Bluntnose sixgill vs Whitetip reef shark: Size, Weight & Bite Force

QUICK VERDICT

Bluntnose sixgill is about 2.3× longer by these reference values.

Bluntnose sixgill uses a 4.8 m upper reference, compared with 2.13 m for Whitetip reef shark. Bluntnose sixgill's weight reference is about 32× heavier.

ON THE SAME SCALE

Human. Bus. Whale.
Pick your reference.

RELATIVE LENGTH · 0–24 METERS

ABluntnose sixgillreported to 4.8 m / 15.8 ft

BWhitetip reef sharkreported to 2.13 m / 7 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.

MeasureBluntnose sixgillWhitetip reef shark

Length referencereported to 4.8 m / 15.8 ftreported to 2.13 m / 7 ft

Weight referencepublished to 590 kg / 1,300 lbreported near 18.3 kg / 40 lb

Bite forceNo dependable maximum foundUnknownNo dependable maximum foundUnknown

HabitatDeep temperate and tropical watersTropical Indo-Pacific reefs

DietFishes, rays, seals and carrionOctopus, fishes and crustaceans

WHAT THE DATA CAN SAY

Size is not the whole animal.

Length and weight

Bluntnose sixgill is represented by reported to 4.8 m / 15.8 ft; Whitetip reef shark by reported to 2.13 m / 7 ft. Deepwater sampling is difficult, so upper records are sparse. The species is usually smaller than its reported maximum.

Bite evidence

Bluntnose sixgill: No standardized maximum is available. Whitetip reef shark: No standardized maximum 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 six gill slits mark an ancient branch of shark diversity. Its slim body lets it hunt inside reef crevices.

TRACE THE CLAIMS

Sources and limits.

Bluntnose sixgillFlorida Museum ↗Whitetip reef sharkFlorida Museum ↗How we standardize comparisonsRead the methodology →