>>58276538I guess its worth noting that, as
>>58272507 implies, this is a lower bound, so they could very well be even bigger than that.
Though, the Lugia actually lines up decently well with its description in
>>58272224 that says Lugia is measured from beak to tail - that would make them look about as big as they are in that chart.
Though I did see a shitload of posts from awhile back claiming ash was 140cm, which I also did, and I guess is a decent upper bound?
I guess it depends on what you like.
