# g.pulchripes & g.pulchra pros/cons



## sam gamgee (Apr 8, 2009)

Just your experiences of keeping above, really.
Preferences, feeding 'habits', docility (yes know they're both 'ok'), handling (we do like to interact on occasion, so no debate needed lol), hardiness bla bla.
Personal experiences & thoughts about these 'rocks' lol.😊


----------



## wilkinss77 (Sep 23, 2008)

g.pulcheripes: grows huge (birdeater size, ie 7-8'' span, 3-4'' body).
fasts for short periods of time, a couple of months maybe.
usually docile, but mine is defensive if you try to touch her.
relatively fast growing.

g.pulchra: grows large (6-7'' span, 3-3 1/2'' body)
fasts for longer than pulcheripes, but not as bad as a chile rose.
usually docile- mine is handleable, but i've heard of odd nasty ones.
is more likely to muller its setup by bulldozing the substrate.
slow growing.

both require the same setups, ie dry substrate, hide & water bowl.
both are as tough as old boots, & will eat anything that moves.


----------



## sam gamgee (Apr 8, 2009)

Just the type of info.....personal stuff.


----------



## stevemet (Dec 29, 2011)

And......pulcheripes grows an awful lot faster than pulchra. If you start with a pulchra sling you are in for a long wait for a large spider. However worth every minute in my opinion.
Sorry Wilkinss77 I didn`t notice that you had put slow growing.


----------



## sam gamgee (Apr 8, 2009)

Thanks guys......


----------



## Slicer (Feb 8, 2011)

and now you own both


----------



## PeterUK (Jun 21, 2008)

wilkinss77 said:


> g.pulcheripes: grows huge (birdeater size, ie* 7-8*'' span, 3-4'' body).



I've been seeing this reported size for G pulchripes on the internet for years but have never seen or heard of a photo proving this. ie next to a ruler or similar to prove its size.
In reality a large specimen would be 6 - 6.5 inches.


----------



## wilkinss77 (Sep 23, 2008)

PeterUK said:


> I've been seeing this reported size for G pulchripes on the internet for years but have never seen or heard of a photo proving this. ie next to a ruler or similar to prove its size.
> In reality a large specimen would be 6 - 6.5 inches.


in that case, why does everybody quote the bigger size, including breeders (including ray gabriel who claims to have seen them that size), books, and shops?


----------



## PeterUK (Jun 21, 2008)

wilkinss77 said:


> in that case, why does everybody quote the bigger size, including breeders (including ray gabriel who claims to have seen them that size), books, and shops?



because breeders want to sell them and people will always buy a calm species that gets LARGE. 

Books authors are generally are like the internet caresheets . . they copy other peoples info, right or wrong. 

Who believes anything shop assistants say ?! 

Ray G probably has seen them that size in the wild BUT how many of that size have been available in the hobby ? Very very few i'm guessing.

I've been in this hobby for 34 years and have seen a lot of spiders in this time but like i said above, i've never seen an actual spider or a photo proving that someone has actually got or had a pulchripes of this size. 

Have you seen a G pulchripes anywhere near this size ?


----------



## matty (Feb 17, 2007)

I personally prefer G.pulchripes, but this might be because it was the first tarantula I ever owned. I've always found them to be a bit more interesting to watch than pulchras too, but I do have a soft spot for both of them.


----------



## PeterUK (Jun 21, 2008)

I've got 6 pulchripes and 30 pulchra and i would guess that the 6 pulchripes move about more than all of the pulchra combined.


----------



## wilkinss77 (Sep 23, 2008)

PeterUK said:


> because breeders want to sell them and people will always buy a calm species that gets LARGE.
> 
> Books authors are generally are like the internet caresheets . . they copy other peoples info, right or wrong.
> 
> ...


i have never even seen a full adult one in the flesh- mine is a large sub-adult, & about as big as a g.porteri/rosea.


----------

