Frilled shark vs Shortfin mako: Size, Weight & Bite Force

QUICK VERDICT

Shortfin mako is about 2.2× longer by these reference values.

Shortfin mako uses a 4.45 m upper reference, compared with 2 m for Frilled shark. Shortfin mako's weight reference is about 38× heavier.

ON THE SAME SCALE

Human. Bus. Whale.
Pick your reference.

RELATIVE LENGTH · 0–24 METERS

AFrilled sharkabout 2 m / 6.6 ft

BShortfin makoreported to about 4.45 m / 14.6 ft

REFAdult human1.8 m · about 80 kg

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.

MeasureFrilled sharkShortfin mako

Length referenceabout 2 m / 6.6 ftreported to about 4.45 m / 14.6 ft

Weight referencelarge-adult reference about 15 kg / 33 lbrecorded to about 570 kg / 1,257 lb

Bite forceNo dependable maximum foundUnknownNo dependable maximum foundUnknown

HabitatDeep continental slopesOpen tropical and temperate oceans

DietSquid, fishes and small sharksFast fishes, squid and other sharks

WHAT THE DATA CAN SAY

Size is not the whole animal.

Length and weight

Frilled shark is represented by about 2 m / 6.6 ft; Shortfin mako by reported to about 4.45 m / 14.6 ft. Deepwater records remain limited. Record length and mass do not necessarily describe the same individual.

Bite evidence

Frilled shark: No standardized maximum is available. Shortfin mako: No directly comparable maximum bite-force estimate is used.

Living versus extinct

Both species are living, but record-sized individuals are rare. These upper references should not be read as normal adult size.

Ecology changes the matchup

Its body plan looks ancient, but living frilled sharks are modern species—not unchanged fossils. Speed is its signature; the biggest animals are unusual and hard to verify.

TRACE THE CLAIMS

Sources and limits.

Frilled sharkFlorida Museum ↗Shortfin makoFlorida Museum ↗How we standardize comparisonsRead the methodology →