Squalicorax is about 1.56× longer by these reference values.
Squalicorax uses a 5 m upper reference, compared with 3.2 m for Sand tiger 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
Sand tiger shark is represented by reported to about 3.2 m / 10.5 ft; Squalicorax by estimated to about 5 m / 16 ft. Upper records vary by region and source. Body length and ecology are reconstructed from incomplete fossil evidence.
Bite evidence
Sand tiger shark: A reliable comparable maximum was not found. Squalicorax: Bite traces show feeding, not maximum force.
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 protruding teeth look dramatic, but appearance alone does not reveal bite force. Serrated teeth and bite traces show a broad, opportunistic diet.
TRACE THE CLAIMS