Confusion: Giants & Super Giants in leopard geckos

So I’m the proud new owner of this handsome little guy

My confusion is that he is extremely bigger (in my opinion) then my other geckos his measurements are 9 3/4 inches and little over 99 grams is he a giant leopard gecko? My male I’ve had for 2 years is 9 inches and 64 grams

What’s the difference (besides weight obviously) I’ve been told giant is 9-11 inches and 85-110 grams and a normal is 6.5-8 inches and 45-80 grams… Is this accurate?


I believe so but someone with more leo knowledge like @mblaney or the other Riley/ @erie-herps probably would be a better help.

1 Like

This is something I’m not sure of. I’m under the impression that the labels ‘Giant’ and ‘Super Giant,’ just like ‘Godzilla Super Giant,’ are actually names of specific lines, not just a descriptor for very large geckos.

The first ‘Giant’ that I remember (please someone correct me if I’m wrong, this was quite some time ago) was a gecko named ‘Moose,’ owned by Ron Tremper. (Side note: though Tremper is now retired, his stock and brand are still in use with another breeder as of me writing this.)

Moose passed away fairly young, but had many descendants, and I’m pretty sure that the term ‘Giant’ actually means, ‘descended from Moose,’ as opposed to just being a descriptor of size. I don’t know when the label ‘Super Giant’ started getting used, but my guess is that it is probably a term that means ‘descended from (a particular gecko), who was in turn a descendant of Moose.’ Just as ‘Godzilla Giants’ are descended from a gecko named Godzilla. I can’t remember who owns/owned Godzilla, apologies.

Labels aside, it’s not really valid to use weight to compare ‘size,’ as a morbidly obese gecko will also be heavy. So, if you are looking to compare two geckos, use their length, not their weight. This was actually a sort of drama back in the day, as some critics of the ‘Giant’ morph felt that Moose & other Giants were being overfed in an effort to increase their weight & make them sound bigger.

edit: Your gecko does sound large. But unless you know his genetic history, I don’t think the ‘Giant’ label can be used, if I’m correct about it being line-specific.


Everything said above is accurate. He might be a larger gecko but I don’t think the Giant “morph” has been proven genetic to my knowledge (by mendelian inheritance, it’s likely polymorphic). The reason he might be heavier is because he’s a fatter gecko (not obese, just fatter than your other male). You will get different opinions depending who you ask but unless you’re positive that he’s from a Giant line then I wouldn’t use the label.


Thank you everyone for your help this does solve a lot of my confusion and appreciate all of the information you have given me the Humane Society I got him from freely admitted they did not know a lot about geckos so they weren’t sure of his type the pictures don’t do him Justice I’ll try to get better ones and do a different post to see if you guys can help me identify him he is very loving and calm considering he was just dumped somewhere instead of being in a forever home

The morph looks like a super hypo baldy poss. carrot tail (I’d need more pictures to tell).

1 Like

I’ll get some more detailed ones tomorrow todays been a little stressful and long for him so going to leave him alone for the night let him rest


Ron Tremper eventually determined that the morph is a recessive gene. IIRC this was not known when his original book came out. He knew that Moose’s size was some way linked to genetics because he got to that size eating nothing but mealworms, but didn’t know that it was recessive.

If someone knows the origin of Godzilla, please chime in!

1 Like

I believe Godzilla originated from Steve Sykes (Geckos Etc). I don’t know more specific details though. He had a page about it on his website but looks like they have updated it and the page isn’t there anymore, but there are Godzilla giants for sale on his website.


As a quick note I wanted to chime in that something I’ve noticed with many leopard gecko morphs is that different breeders form their own opinions re: inheritance, whether a trait is polygenic, recessive, co-dominant, etc., but that there is often not a general consensus until a morph has been around a very long time, as there’s no published, peer-reviewed documentation to reference. So whenever a single breeder is the source of information like that, I always take it with a grain of salt. Especially as I’ve perceived a general bias against self-reporting a morph as polygenic.