too big and strong for a lion.

 

[Silver Prime]

lol I cant imagine how big your two brains put together are...about the size of an infants?

Wheres dah proof?

Oh yeah; thats right...bears are 6x bigger and always won in california, who have crushed the skulls of spanish fighting bulls, says so by some half ass source that has been exploited from more then 20 pros on subject.

lol

Puh-leeze...the lion; tiger and bear, yes and Bear....Brown bears, were all decimated by the bull...
http://teamauthority.myfastforum.org/God_of_War__about728.html

(There was no breaking of any bull's skull; only a beatin to death bear)

All we'll have is a re-accuring fan-tards (Like you two) who thinks opinions are facts.

Good luck. ^_^

 

[Gibsons]

lol I cant imagine how big your two brains put together are...about the size of an infants?

All we'll have is a re-accuring fan-tards (Like you two) who thinks opinions are facts.

Insults? That's not very nice.

Bear beats lion, easy.

Everyone knows this.