OliTheMan says on 3/Jul/10
Click Here
BEFORE HE WAS FAMOUS AND HAD LIFTS/BOOTS
mcfan says on 1/Jul/10
It's very easy to be confused with someone that has good posture and is extremely skinny. I'd say Bowie was a max 5'9.5...maybe 5'9.25. Let's remember he was measured at 5'10.5 in combat boots in his 40s so he was certainly never 5'10 and possibly never 5'9.5. Memory tells me he was just shy of Jagger, noticeably shorter than Lennon, and maybe a hair shorter than Harrison. mcfan says on 14/Apr/10
Bowie was 5'9.5, Mercury was 5'9, and McCartney 5'10 at their peak heights. I know for a fact Bowie wasn't quite Lennon's height in 1975, and looks a tad less than Paul in 1984. I've already proved Tom Jones listed as 5'10.5 was always taller than John Lennon & Paul McCartney from the 1966 and 1975 photos. However, there used to be a video of the 1966 awards event with Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, Lulu, Ringo, Paul, and Tom Jones showing that Paul was wearing 1-inch loafers and Tom 2-inch Cuban heels, but it doesn't account for why Jones appears close to 2 inches taller than Paul. Dylan says on 28/Mar/10
Paul M - Could it be that Bowie looked nothing like his TV image because the person you met WAS NOT Bowie? I mean come on, we all know he is around 5'10". and in his photograph with Glenn which used to be on here he had at least a 3" adavantage and we know for a fact that Glenn was between 5'6.5" and 5'7". First there is "Bowie Fan" saying he is 6'0" and then we get you going to the other extreme saying he is between 5'5" and 5'6". No I have not met Bowie in person but I don't need to have met him to know that both your assessments are nonsense! Johnny says on 27/Mar/10
I dont think he lost 3cm Paul M says on 23/Mar/10
I met David Bowie once, in a London studio where some friends of mine were recording. I was chatting to him for at least 20 minutes before I realised who he was. He looked nothing like his TV image, or his press photos. And I was amazed at how small he was, as I had always assumed that he was tall. He was at least a couple of inches shorter than me, and I am 5' 8". So his height has to be something like 5' 5" or maybe 5' 6". I later discovered that he wears shoes with "lifts" to make himself appear taller. Dylan says on 24/Feb/10
You could well be right McFan, however, at the height of his fame with Queen he was listed as 5'9.75" and in an interview he gave after touring he remarked on how much weight he had lost and he stated, "I am nearly 5'10" and I only weigh 8st 7lbs" mcfan says on 12/Feb/10
Dylan, I dispute the Freddie Mercury claim of 5'9.75 as he only looked 5'9. Dylan says on 8/Feb/10
guyfrommars - Freddie Mercury was actually 5'9.75" just shy of 5'10" I think Bowie could well have been 5'10" in the seventies, he used to wear about 4" platform shoes which made him look taller. I have seen him listed as 5'10.5" but I think that is a little optimistic. I think 5'10" was a fair assessment of him. mcfan says on 5/Feb/10
Remembering back, he was just shy of Lennon's height. I would say he was the same height as George Harrison. (5'9.5 maybe) guyfrommars says on 5/Feb/10
Bowie was not much taller than 5ft9 Freddie Mercury. During the Ziggy Stardust era of the early '70s, he used to wear some big platforms. 178lad;P says on 31/Jan/10
5' 5"?! What a load of 'ole ****. I spose you believe that Rod Stewart is 5' 5" too! Otis says on 30/Jan/10
5'5" I spoke to a lighting technician who worked on a David Bowie performance and needed to accurately know his height to adjust the spotlight. He specifically asked Bowie's advance people and thought they were kidding when they told him....5'5". Take that one to the bank. 176 cm! says on 14/Jan/10
5' 9" maximum for David Bowie. He is 0.5" maximum, taller than his 5' 8.5" wife Iman.
5' 8.75" is also possible. Definitely a 175 cm guy, not 173 cm! bowie fan says on 23/Dec/09
It says that David Bowie is a handsome 6 footer in that article. Here is the article. Click Here Dylan says on 16/Nov/09
Bowie Fan - He was never ever 6'0" in his life or his wildest dreams. He always claimed 5'10" but alot of people disputed that, in fact they nearly didn't choose him for the role in "The Man Who Fell To Earth" because they thought he was too short. Peter O'Toole was considered for the part but they decided Bowie had something he didn't which was real life weirdness. You must have been reading about someone else in your article. Anonymous says on 26/Sep/09
No way he's 6'0. 5'10 max in his peak. I'd say 5'9 in his peak and 5'8 now. And many guys stop growing at 17 or earlier. bowie fan says on 30/Aug/09
David Bowie is at least 6'0". I even read in a 1964 article that he is a handsome 6 footer and he was only 17. David Bowie must have grown an inch or two since he was 17. That mugshot of his was taken when he was only 15. Anonymous says on 29/Jun/09
hey I havent got the picture yet (i'll upload it later), but its one of my dad with David Bowie. David Bowie is waaay shorter than my dad but my dad is, by no means a tall man. My dads about 5'9" yet hes a lot taller Anonymous says on 21/Jun/09
I think he was 5'9 at most when he was young. He's very thin and has long legs for his height, which makes him look quite tall. But if you look at the picture when he was arrested for drug possession in 1976, you can see that he barely reaches 5'9, and he was probably wearing shoes. So I guess he was 5'8-5'9 at his peak. Mick Ronson was slightly shorter, I think. Probably 5'7-5'8. Dez says on 19/Jun/09
My mates Uncle was one of old Dave's bodyguards during some tours in the 80s. He told me he couldn't believe how short he was when he stood next to him - 5ft 7in tops! I think he probably wears built up shoes in the photos some of you guys are talking about. Dylan says on 18/May/09
I don't suppose anyone knows how tall Mick Ronson was? Dylan says on 28/Apr/09
David Bowie was always listed as 5'10" and weighing 8st 7lbs in the early seventies, his wife at the time Angie Bowie was listed as 5'9" and 8st 3lbs, although when interviewed on the Russell Harty show, when asked she said she was 5'8". It was well known at the time that neither of them ate much, hence the skeleton frames. To say describe David Bowie as 6'3" and very muscular is absolute nonsense. StraightToThePoint says on 19/Apr/09
Haha, good one, "Bowie fan". Thanks for the laugh. Wait, I'm worried. You were kidding, right? David Bowie never looked short to me. I wonder why. Perhaps because he's extremely thin? Or because he wears appropriate clothes? The hairdress? Any idea? Anyway, he looks rather tall, although he's not. |
