How tall is Ringo Starr

Ringo Starr's Height

5ft 6in (168 cm)

Peak height was 5ft 7in (170 cm)
British musician from The Beatles. Even a 1964 newspaper joked when someone questioned if he was 5ft 4 and wore lifts "there seems to be no reliable figure on Ringo's height, despite the efforts of statisticians and entomologists everywhere".


Photos by PR Photos

Add a Comment 66 comments

Average Guess (5 Votes)
Peak: 5ft 6.6in, Current: 5ft 5.75in
Ferney said on 22/Oct/16
Ringo Starr was 5'7 in his youth, and 5'6 now 1.70m and 1.68m now.
Ferney said on 22/Oct/16
Ringo Starr was 5'7 in his youth, and 5'6 now 1.70m and 1.68m now.
TJE said on 15/Sep/16
Ringo and Paul McCartney at the Eight Days A Week premiere today:

Click Here
mande2013 said on 3/Sep/16
My hunch is 5'6.5-5'6.75 in his prime. If he was a strong 5'7, he would have gotten away looking average every now and then and Ringo never did.
169 is said on 20/Jul/16
if he can keep 5'6 range constantly at this age, its possible that he was at least 169 or 170 in his prime.
Person said on 29/Jun/16
He is five six. I've heard he's five eight, but look at pictures of Ringo standing next to either John or Paul. He's a good five inches shorter.
5'6.5 Indiana jones guy said on 27/Jun/16
Fake height:5'7
Real height:5'5
5'6.5 Indiana jones guy said on 26/Jun/16
I think his peak height was 171 cm and nowadays 169 cm.
truth said on 18/Jun/16
John Lennon: 177-178 cm peak
Paul McCartney: 178-179 cm peak, 176-177 cm now
George Harrison: 176-177 cm peak, 175-176 cm in his older years
Ringo Starr: 169-170 cm peak, 167-168 cm now
Marc said on 29/May/16
I heard his peak height was only 5ft6.5
Arch Stanton said on 21/Dec/15
Seb below also says he thought Ringo could look 2-3 inches shorter than Sellers in the film. I didn't see three inches, but at times it could definitely look a 2-2.5 diff. His posture at times wasn't great though which made him look shorter.
Arch Stanton said on 21/Dec/15
Rob, I think Ringo might have been the same height as big G! 5'6.75 might be nearer. I dunno, do see the whole Magic Christian film if you can, I just really got more a 5 ft 6 range impression from him in it. Click Here A photo there with Sellers and Cleese. He could often look that short in it. My gut is 169cm. I see Tr27 also thinks that below. I guess like John Mills you could argue high 5'6 range peak. I'd lean more on 5'6.5-5'6.75 than the full 5'7.
Jimmmmybrady said on 19/Aug/15
I once met Ringo's good friend Harry Nilsson,I'm 6' tall and Harry was 6'2" just like his Biography says so compare photos of Harry to Ringo,John,Paul + George.
Arch Stanton said on 7/Jul/15
He really looks about the same age as a few guys I know in 55-60 age group!
Arch Stanton said on 7/Jul/15
Rob can you add a photo? Have you noticed that this guy doesn't seem to age?
I just noticed that he's an astounding 75 now!! Click Here No wrinkles whatsoever!! He still looks 58 like he has done since the 1990s! Even like Cliff Richard who was previously ageless has aged a lot now in 70s but Ringo still looks young enough to be the son of a guy in his 70s! I wonder what his trick is, going to bed with Barbara Bach every night I'd imagine!
[Editor Rob: he's aged well, hair colour helps a lot, as does the demands of Barbara probably...]
Tr27 said on 28/Jun/15
The Beatles' heights:

John Lennon- 175cm
Paul McCartney- 175cm
George Harrison- 174cm
Ringo Starr- 169cm

Check out their photos with Muhammad Ali.
CD said on 29/May/15
Peak height - 5ft 6.5 (169 cm)
Now 5ft 5.5 (166 cm)
Christian said on 27/May/15
-Rob. Before you said that you thought Ringo was 5'6'' maximum in the 60:s but now you have him at 5'7'' peak. What made you change your mind?
[Editor Rob: from looking at more footage I think there was a chance he was near 5ft 7 and shrunk by now.]
Randy said on 4/Mar/15
Some new data has come to light. The Beatles trouser measurements from 'Help' from D. Millings who were the fabs tailor. In inces: John W32 L30 3/4, Paul W31 1/2 L31, George W31 L30 and Ringo, W29 1/2 L29. So probably pretty small guys...
kevin mask said on 29/Aug/14
1,68 is about right
Sam said on 19/Aug/14
About 3-4 inches shorter than the other Beatles.
Ian C. said on 25/Jan/14
Ringo was definitely short because he got ragged on about it by Beatle-hostile reporters. People would (rudely) ask him how tall he was and he'd say, four foot six, or something equally ridiculous. He probably wanted to be tall, because he got himself cast in a spaghetti western as a villain, and looked perfectly ridiculous with his Liverpool accent and small body. The least talented Beatle, but also the most stable and personally likable which, come to think of it, are very useful talents to have if you're a working class boy from Liverpool who suddenly becomes a pop culture god.
diavolo said on 7/Dec/13
All the Beatles' height were exaggerated in the '60s when they were superstars. Plus they wore 2-inch Cuban heels. Ringo was advertised as 5'8" back in the day. I guess he was 5'6" in his peak.
Seb said on 4/Sep/13
Maybe at his peak 5'6". Check him out against Peter Sellers who IMOb claims 5'8". Sometimes he looks 3 inches shorter that Sellers.
Seb said on 4/Sep/13
Just watched Ringo in the Magic Christian and he looks 2-3 inches shorter than Sellers. So once again even then, about 5'5", unless Sellers is wearing lifts. There is also as scene with Richard Attenborough who seems even shorter that Ringo.
Irving said on 24/Aug/13
Hey any guesses what his weight was on the Beatles? I read somewhere that he was 134lbs is that a fair estimate?
marc said on 6/May/13
some people say ringo is 5ft3 wich i dont think is his proper height he looks 5ft6 i also herd on the radio he was 5ft6 and a half
Tee said on 1/May/13
I also heard somewhere that John was measured to be 5'9.5", although I don't remember where. But it seems pretty believable, I've always thought John, Paul, and George looked in the 5'9"/5'10" range just by their figures. So that would put Ringo at 5'6" for sure.
Seb said on 13/Apr/13
I read somewhere that yoko measured john at 5'9.5". So I'm with lagnagal at 5'5" today for ringo.
lagunagal said on 24/Mar/13
Saw him at sundance. He is 5'4 if that!!!
The Exorcist said on 29/Nov/12
I think he was 5'6' max at his peak.
Click Here
Marc said on 19/Nov/11
i herd on the radio that george is 5ft10 john 5ft10 1/2 paul 5ft11 witch makes sens cus hes the tallest and for ringo they said hes 5ft6 and half so....
Mae said on 10/Sep/11
I think that's a reasonable height for ringo
Scott said on 13/Aug/11
I don't believe Ringo is this height. Why does he look taller than mccartney in this picture? Click Here I'd say about 5'8" is fair.
Music said on 6/Jul/11
Next to Dhani Harrison (5'6 1/2'') Ringo is just a bit taller. So maybe 5'7'' is most accurate.
donkey said on 14/May/11
John, Paul, George relativley the same 5'10-11 closer to 5'11 with the cuban heeled boots
ringo 5'6
with the cuban heeled boots on ringo almost looks 5'8-5'8.5
avi said on 7/May/11
yes 5'6. 5'5.5 min. in The magic Christian with Peter Sellers. (a supposed 5'8 guy)he is 2 inches shorter.
Ezio said on 23/Feb/11
me says on 14/Dec/10
There is not way John and George was only 5.8. I think John was about 5.10 and George was 5.9.5. Their frame just doesn't suggest 5.8. You have no idea how short 5.8 is.

5'8 is extremely short now? LOL. While I do agree they were over 5'8, seeing someone's frame on TV isn't always a good indicator of height.
guyfrommars said on 26/Dec/10
Kimber: Those bios in the early 1960s were highly exaggerated. And I guess 5'8" was his height in those Cuban heeled Beatle boots.
cecil noriega said on 19/Dec/10
Why does everybody think George was shorter than paul and john.
He wore converse sneekers all the time after 1967 ( only half inch heels)
He was definitely their height. call it 5-11 or 5-10.
Ringo definitely 5-6 ish.
Ian Fawn-Meade said on 16/Dec/10
Stood in line at Heathrow passport control behind he and Barbara Bach. My wife was 4 11", and she was about the same height. They were a noticeably tiny couple, he was probably no more than 5' 4"
me said on 14/Dec/10
There is not way John and George was only 5.8. I think John was about 5.10 and George was 5.9.5. Their frame just doesn't suggest 5.8. You have no idea how short 5.8 is.
Russ said on 13/Dec/10
I think john and George were only about 5'8, I'd say Ringo was no taller than 5'6
Kimber said on 4/Dec/10
Ringo's wife Barbara Bach is 5'6". If you look at their wedding photos from 1981 they are about the same height however she is wearing heels and it he is wearing dress shoes. So I would say he has to at least 5'7" or 5'8". I have heard that in a 1963 Beatles' bio he was listed as 5'8" and 134 pounds. Of course now that he's 70 years old he's probably closer to 5'6" now. In the end it doesn't really matter how tall he is, what matters is that he's a rock-n-roll icon and has lived an extraordinary life! As MrsRStarkey said Good Things Come in Small Packages!!!
TJ said on 8/Aug/07
I'm from the UK and I've never met anyone who doesn't give their height in feet and inches. Anonymous, as I said way down in this thread, Ringo has himself stated that his official 60s height was exaggerated and that he was actually 5'6.5.
Anonymous said on 7/Aug/07
Most of me and my friends give our height in feet and inches. Metres and centimetres are becoming more used but most people still say feet and inches (or I do anyway) lol. Most sources I go say Ringo was listed as 5'8 but I always thought he seemed shorter than that even in the 60's. I've noticed he's always been the butt of height jokes within the Beatles but 5'8 isn't really that small. I'd say 5'6 is the safest guess.
Chris said on 13/Feb/07
True footballed28, but ist centimeters more common today in UK, than during the sixties?
footballed28 said on 8/Feb/07
its pretty curious that they were always listed in feet and not centimeters since they were a british band
Robert.R said on 14/Jan/07
I must have read the same article as Chris, which listed Ringo as 5'8" and the others as 5'11". In the sixties though, no male pop star ever seemed to be listed as under 5'8" and there were some very short ones around. Apart from Ringo there was also Eric Burdon listed as 5'8" and amazingly Keith Hopwood of Hermans Hermits who seemed tiny was always listed as 5'9".
Glenn said on 12/Jan/07
Yes,Chris.
Chris said on 10/Jan/07
-Glenn, When you saw Ringo did you estimate his height as only 5'5''?
Chris said on 10/Jan/07
Ringo was 5'6'' in the 60s and John, Paul and George was about the same height. They were listed back in the beatles-days as for Ringo 5'8'' and the rest 5'11''. However I still think Paul was a tad under 5'11'' and John more like 5'10''. George and John were roughly the same height give or take.
the shredder said on 30/Dec/06
maybe hes more 166cm - 167cm ? ... 5'6.5 could have been his height in shoes ?

oh , and David Spade has to be in the 5'4 - 5'5 range ! just watch Joe Dirt !
Anthony said on 29/Dec/06
They're hard to pin down, but most people do agree on Lennon being 5'10 and I as well as Glenn think Paul was about 5'11 at his peak. There's a great pic of John with 6'2-6'3 Peter Boyle in which he looks 5'10 in comparison.
Middle-sized cat said on 29/Dec/06
Anthony,

Am almost sure the album is Son of Dracula - not easy to find, but good luck. They are dressed as vamps! I think they're also seen together in sleeve of that '75 album with the Latin name. Nilsson was a rocker at heart.

Re. Beatles, I always thought Lennon was a little taller than Macca. Seems not. Actually, Macca's brother Mike is over 6', I believe. He was in The Scaffold as Mike McGear.
Anthony said on 29/Dec/06
Middle-sized cat, that would be a great pic. I'll try and find it, Had no idea Nilssn was really as tall as 6'5, but now looking at him in photos he does look at least 6'4.

Like I said, Ringo IMO is 5'6 peak and 5'5 now. My estimates for the group as a whole: Ringo 5'6 peak, Lennon 5'10, Harrison 5'9.25 and Paul a solid 5'11.
Anonymous said on 27/Dec/06
Yeah I recon that 5-6 is about right. I've always read 5'8, but always doubted it as he seemed a fair bit shorter than the other Beatles even in the sixties.
Middle-sized cat said on 27/Dec/06
One picture I love occurs in a Harry Nilsson album. Nilsson and Starr were mates, and played on one another's albums, but Nilsson was 6'5" - towered over the li'l Beatle!
Glenn said on 27/Dec/06
Trust me Shredder.shrunk to 5-5ish.
the shredder said on 27/Dec/06
I can buy 5'6.5 , now that he said hes 5'8 height listing was false ! ... 5'6.5 peak , 5'6ish now
sf said on 26/Dec/06
I never realized Ringo was my height. Alawys pictured 5'8 or so, but, of course, always has on big heels.
Viper said on 26/Dec/06
Lennon looked 5-10. Ringo looks 5-6.
Glenn said on 26/Dec/06
Everyone is taller than Spade! well,except Devito and Seth Green.Lennon is tricky.I always thought 5-9.but he mustve been 5-10.
TJ said on 26/Dec/06
Ringo has been on record as saying that his official 5'8 height of the 60s was false. He says that he was actually 5'6.5. If going to the bother of debunking the official height, it would be weird to replace it with another false height, so I guess he was 5'6.5 in the 60s and maybe a little shorter now.
the shredder said on 25/Dec/06
he only looks 5'5-ish in that Caveman movie ! the only Beatle that i can't figure out with height is John Lennon ?

[Editor Rob: one thing is sure...he's taller than david spade]
Anthony said on 25/Dec/06
5'6 for his peak and 5'5 now looks to be right for Ringo.

Heights are barefeet estimates, derived from quotations, official websites, agency resumes, in person encounters with actors at conventions and pictures/films.

Other vital statistics like weight, shoe or bra size measurements have been sourced from newspapers, books, resumes or social media.

Celebrity Fan Photos and Agency Pictures of stars are © to their respective owners.