|
Post by Super Communist on Jan 3, 2012 2:57:09 GMT -5
Head to hindquarters, raccoons measure between 40 and 70 cm (16 and 28 in), not including the bushy tail which can measure between 20 and 40 cm (8 and 16 in), but is usually not much longer than 25 cm (10 in). The shoulder height is between 23 and 30 cm (9 and 12 in). The skull of the adult male measures 94.3–125.8 mm long and 60.2–89.1 mm wide, while that of the female measures 89.4115.9 mm long and 58.3–81.2 mm wide. The body weight of an adult raccoon varies considerably with habitat; it can range from 2 to 14 kilograms (4 to 30 lb), but is usually between 3.5 and 9 kilograms (8 and 20 lb). The smallest specimens are found in Southern Florida, while those near the northern limits of the raccoon's range tend to be the largest (see Bergmann's rule).[32] Males are usually 15 to 20% heavier than females.[33] At the beginning of winter, a raccoon can weigh twice as much as in spring because of fat storage.[34] It is one of the most variably sized of all mammals. The largest recorded wild raccoon weighed 28.4 kg (62.6 lb) and measured 140 cm (55 in) in total length, by far the largest size recorded for a procyonid. V.S The Water monitor, (Varanus salvator) is a large species of monitor lizard capable of growing to 3.21 metres (10.5 ft) in length, with the average size of most adults at 1.5 metres (4 ft 11 in) long. Maximum weight of Varanus salvator can be over 25 kilograms (55 lb), but most are half that size. Their body is muscular with a long, powerful, laterally compressed tail. Water monitors are one of the most common monitor lizards found throughout Asia, and range from Sri Lanka, India, Indochina, the Malay Peninsula and various islands of Indonesia, living in areas close to water.
|
|
Reticulatus
Ichthyoid
http://fantasyfaceoff.proboards.com
Posts: 709
|
Post by Reticulatus on Jan 3, 2012 3:13:52 GMT -5
With the exception of a few goliath raccoons I have met I give this to the Monitor. I dont underestimate the raccoon though for a minute. Its just that the reptile bite would be far more determental to the mammals long term health than the reverse.
|
|
Venomous Dragon
Archeon
The Varanid
The Ora, King of The Lizards.
Posts: 2,037
|
Post by Venomous Dragon on Jan 3, 2012 3:20:17 GMT -5
The coon wouldnt be able to beat a big water monitor. Big water monitors have been reported preying on small deer.
|
|
Reticulatus
Ichthyoid
http://fantasyfaceoff.proboards.com
Posts: 709
|
Post by Reticulatus on Jan 3, 2012 3:28:06 GMT -5
i have seen coons the size of border collies that would see a small monitor as food and a play thing. your right though mostly a big monitor would prevail.
|
|
Venomous Dragon
Archeon
The Varanid
The Ora, King of The Lizards.
Posts: 2,037
|
Post by Venomous Dragon on Jan 3, 2012 3:42:44 GMT -5
The size of a border collie? coons are barely bigger than cats (in fact i know of cases where cats have fought racoons) and water monitors can reach 100 pounds. they are the second largest lizard in terms of weight.
|
|
Reticulatus
Ichthyoid
http://fantasyfaceoff.proboards.com
Posts: 709
|
Post by Reticulatus on Jan 3, 2012 3:52:18 GMT -5
well where I live I assure you there are coons, granted they aren't common, that double the size of you average tom cat. I'm not saying the coon wins here, but a four foot lizard wont do.
|
|
Reticulatus
Ichthyoid
http://fantasyfaceoff.proboards.com
Posts: 709
|
Post by Reticulatus on Jan 3, 2012 3:55:08 GMT -5
Infact upon review I'm not satisfied with those weight estimates for the coon at all.
|
|
Reticulatus
Ichthyoid
http://fantasyfaceoff.proboards.com
Posts: 709
|
Post by Reticulatus on Jan 3, 2012 4:13:33 GMT -5
I suppose the average is probabaly correct. The local subspecies here is the Northern Mississippi Valley Raccoon it is amoung the largest. I see what I would estimate as 25 lb raccoons regularly, we don't even concider them big. Occasionaly you will even see what could easily be a 50 lb coon, though they dont usually let you weigh them.
|
|
|
Post by Felis Rex on Jan 3, 2012 17:53:12 GMT -5
With all the coon hunting that goes down around here, we know quite a bit about them. They are much larger than a tom cat, a juvenile is about the size of a cat. An healthy domestic cat rarely tops 10lbs. The problem here is that raccoons dont kill things like this. Frogs, fish, inverterates, stuff like that. They are omnivorous, and only really fight when a food cache is being disputed. Coons are aggressive in such situations, successfully running off cats, skunks, oppossums, feral dogs, and even coyotes, but more often than not they feed side by side in peace. They do kill hunting dogs on occassion, usually "death by 1000 cuts" tactic, 100% defensive.
|
|
|
Post by Ultimategrid on Jan 4, 2012 3:12:16 GMT -5
The lizard takes this easily. It's far too big to consider the racoon as anything but a quick snack.
|
|
|
Post by Canid Cetus Aves on Jan 5, 2012 12:33:27 GMT -5
With the exception of a few goliath raccoons I have met I give this to the Monitor. I dont underestimate the raccoon though for a minute. Its just that the reptile bite would be far more determental to the mammals long term health than the reverse. I agree. The Raccoon wouldn't really be able to do much against the Monitor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2013 21:40:25 GMT -5
At some Indonesian parks there are water monitors taht would swallow even large coons whole. But on average the lizard is smaller making this more interesting. I still think the monitor would have a size advantage and I think it would win. It would be difficult to subdue the raccoon but once it gets a good hold with its mouth, I think its superior size would allow it to overpower and break the bones of the mammal. Monitor 6/10 at average sizes.
|
|
|
Post by Cr1TiKaL on Jul 20, 2013 12:05:51 GMT -5
Monitor wins. Bigger, more aggressive and pretty damn quick in their own rights.
|
|