Shortfin mako is about 1.39× longer by these reference values.
Shortfin mako uses a 4.45 m upper reference, compared with 3.2 m for Sand tiger shark. Shortfin mako's weight reference is about 3.6× heavier.
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
Sand tiger shark is represented by reported to about 3.2 m / 10.5 ft; Shortfin mako by reported to about 4.45 m / 14.6 ft. Upper records vary by region and source. Record length and mass do not necessarily describe the same individual.
Bite evidence
Sand tiger shark: A reliable comparable maximum was not found. 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 protruding teeth look dramatic, but appearance alone does not reveal bite force. Speed is its signature; the biggest animals are unusual and hard to verify.
TRACE THE CLAIMS