Can Gorillas really lift 10x their body weight?

[wolveraptor]

A few years back, I was watching animal planet, and they had all this shit about the strongest animals in nature, etc., and their claim that a 460 lbs adult silverback gorilla could lift nearly 4600 lbs above its head with both hands.

Now, I've heard a ton of references to primate strength, but this is slightly unbelievable.

Oh great biomechanics of SDN, is this a heaping pile of tathe?

Here's a reference to primate strength:
135 lbs female Chimp pulls 1,260 lbs on dynamometre. Chimps easily dead lift 600 lbs. Gorilla speculated to heft 1,800 lbs with ease. The Straight Dope

[Zor]

I don't see how that could work. While Gorillas are more heavily buit than humans, they still made out of the same stuff (mussle and bone). I doubt that a Gorilla could lift a Truck.

Its a heaping pile of BS if you ask me.

Zor

[wolveraptor]

That's not really a refutation. I was hoping for some rebuke based on geometric scaling.

One could assume the gorilla nothing more than a large chimp. Now the problem is, what is the cross-sectional muscle area of a chimp, and what is the formula to determine how much weaker, lbs for lbs, a chimp that size is than one of regular size.

[Hardy]

One could assume the gorilla nothing more than a large chimp.

I don't think it's that simple, but okay.

and what is the formula to determine how much weaker, lbs for lbs, a chimp that size is than one of regular size.

Cube of the linear scaling factor divided by the square of the linear scaling factor. More simply, the relative strength of an object being scaled up is equal to the reciprocal of the linear scaling factor times. Or the reciprocal of the cubic root of the ratio of their masses.

[wolveraptor]

Realize that I don't know shit about math, and can barely wrap my head around geo-scaling.

The problem with assuming that large chimp=gorilla is that a gorilla and chimp, both five feet tall, will have a difference of more than 200 lbs in weight. They ain't not not the same thing.

[Gil Hamilton]

The above claim that gorillas can lift ten times their body weight is bogus. Even if it were physically possible, no one has ever been able to conduct studies of gorillas strength because gorillas don't tend to cooperate with such studies. It's kind of funny, I actually asked this once to a member of the primate group at the Washington Zoo and his response was to the effect that gorillas are much too strong for people to compell them to do things they don't want to do.

[Edi]

There's a thread here that discusses the relative strengths of humans, chimps and gorillas. It can probably give you some info on the issue. That said, I'd be inclined to call the claim that gorillas can lift ten times their body weight exaggerated. They probably can if they use a block and tackle, but straight up from the ground, that sounds suspect.

Edi

[Xon]

I wouldnt be suprised if they could pull or push ten times their body weight in ideal conditions, but lift?

No fucking way.

[Lagmonster]

I've seen some impressive feats of strength from primates, but nothing to suggest that a gorilla can deadlift that kind of weight. Their body construction and centre of gravity just isn't right for straight lifting - they're built, like most animals are, for *pushing* since lifting isn't really a huge necessity for such an animal. So that said, I wouldn't put it past a gorilla to be able to flip a car end over end until it got bored.

[wolveraptor]

I've heard primates are better designed for deadlifts than say, benching. The long arms are a hinderance.

While I have no sources now, I heard a while ago about a female gorilla bending steel bars 2" in diameter when they seperated her from her baby. Why the fuck do they evolve that kind of strength? Is there a real need for it in nature? A gorillas biggest predator is a puny 100 lbs leopard.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

I've heard primates are better designed for deadlifts than say, benching. The long arms are a hinderance.

While I have no sources now, I heard a while ago about a female gorilla bending steel bars 2" in diameter when they seperated her from her baby. Why the fuck do they evolve that kind of strength? Is there a real need for it in nature? A gorillas biggest predator is a puny 100 lbs leopard.

Wrong. Technically the gorilla's largest and most dangerous predator is a 160 pound close relative that goes about on two legs. But that's being pedantic. And leopards are extremely dangerous for their size. For much of the history of the hominid family tree, hominids were little more than leopard food (Australopithecus fossil skulls have been found with holes in their skulls matching the size and spacing of leopard fangs, for instance.) Furthermore, a leopard wouldn't take a full-grown adult silverback, but juveniles are fair game.

It could well be that their great size is an effect of sexual selection. Generations of female gorillas preferrentially mated with the biggest, baddest male gorillas capable of keeping a hold onto their harems with fairly obvious results.

[Master of Ossus]

I've heard primates are better designed for deadlifts than say, benching. The long arms are a hinderance.

While I have no sources now, I heard a while ago about a female gorilla bending steel bars 2" in diameter when they seperated her from her baby. Why the fuck do they evolve that kind of strength? Is there a real need for it in nature? A gorillas biggest predator is a puny 100 lbs leopard.

These animals live in forests, where their ability to actually break and then either use or eat large wooden objects is actually critical. Those "gorilla nests" you hear about are sometimes made of grass and twigs, but they have to support the gorilla's entire weight and so they have to have big, thick structural supports. Remember that gorillas, unlike chimps and orangutans, do not eat fruit in significant quantities. Their entire diet is based on tough, fibrous materials, and in order to get it they need to be able to destroy large branches or even small trees.

[wolveraptor]

That reminds me; discovery once told me that gorillas exerted around 1200 lbs of force in breaking bamboo to eat. Bullshit?

[Molyneux]

That reminds me; discovery once told me that gorillas exerted around 1200 lbs of force in breaking bamboo to eat. Bullshit?

Quite possible, but you might want to see if you can find confirmation elsewhere before you flag it as definitively accurate.

[wolveraptor]

Well, I know they eat the juicy center of the bamboo, so clearly they crack it open. And I've seen bamboo used as scaffolding for buildings in southeast asia. I just don't know what kind of force it takes to break the stuff.

[Master of Ossus]

That reminds me; discovery once told me that gorillas exerted around 1200 lbs of force in breaking bamboo to eat. Bullshit?

Possible. The gorilla is exceptionally strong, and does eat bamboo as part of its diet (something like pandas). I've heard gorillas can snap through bamboo trees that are as thick as a few inches, so the limit there is how strong the bamboo would have to be.

[Gil Hamilton]

Quite possible. The big bamboo is very tough material as you've said, wolvie, it's used as building material.


Personally, I know this is slightly off topic, but is it me or do gorillas in the wild have a hell of a lifestyle? All they do all day is idly troop around their area of forest munching on anything delicious they want and nothing in the wild messes around with them. Sleep, eat, play around with each other, and make hot ape love when the desire arises. If it weren't for humans hunting them to extinction, I'd wish I were a Silverback.

[wolveraptor]

It's like being a lion male, except you don't even need to beat the shit out of the other guys so often. Very rarely in fact.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

Can anybody remind me what exactly it is in our structure or muscles that makes us so weak compared to our genetical neighbors? I'm sure it was mentioned before somewhere, but I forgot.

[Zac Naloen]

Can anybody remind me what exactly it is in our structure or muscles that makes us so weak compared to our genetical neighbors? I'm sure it was mentioned before somewhere, but I forgot.

presumably it has something to do with the density of our muscle fibers, and the fact we don't have nearly the same need for strength in order to survive, strength just got naturally selected in favour of other things.

notice how its usually the smart innovative "geeks" who are small weak and puny*?

same with eye sight and other things we just don't seem to need to be as good anymore, people who need glasses aren't getting killed off cos they can't see.

* i am aware this is a stereotype and not always true

[wolveraptor]

I have a few hypotheses (nobody knows for sure really; it's buried within our evolutionary past).

But first, here are the facts:
1. Apes have virtually no body fat. Living in a tropical climate, they obviously don't need it, and it also helps explain why a wild greater ape refuses to swim. They have no natural buoyancy. Basically, they have frames of pure muscle and bone.

2. Apes were/are arboreal. They must be able to support their entire body weight by one hand or foot. If you've ever tried this, you know that it sure as hell isn't easy, yet ape children do it for fun. It belies great strength. That's why an ape's grip is so crushing. They also hoist themselves through the canopy like nothing, with both hands and feet (though primarily hands, accounting for their great upper-body strength). As some descended from the trees some put their great strength to use by tackling tough foods (gorillas).

Hypotheses:
1. Greater strength may mean less dexterity. You might have a crushing grip, but may not be able to handle tools well, and even the strongest silverback will be shredded by a pride of lions. Thus, those hominids who could work their fingers began to be prized as mates. For once, the strongest brute wasn't always top monkey. The male who figured out how to cut into the elephant carcass was praised with the attention of sexy monkey females.

2. The fastest running animals don't have huge, bulky frames, and are comparatively light-weight. As humans began to become savannah creatures, they needed to lose the pounds and become lean running machines. Sure we don't run fast, but we can last a lot longer in the sun than a chimp.

3. The monkeys that were dislodged from the trees and forced to become savanah apes were the ones who weren't tough enough to stand the heat as forests dwindled. Thus, the strongest primates stayed in the trees out of sheer buffness, while the weak ones went on to become our ancestors.

Again, that's pure speculation, but it appears to make sense.