Arch Stanton said on 21/Jan/23
Compare George Kennedy to Cary Grant in Charade and he was easily 6'4.
Arch Stanton said on 21/Jan/23
Clint looked too tall with 6 ft 1-6 ft 2 guys in his films to only be 190cm Hong. Clint was very similar height to legit George Kennedy in Eiger Sanction, I think Kennedy would have had the edge if stood his best. 192 cm barefoot seems the best shout.
Rory said on 20/Jan/23
I think 6ft3 max is harsh,I don't think Clint was only marginally taller than 6ft2 guys, I think he was comfortably taller than guys that range peak,had them by 1+ inches. For me either 6ft3.25 or 6ft3.5 at best prime.
I personally think 60s Clint was 6ft3.25 so if measured in cowboy boots I'd expect him to be 6ft5 as they usually give about 2 inches or a bit less.
Hong said on 10/Jan/23
About 190cm peak is my guess,around 6ft3 max and slightly over 6ft4 in cowboy boots.Now he's looking under 6ft around 5ft11 range, sometimes a bit less because of posture.
5'7 and a fraction said on 10/Jan/23
I think, if he could stand up straight under the stadiometer, 6'0 would his absolute max today.
berta said on 2/Jan/23
time for a new current height. He struggling to look over 5´11. Peak are all over the place. sometimes could look 6´4 with cowboy boots other time not really over 190 cm. 191 is my guess.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Jan/23
His legs don't look outlandish, but I think his legs were pretty long even for his height as Henrik says. I think you'll find there are 6 ft 6 men who had a similar leg measurement, I would guess 36 inseam too.
Meltdown said on 31/Dec/22
I'm pretty sure at 92 Clint lost more than 3.5 inches. Nowadays, he is barely if at all taller than his son Scott who is probably 5'11" at most. And he's only getting shorter. I can go with a peak height of 6'3"+ for Clint, but now, he's closer to 5'11" like Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Henrik said on 30/Dec/22
No, I guess it doesn't look the same as with David Prowse (who was a bodybuilder back in his day). You could clearly see on his legs when he had shrunk down to 6ft 1 in the photo with Rob that he didn't have the proportions of a normal 6ft 1 man.
Malcolm Oliver said on 28/Dec/22
@Henrik
Good proportions, but his legs don’t look outlandish or disproportionate (average for his height). Just a tall guy who happened to retain his lanky frame.
Henrik said on 15/Dec/22
Clint already at his peak had relatively long legs for his height, probably a 36" inseam. There are some 6ft 4 to 5 men who have shorter legs. Clint is now 5ft 11 with the legs of typically someone 6ft 6+.
Emil said on 3/Dec/22
@Rob
At any rate he's tough as nails so wouldn't surprise me that he'd be standing on his two feet till the day he goes
Emil said on 3/Dec/22
Doubt he's gonna lose more height than this.

Editor Rob
If he gets more bent in upper torso but still able to walk/stand he could drop more.
James B 172cm said on 2/Dec/22
Arch Stanton said on 29/Nov/22
Caught GBU again as well, good to see my grave again :-). Such a masterpiece, definitely one of the ten best films ever made. In some scenes with the hat and boots and long coat Clint really looked very tall, perhaps the wax work of him in California at 6'5.5 in cowboy boots was taken from a measurement. That looks about right. Whatever similarity there is of Scott to Clint around the eyes Scott really doesn't come close to how his dad looked back in the Dollars films in overall appearance and manliness. Scott still looks boyish and Clint looked middle aged and weathered by that time, Scott now being about the same age as Clint was in GBU.
Yeah, I think he's likely nearer 5 ft 11 now, might be time for a downgrade at the age of 92.
Looks more like Beckham in the Dollars films
Arch Stanton said on 29/Nov/22
Caught GBU again as well, good to see my grave again :-). Such a masterpiece, definitely one of the ten best films ever made. In some scenes with the hat and boots and long coat Clint really looked very tall, perhaps the wax work of him in California at 6'5.5 in cowboy boots was taken from a measurement. That looks about right. Whatever similarity there is of Scott to Clint around the eyes Scott really doesn't come close to how his dad looked back in the Dollars films in overall appearance and manliness. Scott still looks boyish and Clint looked middle aged and weathered by that time, Scott now being about the same age as Clint was in GBU.
Yeah, I think he's likely nearer 5 ft 11 now, might be time for a downgrade at the age of 92.
Hong said on 26/Nov/22
Rob,I think it's time for a change to Clint's current height,5ft11 would be fair guess for his height now aged 92, because at times he's looking 5ft10 range,I would put that down to posture though.But in general I'd say he is no more than 5ft11 max currently.
Arch Stanton said on 25/Nov/22
So Burton obviously thought he looked very tall and imposing to call him 7 ft 2. Just watching For a Few Dollars More Again, not seen it for a few years, what a masterpiece. He looked too lanky and imposing proportionally to be just 6'2-6'3. I think he had to have been close to 6 ft 4, maybe he did really measure that in the morning. You can see big chemistry of Diana with both Clint and Selleck in those pics, she looks a bit overwhelmed in their presence! Selleck does look taller in comparison.
Hong said on 25/Nov/22
Click Here= Look how short Clint looks in this pic,U think the tall guy with the beard is Dennis Haysbert listed 6ft4,Clint is looking way shorter, it's hard to believe there was only an inch between these two guys at peak.
Hong said on 11/Nov/22
Click Here Back to the subject of John Humphreys height in that Eastwood clip from 1967, Humphrys height is a bit of a mystery,but if you compare him to 5ft7.5 listed Chris Moyles,he looks to have about an inch of height on Moyles, allowing for his age and possible height loss it seems fair enough to assume that Humphreys was about 5ft9 as a young 24 year old reporter at the time of that interview.

Editor Rob
In 1996 a newspaper described him as exactly that, 5ft 9.
Editor Rob said on 2/Nov/22
Saw an article from 1969 in which Richard Burton glanced up at Clint and said "This is a combination for you. He's Seven-foot two and I'm five-foot one."
Clint gave an embarrassed grin..."He's exaggerating. I'm only six-four"
Hong said on 17/Oct/22
Click Here Whoops that's Forest Whitaker and Bill Duke,this is the pic of Clint and Damon I meant to send.
Hong said on 16/Oct/22
Parker I've seen that film with Hudson before and Clint does look almost equal to Hudson,but I did post a pic of Clint and Hudson standing next to each other before,l don't seem to be able to find it again but it did show that Hudson was around an inch and a half taller than Clint.The pic was taken in the early 70s,it was in black and White.
Hong said on 16/Oct/22
Click Here Here's Clint in 2010 aged 80 with 5ft9.5 listed Matt Damon, it's interesting to see Clint with a guy who probably would have measured similar to the young Humphreys looking only a few inches Shorter than the 80 year old Clint and not being towered by him as Humphreys was.Its a good indicator of how much height Clint shrank from age 37 to the age of 80,and with 6ft range Denzel Washington he looks to have lost a bit more in the next 7 years at age 87.
Coldice said on 16/Oct/22
79- 191.3 cm
88- 190 cm
95- 187 cm
2003- 185 cm
Celebheights 6'1.5" said on 16/Oct/22
With Denzel Washington:
Click Here
This was taken in early 2017, and Denzel is definitely taller.
Rory said on 14/Oct/22
I'd say in 1967,Humphrys 5ft9.25 and Clint 6ft3.25. Clint makes John look small there but it's clear looking at him elsewhere Humphrys was a perfectly average height,not short.
Parker said on 13/Oct/22
Fair points Hong, although I would say looking at John Humphreys with 6 ft listed Tony Blair
Click Here
And the pic I posted of him with 6ft+ listed David Cameron
Click Here, I cannot see 5'8 peak for John. Here's Cameron with Obama
Click Here
John was 76 in the picture with Cameron.
In terms of Clints height, I've seen many interviews where he has claimed 6'4 - He's also said he felt he lost parts because he was too tall in his early days.Why then would he claim 6'4? Watch the first 4 mins of this Rock Hudson movie
Click Here
Hong said on 12/Oct/22
Yeah Parker, Clint looks very tall in that clip with Humphreys,if Humphreys was 5ft9?Clint is looking his original 6ft4 listing in comparison,but you can't see the ground level as to judge if there are and advantages in Clint's favour,like uneven terrine,also Humphreys height is unknown and could have been 5ft8 for all we know.
Rory said on 10/Oct/22
I'd say hes looking 6ft2.5-2.75 next to Ferrigno, and I'm guessing the photo is from the late 80s which is the sort of range he consistently looked around then.
Parker said on 10/Oct/22
This has been posted before, John Humphrys interviewing Clint Eastwood in 1967
Click Here
Think posters guestimated John at ~5'9. 6'3+ Clint Eastwood would match up.
Here's John with David Cameron in more recent times
Click Here
Tall Sam said on 10/Oct/22
That is interesting seeing him near Lou Ferrigno. Eastwood looks to be between 6’2” and 6’3” to my eyes but he does look a little gray and could already have been losing a bit of height.
Hong said on 8/Oct/22
On second thoughts if Ferrigno was 6ft4, looking at the pic again Clint is looking nearer 6ft3 in comparison to Lou.
Hong said on 8/Oct/22
Click Here Steven Spielberg was 5ft7.5 peak,in his 70s Clint was looking around 6ft next to this guy,in all the pics dating back 30 years Clint looked max 6ft2ish next to Spielberg.
Hong said on 7/Oct/22
Click Here= Here's Clint looking 6ft2 range next to 6ft4 listed Lou Ferrigno.
Hong said on 6/Oct/22
Yeah Rory I'd go along with that.
Rory said on 5/Oct/22
Most 58 Yr old men have lost something however small, and seeing as we know Clint has lost more height in life than most, it seems logical that hed succumb to some loss by 58. Unscientifically to me he also looked slightly smaller on screen by late 80s compared to 60s/early 70s too. My own view is by late 80s he'd gone from a strong 6ft3 peak to a weak 6ft3.
Hong said on 5/Oct/22
Yeah he could have been 6ft2.75 by aged 58,but I suppose he still measured up pretty well next to a big 6ft4 guy like Neeson.If I was pushed I'd say max 6ft3.25 for Clint's peak, I think 6ft3.5 is a tad over estimated.
James B 172cm said on 5/Oct/22
Hong-Also aged 58 his hair was thinner and he was more bulkier/stockier than he was in his 40s which could have given the illusion of him being shorter. Anyway he didn't seem under 6ft3 with Neeson in my opinion but still not impossible that he lost 1/4 of an inch from his peak at that point.
Hong said on 4/Oct/22
@JamesB172cm I'm sure you meant 1988,but its a matter of opinion weather Clint lost any height by 58,I personally think he didn't.
James B 172cm said on 4/Oct/22
1988 I meant
James B 172cm said on 3/Oct/22
Not so sure about just 6ft3 flat peak. I mean Clint did not look that much shorter than 6ft4 1/8 Liam neeson in 1998 because at that stage he already lost half inch from his peak.
Hong said on 3/Oct/22
I think I remember Rob listing Clint at 6ft.5 at 80 years old?This estimate would probably be more accurate,but I do have to concede that Hammer is making Clint look exceedingly average in those pics,and it is somewhat hard to believe that there would have been only an inch in the difference between both guys at peak.My own personal opinion on Clint's peak height is standing tall around 6ft3 but in more relaxed loose posture he looked more 6ft2.5 range.He could pull off 6ft4 and a bit in his boots though,and look near 6ft4 in a standard heel.
Hong said on 2/Oct/22
Click Here Here's Clint and DiCaprio in 2001,Clint aged 81 is looking slightly taller than DiCaprio and if you look at Clint's legs there slightly bent at the knee resulting in him dropping a bit more height,at 81 I would guess standing tall Clint would still have been around 6ft1 range but given his habit in old age to stand with a slight stoop and bent knees he of course would look shorter than this.
James B 172cm said on 2/Oct/22
He looks 5’11 1/2 with hammer but then his posture is not great
Coldice said on 2/Oct/22
Peak- 6ft 3 ⅓ , 191.3 cm
Now- 5ft 11 ⅞ , 182.5 cm
Philip Z said on 30/Sep/22
With 6ft 4.5 listed Armie Hammer and 5ft 11.25 listed DiCaprio in 2011:
Click Here
Looks very similar to or slightly under DiCaprio here and in other pictures from the same event, and a good five inches under Hammer. Footwear may throw those estimates off a bit, but I think it's fair to say Clint was already under 6ft back in 2011. Very likely he lost at least another inch since then and is below 5ft 10 these days.
Peter 180cm said on 27/Sep/22
It must really suck big-time to be very tall and lose so much height,and then look closer to the average at an old age. Tall genes aren't always generous to the people that get them.
Rory said on 24/Sep/22
It's a bit of a stretch reaching a conclusion how tall someone was based on a comparison with how someone else looks with another person in one still,when theyre stooped down I'd say lol. Even so I do think Selleck would have had Clint by a good half inch both peak. By '85 I think Clint had probably lost 1cm too.
Hong said on 23/Sep/22
@JamesB172cm I'm aware of Selleck being described as 6ft3.5 before,if that was the case you would have to seriously consider Clint being nothing over 6ft3 peak and even more likely 6ft2.5 to 6ft2.75 range probably 1.90cm at peak.
James B 172cm said on 22/Sep/22
Hong- Selleck could have been 6’3 1/2 as well
Hong said on 21/Sep/22
Click Here Here's Clint and Tom Selleck both with Diana,Clint is dropping a bit of height because of his posture and Selleck is standing very straight,but even taking that into account,it still looks too me that Selleck was the taller than Clint at age 55 by a couple of inches,Clint is looking no more than 6ft2 there.I doubt he would have lost over an inch in height by age 55?
Philip Z said on 19/Sep/22
Slight correction: The third picture is actually from 2016, same goes for the first picture in my previous post. It seems as though the latest pictures of them together are from 2018 (not 2019).
In any case, back in 2006 20 years old Scott still looked considerably shorter than 76 years old Clint:
Click Here
If Clint already looked 5ft 11-10.5 range in 2016, it's safe to assume he's 5ft 10 at most these days.
Philip Z said on 19/Sep/22
@Hong: For sure, the second picture is deceiving. Here's another one from that event:
Click Here
Clint looks around 5ft 10.5 here if we believe Scott's 5ft 10.75 listing. Keep in mind that this was in 2018, and in years prior to that Clint still had an easy inch on Scott, putting him quite close to his 6ft listing:
Click Here
In 2021, however, Scott looks noticeably taller in every picture:
Click Here
Even when taking posture etc into account in Clint's favor, he's barely looking 5ft 10 there. 6ft for Clint in 2022 is out of the question I'd say.
Hong said on 16/Sep/22
Click Here @PhilipZ Here's Clint and Scott at the same event, as you can see Scott is no longer towering Clint as he was in the second pic you posted.Its just a case of an elderly man who's around 6ft standing next to a young man who's around 5ft10.5.The elderly man is slouching and in extremely relaxed posture with bent knees dropping about two inches because of that, and the younger man standing as tall as he can.
Philip Z said on 15/Sep/22
With 5ft 10.75 listed Scott in 2021:
Click Here
Even keeping Scott's slightly thicker shoes in mind, Clint is barely looking 5ft 10 here. Must be close to a five inch loss by now.
This shot from 2019 looks even less favorable for Clint:
Click Here
Scott might have an even greater footwear advantage here, however.
Zuber said on 9/Sep/22
@Matt6'4.5
We need to realize that Eastwood is 90 freakin 2.Most people aren't around at that age,and the ones that are,are very rarely at such a good condition physically and mentally.Clint directed and starred in a movie at the age of 91.You cant exept him to be close to his peak height.
Matt6'4.5 said on 4/Sep/22
Rob, would you think a loss of that magnitude is due to lifestyle, intensity of exercise, or just plain crappy genetics? Or is it just natural progression into extremely old age? What do you think that would be like to lose 3 plus inches?

Editor Rob
in Clint's case, his age and 6ft 3+ starting height is something to bear in mind.
Rory said on 27/Aug/22
No, because I suspect that's why they were the chosen few who got on. It was the fact they were unusually tall for their generation which helped them as leading men of the era.
Arch Stanton said on 27/Aug/22
Slim1.75m said on 25/Aug/22
Rob are you and Sure about the 1988 article list him at 216lb sounds to heavy for him even for a guy who's 6'3/4 I'd have thought about 190lb
Editor Rob
Could see him 200's range, but 216? Maybe that's a kind of prime weight he once reached?
It's a Gethin Jones 216 haha! Looks 190-200 lbs but claims 15 and a half stone!
Slim1.75m said on 26/Aug/22
Hey isn't it weird the despite being born in 1900s-1930s in james stewrt,john wayne,clint eastwood,Rock hudson all grew to be 6'3+ despite all the claims of pepper being taller in the 21st century
Slim1.75m said on 25/Aug/22
Rob are you and Sure about the 1988 article list him at 216lb sounds to heavy for him even for a guy who's 6'3/4 I'd have thought about 190lb

Editor Rob
Could see him 200's range, but 216? Maybe that's a kind of prime weight he once reached?
MaskDeMasque 5'9.5 said on 24/Aug/22
I think 6'3.25 is more likely. But yeh I agree Rampage, he was slightly more than a flat 6'3.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Aug/22
I'm not sure I'd go to 6ft3 flat for his peak
Jordan87 said on 17/Aug/22
@ 58 he was already getting 6'3" Listings in papers. I doubt they or Him would report based on height losses. he never looked over 6'3. One of my favorite actors but I'm not going to just add an inch to his height so he can be 6'4 lol.
Hong said on 10/Aug/22
Clint is definitely looking taller than 6ft2 in the Magnum Force video,he looks a comfortable 6ft3 guy, could pull off 6ft4 in shoes.
Leighton Tang said on 10/Aug/22
Hi Rob, do you think Clint is still 6 foot at 92 years old or is he due for a downgrade?

Editor Rob
Likely under it now.
Hong said on 10/Aug/22
Click Here Here's the Magnum Force scene at the firing range.Clint with a couple of 6ft2 range guys.
Becheese said on 9/Aug/22
Good scene in magnum force with David soul (6-0.5). Stood facing. Clints 6-3 minimum peak. Probably over that.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 9/Aug/22
I wouldn't place George Kennedy under a solid 6ft4 in his prime. In fact I'd argue he was a little over it. Bit taller than Eastwood (still at peak I'd say) and near 3in on Jeff Bridges in Thunderbolt and Lightfoot
Becheese said on 8/Aug/22
Good scene in magnum force with David soul (6-0.5). Stood facing. Clints 6-3 minimum peak. Probably over that.
MaskDeMasque 5'9.5 said on 1/Aug/22
Over 6'3 peak but probably not 6'3.5. 6'3.25 I think.
James.B 172cm said on 26/Jul/22
Clint 6’3.25-6’3.5
Kennedy 6’3.5-6’3.75
Hong said on 26/Jul/22
Click Here Even better here's the video of 6ft1.5 Coburn and Clint in that scene they shared all those years ago on Rawhide.
Hong said on 26/Jul/22
Click Here Here's an example of a young Clint next to James Coburn listed here as 6ft1.5 but usually 6ft2.Now both guys are in western outfits,both in cowboy booth style heels probably?they certainly don't look the same height too me,even if you give Clint a slight heel advantage he's looking a solid 6ft 3 in comparison to Coburn.
Hong said on 26/Jul/22
Clint did indeed wear cowboy boots in westerns but unfortunately for him everybody else was also wearing them so he could not take advantage of the high heel.As for his other movies of the 60s and 70s he mainly wore a regular heel or flats.To say he was only 6ft1.5 at peak is in accurate and ilinformed. If you look at him next to 6ft4 George Kennedy in the videos I posted he was definitely in the strong 6ft3 range with no cowboy boots by the way.
stiggles said on 25/Jul/22
Clint always came across as a 6ft 1.5 fella.. but could easily claim 6ft 3+ in those 60s / 70s cowboy boots.
Hong said on 25/Jul/22
It's pretty close there Rob?Kennedy at 6ft4 would put Clint near enough to that mark himself,so in this case Clint is looking 6ft3.5 as you have him listed.
Hong said on 24/Jul/22
Click Here Clint and Kennedy look very similar in height at the end of this hilarious video😂

Editor Rob
I thought Kennedy edged him slightly.
Hong said on 24/Jul/22
Click Here Here's a pic of Clint and Burt I've never seen before.
Tall Sam said on 23/Jul/22
Eastwood holds up admirably a lot with George Kennedy, definitely looking a taller than 6’3” guy IMO in stills and videos with him.
Rory said on 23/Jul/22
There's better examples of Clint with Kennedy in the film Eiger Sanction, and I'd say Kennedy is definitely taller than Clint by 0.5-1 inch. Kennedy 6ft4 and Clint 6ft3.25 seems fair to me. Clint also shorter than 6ft4 Gregory Walcott in that film.
Andrey200 said on 23/Jul/22
Rob are you aware of any health-related reasons for such a big height loss, or is his age the only factor? Could posture have accelerated the loss?

Editor Rob
He is still in the limelight at his age, when a lot of elderly people are in care homes.
Since Clint was a very tall height to begin with, the odds of shrinking more increase. Maybe it's not that much more than what you'd expect for a 90 year old who was active as much as he's been, still working and directing in most of his 80's...
Hong said on 22/Jul/22
By the way it's at 6 minutes 19 seconds on the video.
Hong said on 22/Jul/22
Click Here Here's Clint and 6ft4 listed George Kennedy.Kennedy looks to have the edge on Clint.
Voorhees Myers said on 21/Jul/22
Peak 6-3.5 or just over. Far too many pictures to suggest under 6-3 imo. Legit big guy.
James B 172cm said on 17/Jul/22
This is what I think for clints height through his younger decades
1950s 6'3.25-6'3.5
1960s 6'3.25-6'3 3/8
1970s 6'3-6'3.25
Tall Sam said on 16/Jul/22
Interesting that comparison with William Smith who has a page listing him 6’1.5”. IMO Eastwood looks his peak listing with Smith.
Hong said on 15/Jul/22
Click Here Here's Clint with William Smith who was around 6ft1 tall some say as tall as 6ft2.
Canson said on 12/Jul/22
Selleck was more 6’3.5 which he admitted twice
James.B 172cm said on 11/Jul/22
Also remember Tom Selleck could have been a weak 6’4
On a different note Clint Eastwood and Jeff goldblum both attended ‘A perfect world premier’ in 93. Shame there are no photos of them together but I would imagine Jeff would be significantly taller than Clint.
Rory said on 11/Jul/22
Selleck would have been an inch taller than Clint by 1985. I think peak Clint was 6ft3.25 and by mid 80s he was 6ft2.75-3. Its not true to say Neeson had 2 inches on Clint,he had 1.25 inches on him or at the absolute most 1.5.
Hong said on 11/Jul/22
@Tallerornot,your right about Selleck and Diana compared with Clint and Diana,also Clint was only in his mid fifties at the time.I think Clint was someone who could stretch to 6ft4 in shoes at peak,but would have been more 6ft2.5 to 6ft3 range depending on posture barefoot.
Tallerornot said on 10/Jul/22
Clint was a tall guy and has lost quite some height. He is over 90 years old.
I do not agree with the peak height Rob. If it were correct it would mean that Clint was about the same height as Conan at his peak. Look at Clint dancing with princess Diana and look at her dancing with Tom Selleck who is a genuine 6'4 guy. Selleck is about 2 inches taller than Clint. Clint probably had lost about 0.5-1 inch in height by then. That makes Clint 6'3 max. I think Clint was 189-190cm at peak.
Clint looks taller because he has a narrow frame and his hair always gave him a bit of extra height.
Compare his height to Liam Neeson in one of their movies together and Neeson is clearly 2 inches or more taller.
Hong said on 10/Jul/22
@Rory point taken about Burt's lift wearing,he made no secret about it himself and could look over 6ft with a good pair of shoes or boots.
James.B 172cm said on 7/Jul/22
Clint was a 1/4 inch less than his peak in 1983
Rory said on 7/Jul/22
I'd say in those pictures Clint looks 6ft2.75 if Reynolds is 5ft11,however,I think by 1983 Clint had lost a fraction I suspect,and also there is something dubious looking about Reynolds footwear there. Reynolds was a renowned lift wearer and you'd think acting alongside a tall guy like Clint may well be an occasion where he'd look to wear them.
Hong said on 6/Jul/22
Click Here Here's some good pics of Clint with 5ft11 listed Burt Reynolds,both guys would probably be at peak heights in 1983.Burt may have had some sort of lift in his shoes,but Clint is looking max 6ft3 or maybe a bit less.
Sinclair said on 23/Jun/22
Eastwood was barely ever over 6'3"; George Kennedy was visibly closer to 6'4" in The Eiger Sanction. 6'3.25" was more likely than 6'3.75" for peak Eastwood; 6'3.5" being just right.
Cold Water said on 9/Jun/22
191.3 cm - Peak
182.4 cm - Now
Ian C. said on 9/Jun/22
I myself, at the age of 70, am suddenly losing height. At least a half an inch in the last six months, I think. What is happening is, my upper spine is curving down and in. This is painless so far, but certainly disturbing.
Eastwood was an unusually strong man, who famously made a point of staying in shape. Old age got him, and it looks suspiciously as if it's going to get me too.
James B 171.5cm said on 9/May/22
Hong said on 9/May/22
A peak of 6ft3.25 is more likely than 6ft3.5 in my opinion.
yes I wouldn't disagree with that
Hong said on 9/May/22
A peak of 6ft3.25 is more likely than 6ft3.5 in my opinion.
James B 172cm said on 8/May/22
Yeah 6’3.25-6’3.5 peak and 6’2.25-6’2.5 by age 65.
Hong said on 7/May/22
Well it depends on weather you think by aged 65 Clint would have shrunk by 1.5 inches from peak,I personally think that's a bit much to believe,but 1 inch is possible.
Lukesixfeet said on 6/May/22
You guys are forgetting him and Liam needing in Dirty harry the Deadpool both being 6'4" I think it's safe to say he's honest about his height as for now he's very old so he's obviously not going to be the same height.
Tech noir said on 6/May/22
Great pictures Hong. Confirms a close to 6-4 approx peak.
Hong said on 4/May/22
Click Here In this pic with 6ft4 listed George Kennedy both guys look very similar although George is dropping a bit of height he is on slightly higher ground,this would put in doubt Kennedy's 6ft4 listing rather than Clint being 6ft4 as far as I'm concerned.
Hong said on 4/May/22
Click Here Here's Clint once again in 1995 aged 65 looking a couple of inches shorter than 6ft4 Steven Seagal.
Hong said on 4/May/22
Click Here In 1995 aged 65 Clint was looking a solid 6ft2 next to 6ft1.5 Jim Carrey.
Tech noir said on 1/May/22
6-3 peak minimum. Perhaps a bit over peak. Now lost a huge amount. Looks 5-11.5 range.
Hong said on 27/Apr/22
It's interesting when Lee Marvin was listed as 6ft2 Clint looked 6ft4 in comparison,Clint looked a couple of inches taller than Marvin,now Marvin is listed as 6ft1 with the possibility of being only 6ft.05 which he was measured at at 18 years old that would put Clint at max 6ft3 with the possibility of a bit less.
Tilon kluh said on 27/Apr/22
Reality peak: Somewhere 188.5-190 cm so 6'3 max. Solid 6'2.5 man claiming 6'4.
Rory said on 21/Apr/22
I would fully expect a 30 Yr old Clint to have had an inch on 30 Yr old Ali, now whether Ali 2.25 and Clint 3.25,possibly.
Hong said on 20/Apr/22
He was marginally taller than Ali, but remember Ali stated his height as 6ft2 on the Frost Show.
viper said on 19/Apr/22
Everyone can agree he's taller than Ali
He was at least 6-3. Question is how much over it. He might have been 6-3.5
Hong said on 17/Apr/22
@avi,his height is usually listed as 6ft4 because he said he was that height,if he had of said ,when asked his height,he was 6ft3,then he would have been listed as 6ft3.I don't think many people would have questioned his height at 6ft3,he always looked only an inch or so taller than 6ft2 guys.
Hyper said on 17/Apr/22
Clint Eastwood is taller than Muhammad Ali.
Ali said so himself.
Over 6’3” for sure.
avi said on 16/Apr/22
I am not sure why he is listed so high peak. 6'2.5 makes more sense. Weak 6'3
Hong said on 6/Apr/22
Yeah Tall Sam,it depends on Clints posture his height can look anything from 6ft2 to 6ft3 plus.Clint usually stands with very relaxed posture and hardly ever stands to his full height so it's difficult to guess his actual height,but 6ft4 is not very likely a fraction over 6ft3 is possible.
Tall Sam said on 5/Apr/22
Yeah Eastwood looks a bit skinnier than he would later look in the Every Which Way movies but he’s naturally not as big in build as Wayne. I still think over 6’3” at some times is quite defendable for Eastwood.
Hong said on 4/Apr/22
Click Here @ Tall Sam Clint looks pretty scrawny next to Wayne in that pic, I think Wayne probably is wearing cowboy boots with the rest of his outfit, also as you pointed out he is closer to the camera,taken all that into account 6ft3 is near enough to how Clint is looking in that pic,I've posted another pic of Clint Wayne and Charlton Heston all together and Wayne looks the largest of the 3 guys.
Hong said on 4/Apr/22
Click Here Incase anybody is doubting Holbrook was just a 6ft even guy and was more 6ft1 range here he is with 6ft ish Alac Baldwin.Clint at most looked 3 inches taller,as for soul his height is debatable.
Arch Stanton said on 4/Apr/22
Looks more 2 inches range in that photo deducting hair but I think Clint is slouching a bit. See here with 6'0.5 David Soul, do you really only see 6'2-6'3?
Click Here In the film Clint looked easily 3 inches taller.
Arch Stanton said on 4/Apr/22
I see 3 inches between Clint and Hal, about what it looked in the film. Clint is slouching a little in that photo.
Rory said on 3/Apr/22
No that's never a 4 inch difference. That's about 2.5 maybe 2.75 I'd say, which is the sort of height difference there was between them throughout out the film too. I felt Clint looked 6ft3ish in Magnum force with Holbrook possibly a strong 6ft range in that particular film.
Hong said on 3/Apr/22
Click Here in this one Clint 8s looking know more than 3 inches taller
Tall Sam said on 3/Apr/22
Not sure if this has already been posted but here’s Eastwood with John Wayne (and Don Siegel). Considering that Clint is standing loose and Wayne has a camera advantage, Eastwood looks 6’3” range.
Click Here
James B 171.5cm said on 3/Apr/22
He seems 4 inches taller in that photo with holbrook and looks like he could actually be 5 inches taller if he stood with better posture.
Must be uneven ground or something?
Hong said on 1/Apr/22
Click Here Here's Clint during the making of dirty Harry with 6ft Hal Holbrook,he didn't really look 3.5 inches taller than Holbrook,sometimes he only look 2 inches taller and maybe 3 depending on posture.
James B 171.5cm said on 29/Mar/22
I always thought the original 6ft4 for clint seemed off when seeing him in westerns and dirty Harry films.
Tilon kluh said on 29/Mar/22
Hong said on 18/Mar/22
That's the range I've alwaysa guess for him. 190 barefoot max so under 6ft3. 6ft2.75 was his peak height
Rory said on 28/Mar/22
His posture was never that good, which is why I think at times he could barely look 6ft3,but for a measurement could rise up to 6ft3.25 or 3.5 I think. The scene with Ebsen is a case in point, for me Buddy definitely had the better posture. Clint peak may well be similar to a guy like Paul Bettany actually, doesn't stand tall generally but clears 6ft3 when he does.
James B 171.5cm said on 28/Mar/22
Guys just wondering do you think clint looked 6'3 1/2 in Dirty Harry?
With his hairstyle and slim build I am suprised he didn't look taller but then his posture wasn't that great was it?

Editor Rob
I think at most that mark
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 25/Mar/22
His peak is on point. Somewhere between 6ft3-4 is realistic.
Hong said on 24/Mar/22
Maybe 6ft3.25 peak Rob?
Hong said on 24/Mar/22
Rob do you think Clint looks only 2 inches shorter than Fess Parker in the video I posted,even with heel advantage?

Editor Rob
He was looking about 6ft 3. With Buddy, I think he is taller, but it's not that much...
James B 171.5cm said on 23/Mar/22
Rob do you agree with the average vote for his peak which is 6’3 3/8ths?

Editor Rob
I agree at a peak he cleared 6ft 3, it's just a matter of exactly how much.
Hong said on 23/Mar/22
Barefoot peak evening around 190.5cm that's the max for me 6ft3.
Hong said on 23/Mar/22
@Arch Stanton 6ft4 barefoot in the morning would mean 6ft3.25 in the evening.
Arch Stanton said on 22/Mar/22
Nah, just looking at him proportionally in film in 60s-70s period, the legs and look, he looked taller than 190cm. I've seen his films too many times, 6 ft 4 measured in the morning barefoot is believable peak.
Hong said on 21/Mar/22
Click Here Here's Clint and 6ft3 listed Buddy Ebsen from Rawhide,from 34 minutes there is ample opportunity to compare both guys heights,and once again they are looking pretty even although Clint may have heel advantage,I can't see Clint as anything over 6ft3 flat and taking away his slight heel advantage and being 22 years younger than Ebsen, 6ft3.5 meaning he is taller than Ebsen seems very unlikely.
Hong said on 21/Mar/22
Click Here As you can see Clint's heel is the highest of the group.
Cold Water said on 19/Mar/22
182.4 cm - Now
191.3 cm - Peak
Hong said on 18/Mar/22
I'd say he could have stretched to 193cm in his shoes,but barefoot at peak was more 190cm flat.
Hong said on 18/Mar/22
Click Here Here's Fess with Reagan in 1985 you can see how much Fess towers over Reagan,compared with pics with Clint and Reagan taken at a similar period.
Pierre said on 17/Mar/22
Hong said on 25/Feb/22
Click Here I've posted this video before,but it still is in my opinion a clear example of Clint Eastwood being 6ft3 max in height aged 35.Clint is clearly is looking at least 2.5 inches shorter than 6ft5.5 Fess Parker and that's with footwear advantage,there is no denying that Clint was sub 6ft3.5 in this video,unless Parker was 6ft6.5 tall.
By this comparison Clint is never 6"3.5'.Fess Parker stands 99% of the time in a terrible posture to talk to his neighbours in this video .Plus at 5 min 06 we can see Clint's heel ,that looks advantageous (at 5 min 34 we can see Fess's heel).
Imalpol2 said on 17/Mar/22
000614080093 said on 9/Mar/22
Sure... He was 198 cm peak and now 191 cm ok...
Imalpol2 said on 17/Mar/22
192 cm for a peak Eastood is far from reality. 193 cm in his boots makes a solid 189 peak Eastwood. 190 max!
Sinclair said on 14/Mar/22
Admittedly, Clint only seemed 6’2” range, maybe 6’2.5” max, by the time of In The Line of Fire.
Hong said on 14/Mar/22
Click Here This should be the one I ment to post.
Hong said on 14/Mar/22
Click Here Here's another screen shot in this one Clint is looking closer to 2 inches shorter than Parker
Hong said on 14/Mar/22
Click Here Here's a screenshot of all three standing together,remember Clint is wearing cowboy boots which would have roughly a 1.25 to 1.5 inch heel so at 6ft3.5 barefoot he should be standing at near 6ft5 in his boots,Parker on the other hand is wearing flatter footwear of maybe 1inch heel at 6ft5.5 barefoot he would be 6ft6.5 in his shoes,that would leave a max of two inches between Clint and Parker,it looks a bit more in my opinion.Rob I would be interested to know you opinion on this video,do you think Parker looks only 2 inches taller than Clint?
Rory said on 10/Mar/22
How flat were Fess Parkers shoes though in that clip? Pretty unorthodox, but from what I could see I'd be surprised if say less than 1. 25 inches. 6ft2.75 is definitely undercooking peak Clint, but 6ft3.25 instead of 3.5 is possible.
Hong said on 9/Mar/22
The video with Fess Parker and Danny Kaye is not what a 6ft4 inch guy in cowboy boots and a hat would look measure up to a 6ft5.5 guy in flatter footwear,Clint is struggling to look 6ft4 even in his boots in that video,unless of course Parker was 6ft7 or something?Clint looks similar to Buddy Ebsen who was max 6ft3 peak and more by his late fifties 6ft2.5.I would completely rule out 193cm or 6ft4 inches whatever you prefer.The guy was 6ft2.75 or maybe 6ft3 peak,the 6ft4 listing was just a bit of Hollywood exaggeration.
000614080093 said on 9/Mar/22
Eastwood's peak was 193 cm, current 184 cm
Hong said on 2/Mar/22
Click Here Here's Clint with Snyder,also in that pic of Snyder with Howard Stern,Stern is wearing cowboy boots,there is an interview on YouTube the photo was taken at the time of that interview an Stern has cowboy boots on.
Hong said on 28/Feb/22
Click Here Snyder and 6ft5.25 listed Howard Stern.
Hong said on 28/Feb/22
Click Here Here's a video of David Letterman talking to Tom Snyder,he was one of the previous presenters of the late show,at 1 hour 8min Letterman commented on Snyders size and asks him how tall he is Snyder replied 6ft4 in his high heels.There ate some pics of Snyder and Clint from 1980 in which Clint looks pretty similar to Snyder,the angles aren't great though,but there is also a pic of Snyder standing next to 6ft5.25 listed Howard Stern and Stern looks a good 2 inches taller.I will post the Stern and Clint comparison's later.It seems to me that Snyders comment about being 6ft4 in his high heels may also apply to Clint but barefoot both guys would be more 6ft3 flat,also Letterman IMO was more a 6ft1 guy.
Hong said on 25/Feb/22
Click Here I've posted this video before,but it still is in my opinion a clear example of Clint Eastwood being 6ft3 max in height aged 35.Clint is clearly is looking at least 2.5 inches shorter than 6ft5.5 Fess Parker and that's with footwear advantage,there is no denying that Clint was sub 6ft3.5 in this video,unless Parker was 6ft6.5 tall.
Hong said on 18/Feb/22
I think from all the pics and videos sent Clint was 191cm or 6ft3.25 at peak a slight downgrade would be satisfactory,his current height could range from 5ft11 with typical posture and standing for measurement 6ft flat IMO.
Arch Stanton said on 18/Feb/22
Great clip Hong, I've not seen that before. If Heston was only 6'2 flat Orson Welles was under 6 ft.
Hong said on 15/Feb/22
Click Here Here's a clip of Clint near 6ft5 listed Will Sampson,it's not the greatest clip for an accurate height comparison,Clint is most likely in boots and Sampson barefoot,the terrain is uneven too,but givin all that Clint is looking 6ft4 range in his boots in comparison to Sampson IMO.
Hong said on 14/Feb/22
Click Here Here's Clint with 6ft3 Jim Nantz,it's hard to believe the young Clint was this tall.
Jtm said on 11/Feb/22
6’2 peak Heston and 6’3.5 Eastwood seems about right to me. I would believe Eastwood was 6’4 peak before I would believe 6’3 peak for Heston.
Hong said on 11/Feb/22
Click Here Rob Here's that pic with Hoge from a different angle,as you can see as James B 171.5cm said,Clints posture is horrific,to be fair to Clint if he even straightened his Knees he could gain a good inch.

Editor Rob
How much Clint gains when being measured, versus how he stands is the big question really.
James B 171.5cm said on 10/Feb/22
Rob his posture is horrific though in that photo

Editor Rob
The question with Clint is how much he might stand better when measured. You can't really unkink bad kyphosis in the spine.
ArchibaldVonHabsburg said on 9/Feb/22
Here is the latest photo of Clint Eastwood with golfer Tom Hoge. Hoge is allegedly 6ft1 (185cm). Eastwood certainly looks a bit shorter. Rob, what do you think?
Click Here

Editor Rob
maybe 5ft 11 there
Joseph Cully said on 7/Feb/22
I think that Jimmy Stewart always stooped alot. He rarely looked as tall as he really was.
Tall Sam said on 3/Feb/22
Few older men claim their current height if they were ever honest, even though they undoubtedly notice they’re losing height.
Hong said on 2/Feb/22
Yeah he was looking in early 2000s in the 6ft1.5 range by 2020 he was looking Bearley 6ft flat,now under 6ft around 5ft11 range.
James B 172cm said on 2/Feb/22
No offense to clint or anything but he's totally deluded still claiming 6ft4 in the 2000s
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 2/Feb/22
Heston you could argue was 190cm which would possibly push Clint into 192-193cm territory. I don’t either were quite the full 6ft3 and full 6ft4 though
Wayne is claiming 6ft4½ in shoes. No way barefoot. Comfortably shorter than 6ft5 men. Apparently loathed working with guys who were taller than him
Arch Stanton said on 1/Feb/22
And some people have Heston down as 190cm peak...
Arch Stanton said on 1/Feb/22
Well, Eastwood was easily an inch taller than Charlton Heston at the 1972 Oscars I think it was... Wayne claimed 6'4.5 In The Quiet Man remember. I don't think Eastwood ever claimed that.
Hong said on 31/Jan/22
Click Here @Joseph Cully I've posted the entire video of that TV show you mentioned and I can't see any examples of Stewart looking slightly taller than Clint in it,Stewart may have been slightly taller than Clint at peak but this video does not show it,there are some pics of both guys together and in one Stewart looks taller but in a couple of more Clint looks taller.
Joseph Cully said on 31/Jan/22
I remember a television show honoring Joan Collins. It was in the mid to late 80s. Clint Eastwood and Jimmy Stewart were sitting next to each other. Jimmy Stewart was nearly 80 by that time. Clint Eastwood was mid to late 50s. Jimmmy Stewart was slightly taller than Clint Eastwood.
avrheight said on 11/Jan/22
Rob, who would you give the edge to, Easttwood or John Wayne?

Editor Rob
I still give peak John Wayne a slight edge.
Hong said on 9/Jan/22
Click Here Here's Clint with his rawhide co-star Eric Fleming,I posted a pic on December 7th of Fleming in front of a height chart taken while he was in the navy.Fleming is just scraping 6ft3 from the very top of his hair.In the pic I've just sent both guys are wearing the same type of cowboy boots the heels look similar,and Clint is not looking taller than Fleming,maybe if Clint straightened up a bit they would be even.If Clint was taller than Sydney Poitier at peak it would only be slightly not much in my opinion.
Arch Stanton said on 8/Jan/22
Clint definitely looked taller than Poitier ever did in his prime..
Hong said on 7/Jan/22
Too me Clint looked similar to the likes of Sydney Poitier RIP great actor very sanded by his death he had a long life and a very big influence on cinema for people of African origin,a true trail blazer and icon,may he rest in peace.Clint also was similar to the likes of Morgan Freeman,Buddy Ebsen, Sean Connery,Charlton Heston,James Stewart,and in the Modern age Ryan Reynolds, Dwayne Johnson,Chris Hemsworth,Ben Affleck.What I'm saying is my opinion is Clint was around the 6ft3 mark at peak,somewhere between 6ft2.5 and 6ft3,from all the pics I've looked at and all his movies compareing him to other actors and celebrities over the past 35 years this is the conclusion I've reached.
Hong said on 5/Jan/22
Click Here Clint and Sydney Poitier in 2011,Sydney looks the taller guy,although Sydney is 3 years older than Clint it's Clint who's doing all the shrinking.
Hong said on 1/Jan/22
Good point about the the small tilt in Wayne's favour Rob,but Wayne is looking his listed height of 6ft3.75 I have no problem with that.8 would be interested to here your opinion on Clint's height when you compare him to John Agar who is looking like a 6ft1 guy compared to 6ft2 Ben Johnson.Do you think Clint 8s looking over 6ft3 in the youtube clip I posted?
Hong said on 1/Jan/22
Click Here Here's a better group pic of Wayne,Johnson and Agar.Wayne is looking a big 6ft4 guy there,Johnson at 6ft2 is making Agar 6ft1 so ir seems an accurate height for him,if you watch the YouTube clip I posted earlier of Clint with Agar allowing for Clint's hunched posture I can't see anything more than a 6ft3 flat guy compared to a 6ft1 Agar.With his bad posture Clint is looking only slightly taller than Ager so standing to his full height he would gain a bit more height maybe 1 inch or so.I cant see Clint anymore than 6ft3 there.

Editor Rob
There might be a small tilt in John's favour, if you look at the platform they are on, but still manages to look near 6ft 4 there.
Looks similar boots to others, so no lifts there.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Jan/22
Ah 1955 Hollywood. If I could go back in a time machine and see it! I tend to associate Clint with the 70s, I don't think of him in the young 50s way. Clint started to look shorter by the early 80s I thought, Sudden Impact around 1983. By Deadpool he didn't look over 6'3 with Neeson.
Hong said on 31/Dec/21
Click Here Here's a pic of Clint and Agar,Agar is the one on the left in black,using the bar over their head's is a good reference point for compering their heights,I'd say Clint is looking around a couple of inches taller there.
Hong said on 31/Dec/21
Click Here Here's John Agar with 6ft2 Ben Johnson and 6ft3.75 John Wayne,he looks no more than 6ft1 in comparison,in fact there looks to be a similar height difference between Johnson and Agar as there was between Clint and Agar.
Arch Stanton said on 30/Dec/21
Not easy to judge from that clip, he's slouching a fair bit there which makes him look nearer 6'2 but yeah if Agar was 6'1 he certainly doesn't give the impression of a big 6'4 guy there. I think Hudson was pretty close to 6'5, 195cm maybe, no lower than 6'4.5 anyway. Remember he had about 1.5 inches on Wayne at a time when he claimed to have lost an inch!
Hong said on 29/Dec/21
Click Here Here's a very young Clint in an early bit part role,the actor in the scene with him is John Agar he is listed as 6ft1,now I don't know how accurate his height listing is because he's not very well known too me,but if he was 6ft1,Clint is looking somewhat in the 6ft2.5 maybe 6ft3 range? in comparison,definitely not 6ft4 or 6ft3.5 if that guy was 6ft1?
JamesB171.5cm said on 27/Dec/21
Clint was under his peak height in deadpool for sure.
Hong said on 27/Dec/21
Click Here Here's 58 year old Clint with 36 year old Liam Neeson 6ft4.Clint is closer to the camera,from watching the movie Neeson had about an inch on Clint,in my opinion Clint was still near peak at that age,so 6ft3 is a good height estimate for his peak.
James B 171.5 said on 23/Dec/21
was rock Hudson a full 6'5 though?
Hong said on 23/Dec/21
Click Here Here's Clint and Rock Hudson,as you can see Rock is taller,Hudson's height is a matter of opinion,he looked a solid 6ft4 guy too me,could have been 6ft4.5 but definitely not 6ft5.Clint is looking 6ft2.5 there if Rock was 6ft4,Rock at 6ft4.5 puts Clint at 6ft3.But that's just my opinion,I could be wrong.
184guy2 said on 22/Dec/21
Under 6'3 using Rock Hudson is totally nonsense
No 6'2.5 guy would look that tall beside a 6'5 ish man
Masae180cm said on 22/Dec/21
I was watching a segment of The David Frost Show in 1969 featuring Eastwood and Muhammad Ali. Ali mentions that he is 6'2 and is surprised at how much taller Eastwood and the other actor were.
Hong said on 19/Dec/21
@brunobrown,Wayne was probably in his mid to late 60s at the time of that pic,he looks a big guy considering Clint and Heston were both 6ft2 plus guys,Clint looks slightly taller than Heston who was around 6ft2.5 range,I'd give Clint 6ft3 and Wayne 6ft3.75 at the time of that photo.
brunobrown said on 18/Dec/21
That's a brilliant photo Hong, but its clear Wayne if he stood straight would be clearly taller even at his advanced age compared to the other 2. Proves what I said Wayne lost very little height as he aged.
Hong said on 17/Dec/21
Click Here Here's a rare pic of Clint with Charlton Heston and John Wayne,all 3 guys look similar Clint looks slightly taller tan Heston but it's hard to tell who's taller with Wayne.
Hong said on 13/Dec/21
All true Rory,but it dose give us an evidence that Fleming was a tall guy in and around the 6ft3 Mark.Clint and Fleming did look pretty similar,also Fleming could have been in footwear and the height chart was most likely accurate,if so that would make him more 6ft2 range if that was the case that's why taking all this into account I'll go with 6ft3 range for both Flemiig and Clint peak.
Rory said on 10/Dec/21
Yh but you've no idea what Flemings posture is like in that photo, is it a measured pose, is he standing loosely,are the measurements even drawn up accurately, is he barefoot or in footwear? There's too many variables at play to take it too seriously.
Hong said on 9/Dec/21
I've always been curious about Fleming's height he's listed on line as 6ft3.5 and 6ft3,this pic makes him about 6ft3 max or maybe depending on the time the photo was taken he could be more 6ft2.5 range?Him and Clint looked pretty similar in height,sometimes he edged Clint and sometimes Clint edged him,judging by this pic and presuming Fleming gained no more height after 18 it's looking like 6ft3 max for Clint and possibly 6ft2.5.
Tall In The Saddle said on 1/Dec/21
@Hong
Yeah some photos can be tricky with uneven surfaces. Poor Clint, he should’ve been the one standing on higher ground for that photo. LOL.
Hong said on 30/Nov/21
@Rising174cm I agree with all your points,I believe Clint was a solid 6ft3 guy peak.
Rising174cm said on 28/Nov/21
He was a bit taller than 6'2.5" Muhammad Ali on an early 70s talk show with a bit thicker footwear so about 6'3" peak seems right or maybe around 191 cm. I still think he was around a full 6'3" in the Dead Pool with Liam Neeson and probably not under 190 cm or a weak 6'3" range by In The Line of Fire. In 1992, he still looked at least as tall as Danny Glover, if not a hair taller and Glover was about 190 cm peak, imo, with at least a chance of a full 6'3".
Clint probably lost his first fraction in his 50s or early 60s and he started to shrink more noticeably around the mid to late 90s. I still think he would have measured at least a full 6'0" or a fraction over in his early 80s and I saw him look as much as 3 cm taller than a roughly 5'11" DiCaprio when he stood well promoting J. Edgar.
But I think he likely dropped below 6' and into the 182 cm range by his mid to late 80s. Probably about 5'11.5", but it depends on how much taller he can stand for a measurement.
Hong said on 22/Nov/21
@Tall In The Saddle,that would explain Clint looking under 6ft in comparison,he was at that stage still a solid 6ft I think Rob had him at 6f.05 at that stage.
Hong said on 18/Nov/21
Click Here @Desky this is the pic with Zucchero,in an interview at the time Zucchero said he was recently working with Clint on J Edgar and said the movie will be out in 2012 that's almost 10 years ago and Clint was looking sub 6ft next to him.
Desky said on 16/Nov/21
Looked tiny in a recent picture with actor Craig Zucchero (listed by the unreliable IMBD at 191cm)
Myers Haddonfield said on 4/Nov/21
Imo his 4” shorter at 90. Legit tall guy in his youth. 6-3 minimum. Probably 6-3.5 legit.
James B 171.5 said on 2/Nov/21
rob do you think 216 lbs is possible in deadpool?
Hong said on 26/Oct/21
Click Here Here's Clint with DiCaprio in 2020 Clint aged 90,they both look pretty similar in height,Clint's posture is bad, but 8f he could straighten up he my edge DeCaprio out, but at 90 he's still looking 5ft11 to 6ft range.
Meltdown said on 24/Oct/21
I saw a photo recently of Clint with Leo DiCaprio who was edging him out. I think Clint is well below 6ft now. Time for an update.
James B 171.5cm said on 24/Oct/21
In the early 90s Glover could have been like 6’2.5-6’3
Arch Stanton said on 24/Oct/21
Yes, Clint could even look 6 ft 3 in some scenes in Blood Work in 2002, I noticed that.
berta said on 21/Oct/21
interesting pgoto with danny glover. I think glover was 6´3 peak and clint look pretty mutch the exact same height. But we all know clint had lost height by then. Lets say clint was 190 cm in that photo and peak 191,5.
Hong said on 12/Oct/21
Click Here Clint and Danny Glover both 6ft3 range guys.
Hong said on 11/Oct/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,Here's both guys at the premier,although Clint is bending his right knee and is dropping a bit of height,Daniels is also not standing his full height,giving that, Clint does look to be near a full inch shorter,by age 70 Clint was looking somewhere between 6ft1 and 6ft2 range IMO.
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Oct/21
Just watched Blood Work 2002.
Strange, at times Clint appeared on par with Jeff Daniels, even maybe holding a very slight edge but some scenes it seemed Daniels held the same slight edge. Very symptomatic for two guys who are basically the same height but Daniels was supposed to be 6’2 3/4” peak so technically was arguably the taller of the two as compared to 90s Clint who could’ve easily fallen below 6’2 1/2” by the 2000s.
However, red carpet photos for the movie, though not the best angles, seem to indicate that Daniels was definitely taller. Suffice to say, we all seem to agree that Clint was already down to 6’2 1/2” by the early to mid 90s.
Hong said on 4/Oct/21
Click Here Here's Gary Grubbs with James Cromwell,just to show he's a tall guy,6ft4 is believable.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 2/Oct/21
By the mid-90’s was starting to look under 6ft3
Hong said on 1/Oct/21
@Futy Adore that would be a minimum for me,but still possible,he did look that at times in his younger year
Futy Adore said on 30/Sep/21
6'2,5" - 1,89m
Never a 6 fert guy.
Clint is tall
James B 171.5cm said on 29/Sep/21
Rob watching unforgiven right now
How tall do you think he was by the time of that film? 6’2.75 maybe?

Editor Rob
arguably 6ft 2.5
Hong said on 22/Sep/21
Yeah I think we can rule out Kelly's Heroes for compering Clint's and Sutherland's height because there was no way of compering them in that movie,but in Space cowboys Sutherland did look taller than Clint.Clint at 70 and Sutherland 65 years old at the time,Clint was probably about an inch off peak at that stage,Sutherland was still looking in the 6ft3 range.Who was taller in their Youth? It could go either way
Hong said on 21/Sep/21
That's an 81 year old Cushing and Lee was 72 years old.
Rory said on 20/Sep/21
I wouldn't bet on Sutherland being taller than Clint when they were young. I felt in Kellys heroes particularly at the end of the film, Clint looked the taller if anything but then there wasnt really any strong comparisons to make.
Tall In The Saddle said on 19/Sep/21
On Lee’s THIS IS YOUR LIFE with excellent vision to compare, he didn’t appear to have much on an older Vincent Price. Possibly 6’4 3/4” but I like 6’4 1/2” more for Lee which would give him from 1” (given Clint at 6’3 1/2”) to 1 1/2” (given Clint at 6’3”) advantage over Eastwood. I think peak times peak Sutherland had the edge on Clint and a young Sutherland appeared alongside Lee in a few films and it appeared that Lee was clearly the taller man.
Tall Sam said on 18/Sep/21
@James B 171.5, for sure although some including myself feel that Lee was rounding down by claiming 6'4" a lot, he could've been a solid 6'4.75" in reality.
Arch Stanton said on 18/Sep/21
6'4 morning measurement is believable in his 20s. I don't know, at times I looked at Christopher Lee and couldn't see 6'4.75-6'5.
Hong said on 17/Sep/21
Lee was obviously taller than Clint,I'd say he would have had about 1.5 inches on Clint,Lee looked in the 6ft4.5 range where Clint looked in the 6ft3 range.
James B 171.5 said on 16/Sep/21
I bet christopher lee would have had easily 1 inch on clint at there peaks
Rory said on 15/Sep/21
No I think late 1970s is when he lost his first bit of height, probably around the time of every which way but loose,and then half inch gone by the end of the 80s.
Tall In The Saddle said on 13/Sep/21
@Chaos
Gotcha.
MichaelMyers said on 12/Sep/21
I believe he was definitely 6'4" peak. He seems to have started losing height earlier than most people do, in the early 1970s when Clint was in his early 40s, he was already looking noticeably shorter than how tall he looked in films he starred in from the 1960s. No idea as to current height, maybe 6'0" if he stood with perfect posture?
ChaosControl said on 12/Sep/21
@T. I. T. S. I know you would have made a similar joke given the opportunity
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Sep/21
@Chaos
No comprendo on your last post. Help me out. : )
Tall In The Saddle said on 8/Sep/21
@Chaos
No comprendo on your last post 5 Sep 2021. Help me out. : )
@Ian
LOL.
Think revenge for Randy Newman’s 1977 hit tune but replace title lyrics with Tall People and substitute in all relevant lyrics otherwise. Eg. “They’ve got tree trunk legs, And they stand so tall, You’ve to climb a ladder, To ask how are y’all?”. Bernie Taupin is eating his heart out right now. I must remember where I put Elton’s number again. He might be up for this.
Hong said on 8/Sep/21
Click Here @ Henrik,I don't think Neeson had 2 inches on Clint in The Dead Pool,Here's a couple of stills from the movie,I think Clint holds up very well against a solid 6ft4 guy like Neeson,and was probably still in the 6ft3 range by his late fifties.
ChaosControl said on 5/Sep/21
Tall In The Saddle said on 4/Sep/21
@Chaos
"That's what she said". Haha.
I know what you’re like, you’d have done much the same
Henrik said on 4/Sep/21
I thought Clint looked no more than 6'2" compared to 6'4" Liam Neeson in The Dead Pool. In the first scene with the two, Neeson is looking down when Clint interrogates him.
Tall In The Saddle said on 4/Sep/21
@Chaos
"That's what she said". Haha.
Brings to mind an oldie but a goodie. An exchange between a couple whilst in bed:-
Husband: An inch MORE and I would be KING!
Wife: An inch LESS and you'd be QUEEN!
Talk about getting royally scr*wed.
Ian C. said on 3/Sep/21
You see Chaos, there is a binding ordinance setting down the limits of permissible height, and you are in violation of it. Don't leave the house during business hours or you will be ticketed. Tall people think you're just so superior, and then you step on a normal sized adult and suddenly it is no longer a joke.
So wise up. I'm not telling you again.
ChaosControl said on 3/Sep/21
Tall In The Saddle said on 2/Sep/21
@Chaos
Please stay up in your beanstalk so as to not scare adults and particularly little children. They might think you’re going to crush them underfoot or grind their bones for a nice sandwich. Or, at best, walk with a severe, height depleting hunch (actually, that might increase the “scary” factor, scratch that) OR figure out a way to fast track your spinal compression to below the magic threshold so you can walk among us normal folk.
Seems like a lot of effort for half an inch (that’s what she said)
ammy said on 2/Sep/21
looka 6'3 next to Ali
Tall In The Saddle said on 2/Sep/21
@Chaos
Please stay up in your beanstalk so as to not scare adults and particularly little children. They might think you’re going to crush them underfoot or grind their bones for a nice sandwich. Or, at best, walk with a severe, height depleting hunch (actually, that might increase the “scary” factor, scratch that) OR figure out a way to fast track your spinal compression to below the magic threshold so you can walk among us normal folk.
Ian C. said on 2/Sep/21
You would think, just as a matter of simple logic, that tall people would lose more height in old age as an absolute measurement. They're taller and have more to lose. The question is, do tall and short people lose the same percentages of their youthful heights?
On average there can be little doubt that longevity favours short people over tall. Longevity is also far more prevalent among people with some body types. You can bet with confidence that Woody Allen, for example, will make it well into his nineties. He's short and strong, and also notably temperate in his personal habits. Apparently he has never drunk or smoked. He has not grown noticeably fatter with age, and his father made it to well past ninety.
Although you never can tell. Alfred Hitchcock and Peter Ustinov, both obese, made it into their eighties. Other people who seemed very strong, like Tyrone Power and Robert Shaw, died quite young of sudden heart attacks. Cancer is difficult to predict because it can strike down the young.
Clint's chances of making it to 100 are really quite good, although he is not only losing height but jettisoning weight. His muscles seem to be wasting away. His mind must be very good, and he can summon the energy to produce and direct movies, which would be strenuous labour at any age.
Not everyone who lives to be unusually old is all that happy about it, simply because old age robs you of much of the physical capacity you need to be comfortable and reasonably happy. Hunter S. Thompson and Ernest Hemingway ended their lives while they were still able to operate firearms, because both men had been reduced to little else but pain. I respect that, actually. In fact, if I were Clint's age, I would seriously consider skipping the last act.
ChaosControl said on 2/Sep/21
avi said on 29/Aug/21
@Canson said on 22/Aug/21
Yes human body is really meant to be between 5'0 - 6'2 at most
So I’m just not supposed to exist until late in the evening after 7 hours of construction work or training hard in combat sports?
Arch Stanton said on 1/Sep/21
People who are near dead don't still make movies though, it takes tremendous energy and concentration to make and produce a film. Very stressful and time consuming for many, but CLint always made it look easier as he was so layed back during the filming. Actors loved working with him as he was so economical.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Sep/21
Not a hair under 6'3 till his 60s (the 1990s) in my opinion.
Tall Ssm said on 30/Aug/21
@Avi, strange statement, making those over 6’2” an aberration of what people are “meant to be”? Height loss can be more noticeable in taller people it’s true but I think genetics, health and lifestyle are the primary drivers.