Otodus obliquus is about 16× longer by these reference values.
Otodus obliquus uses a 9.1 m upper reference, compared with 0.56 m for Cookiecutter shark. A clean mass ratio is not shown because at least one weight is not reliably reconstructed.
ON THE SAME SCALE
Human. Bus. Whale.
Pick your reference.
Length bars use upper comparison values and do not show body depth, tail proportion or typical adult size. A long thresher tail, for example, does not equal whale-shark body mass.
THE NUMBERS
Side by side.
WHAT THE DATA CAN SAY
Size is not the whole animal.
Length and weight
Cookiecutter shark is represented by about 0.56 m / 22 in; Otodus obliquus by estimated to about 9.1 m / 30 ft. Weight is a rounded comparison reference. Soft-body dimensions are inferred from teeth and living analogues.
Bite evidence
Cookiecutter shark: Bite shape is documented; a comparable force maximum is not. Otodus obliquus: No species-specific model is used.
Living versus extinct
At least one animal is known from fossils. Fossil length, weight and bite estimates depend on which living analogues and scaling equations researchers choose.
Ecology changes the matchup
Its bite removes a round plug; size alone does not predict ecological impact. It belonged to the megatooth lineage that later produced megalodon.
TRACE THE CLAIMS