|
Michael says on 14/Mar/10
"Since he was the leader, that wouldn't work. We expect the leaders to be the tallest. And anyway, the 3 were very similar in height so it's almost moot."
I disagree. Leaders often get portrayed as either the shortest or the tallest, I feel.
Dries says on 25/Feb/10
No, Marcus, Paul was the tallest, 5'11" in his prime. Then, John and George, 5'9" 1/2 to 5'10". Ringo was indeed the smallest, 5'6" to 5'6" 1/2. Bad health in his youth may have influenced his growth. marcus says on 15/Feb/10
Incredible, after all these years we still can't all agree on how tall the Beatles were! George seemed the tallest, John the 3rd smallest and Paul the 2nd tallest. BUT...it was important for the publicity of Beatlemania that the lads all "appeared" fairly tall, at least average height. Why do you think they always wore those boots?
Ringo, about 5'6". Possibly even 5'7". There's no way he's 5'7. Maybe he's that in the boots. Remember, stars have a way of stating their height in ways not technically accurate but not necessarily untrue. Either way, Ringo's about 5'6", since he was the smallest there's no way he could hide it as well as the others.
But John was definitely the 2nd shortest. Since he was the leader, that wouldn't work. We expect the leaders to be the tallest. And anyway, the 3 were very similar in height so it's almost moot.
George was the tallest, Paul was 2nd, John 3rd, and Ringo last. Snowman says on 18/Jan/10
I met him a few years ago...the nicest guy...He didn't fail to look me in the eyes like alot of celebs do who think they are too important. Anyway, I'm 5'6.5 in bare feet, Ringo and I look eye to eye. Wow, the guy has aged gracefully as well. I know people in their 40s that don't look as young. Jim says on 14/Jan/10
Ringo Starr next to Jon Stewart from The Daily Show
Click Here TRS says on 5/Dec/09
He claims he is 5'7" so i'd say that now in his late 60s he is 5'6" or so. He looked a good 5" inches below Paul / John. So i'd say 5'6" - 5'7" prime and around 5'6" now. Dylan says on 29/Nov/09
He was listed as 5'8" in the sixties but that is not necessarily what he claimed to be. I think he said he was 5'7" in an interview. I would think about 5'6.5" was about right for him. anonymous says on 18/Oct/09
Back in the 60s, Ringo described himself as 5'7, but I pretty much think he's about 5'5-5'6 max nowadays. David says on 13/Oct/09
to Anonymous. You were close, but George is 5'10.5 John and Paul are 5'11. Dries says on 19/Sep/09
Definitely, 1m67-1m67.5 Caddy says on 26/Jul/09
Friend met him recently. He's now around 5'5". Was probably 1.5" taller when younger. guyfrommars says on 18/Jul/09
He always claimed 5ft8. The famous "Beatle boots" with 2-inch Cuban heels helped him to achieve that in the '60s. Anonymous says on 29/May/09
He's 5'8, not 5'6.
The other three were 5'11 Mars says on 19/May/09
Some people said he was 5'8'' but … I really think not. 5'6'' seems about right. artvandelay says on 29/Apr/09
james w paul doesnt 'tower' ringo on the cover of abbey road. they are level, with maybe a 1cm difference. based on the photo ringo is basically the same height as paul while wearing shoes. Anonymous says on 16/Mar/09
5'6.5 in his peak and 5'5.75 now. I think he used to wear lifts. That's why he looked 5'8 sometimes. Nik says on 17/Feb/09
I say Paul was 5-10.5 John and George were 5-10 and Ringo was 5-7 spike wilbury says on 16/Dec/08
he must be 5'6 1/2.looks a half inch shorter than his wife who is listed at 5' 7'' James W. says on 2/Nov/08
Paul TOWERS Ringo on the Abbey Road cover and Ringo has generous footwear there and Paul is barefoot! I say 5'6.5 TOPS for his peak height...and now he is just under 5'6. Rich says on 4/Oct/08
All the Beatles books/magazines concerning Ringo's height states 5'8". Max Weinberg's book "The Big Beat" has an interview with Ringo where the man himself lists himself as 5'7". That's the one I'll go with. guyfrommars says on 28/Sep/08
Ringo was 5'8" in the '60s with those 2-inch Cuban heels all four of The Beatles were wearing at that time. He's maximum 5'6.5" but rather 5'6". TJ says on 19/Sep/08
If there's only 3 inches from your eyes to the top of your head Tim, you have a very small head :-) And snoopy, Ringo was never 5'8. He has said himself that they gave his height as 5'8 in the 60s but that he was in fact only really 5'6 1/2. Now I would expect he is 5'6 maximum. Tim Wargo says on 17/Sep/08
I met Ringo in 2003.I am 5'11" tall.Ringo came up to my eyes height wise.Ringo must be 5'8" tall according to this observation. GK says on 20/Jun/08
RINGO SPEAKS ABOUT HIS HEIGHT
Any other Beatles myths you'd care to dispel at this time?
Yes, that I'm only 5-foot-7.
Click Here Tim Wargo says on 16/Jun/08
I met Ringo in 2003 in Beverly Hills.He was extremely nice to me.He shook my hand twice and called me "Tim".I'm 5'10" tall and he came up to my eyes height wise.Therefore Ringo would have to be about 5 foot ,7 inches tall at the most. runt says on 19/May/08
Not only shorter but noticably smaller frame and head than the other Beatles. At only an inch shorter than 5-9ish George Harrison, he wouldn't stick out like a soar thumb. 5'5"-5'6' + 'techniques' is a good guess. TJ says on 25/Feb/08
Eddie, Ringo himself has said his true height in the 60s was 5.6 1/2 and I really doubt he's grown since :-) Eddie says on 25/Feb/08
Met Ringo at the Bottom Line in NYC a few years ago. I'm 5'8" and i'd say he is as well. Big T says on 10/Feb/08
Just saw him doing Grammy interviews and he was noticeably shorter than the likes of Ludacris when being compared to the same interviewer. Even 5'5" seemed generous. the shredder says on 9/Feb/08
Rob , check this out ! ... lol , Dhani Harrison gets listed 5'6.5 so how is Ringo Starr TALLER ???
Click Here Matt from Sheffield says on 17/Dec/07
No one uses feet and inches for height in England TJ says 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 says 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 says on 13/Feb/07
True footballed28, but is´t centimeters more common today in UK, than during the sixties? footballed28 says on 8/Feb/07
its pretty curious that they were always listed in feet and not centimeters since they were a british band Chris says on 10/Jan/07
Ringo was 5'6½'' in the 60´s 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 says 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 ! Middle-sized cat says 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 says 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 says 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 says 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! the shredder says 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 says 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. TJ says 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 says 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 says on 25/Dec/06
5'6 for his peak and 5'5 now looks to be right for Ringo. |
