Who has better striking power - DCEU Superman or MCU Hulk?

I left for months and the battle still rages on.

*goes back to seclusion*

@ready_4_madness: What do you mean "only one of them is impressive" p-lease.

Those striking feats are superior to what Superman has shown. Superman going all out was only making miniature pressure booms around his hands whilst fighting Zod and even then that was only because of the speeds at which he was "throwing" them.

Errrm what? Iron Man's lasers were cutting through absolutely everything he aimed them at until he tried it against the Leviathan.

In my opinion overpowering a device that reshapes the planet is more impressive then KOing a whale. Superman wins.

Why are people using Superman flying into the world engine as a striking feat it doesn't apply that's like saying running through a wall is a striking feat

Also since when did lifting strength=striking power

Feel like Hulk is being lowballed it's a lot closer than people think

@thorthunder98: hulk only has 1 good fest in all of three movies vs superman's multiple impressive feats in his first movie alone.

That makes the leviathan feat an outlier

After reading the comments and getting some insight; Clark.

@ready_4_madness: Yes, it is.

Let's talk about the armour on the leviathan. The most advanced combat suit ever created by one of the greatest engineers of mankind couldn't scratch it and could easily shrug off the most powerful weapon of said suit.

It could casually fly through skyscrapers and even briefly Incapacitated Thor (though to be fair, Thor was caught off guard).

It took Iron Man to risk his life by flying inside the Leviathan and pretty much launching his entire arsenal while inside of it to kill it.

Thor (a semi-immortal Demi-god had to rely on the Hulks brute strength just to break the armour and create weaknesses for him to exploit and even then he had to amplify his attacks with lightning. Thor also had to use the whole lightning storm he had "summoned" to bottleneck the breach just to fry a leviathan, and even then the Leviathans armour stayed in shape, it was the electrics and flesh that gave out.

Yes it is lol, that explosion you hear after something breaks the speed of sound is the shockwave ?

You mean the escape pod hatch that Faora knew how to open?

Still Hulk.

While I'm inclined to go with Superman on this one, I think people trying to dismiss Hulk's leviathan feat as an outlier are being kinda ridiculous. In fact, trying to dismiss any feat as an outlier (when it isn't suggested in-universe that it is one) is rarely, if ever an intelligent argument. You might even call it an argument from personal incredulity. "I cannot personally believe this character can do this thing, so I'm going to ignore all evidence that he can." Does the leviathan feat explicitly contradict anything shown in the films so far? If not then why is it not valid?

Though if we're still insistent on lowballing the leviathan feat, it's not as if Hulk doesn't have other striking/strength feats to pull from.

https://www.reddit.com/r/respectthreads/comments/4c15y6/respect_robert_bruce_bannerthe_hulk_marvel/

*pulls Batman242 out of seclusion*

Nah, you're gonna enjoy this along with the rest of us.

superman by faaaaaar.

ill be back after ragnarok

Supes. Just the fact his punches have mach cones is nuts.

Ironman laser is energy attack and hulk force is physical attack can u see the difference ?????

1. If ur going to circle around boxer and body builder I am really wasting my time with u coz this is about how powerful his punch is nobody cares whether his punch is professional or not !!!!
2. Reply me if you understand what I meant .

Don't do ur fanboy shit show when ur doing ur fanboy thing where u barely know what i am talking about !!!!

@nightmare52: I do lifting strength does not equate to striking strength. My Dad can lift 210 pounds and I can lift 195 but J can break a board with a punch and he can't. Also why did you underline 300 ton space whale

• ur the one who is confusing his strength comparing it to lifting and pulling things.
• " he is strong enough to pull it across the ice easily " - do u understand what i am saying here ???

@nightmare52: Your first bulletpoint makes no sense. Idk if you wanna try rewording that, or if you're new to English maybe you should ask for help because what you just said equates to "You're confusing strength with things you do with strength" ...and thats not happening here, nor am I sure how anyone would go about achieving what you described. What I did was explain that the mechanisms behind making contact before applying force (lifting strength) are different than when you apply force before making contact (striking strength).

Yes, I understand he can pull things across ice. That a great showing of lifting strength. Your opponent explained that lifting strength is not striking strength. That is the only thing I am here about, I thought you might get it if I reworded it for you. If you still don't get it, thats fine. It ain't my problem, I just wanted to be nice and help clarify one thing. I see that's not happening. Sorry to bother u.

• i understand ur point but unlike u and ur dad has different speed while ur punching which changes the outcome of ur result.
• they are not even 30 tons that's why i underlined .
• coz a 15 ton rock would have demolished that building if its dropped from that altitude .

• ok , its gonna harder to explain thing to u than i expected , so let me start from first .
• so lifting strength has nothing to do with punching is that what u mean ???

@nightmare52:

-Sure

-No, that's not what I mean. Noone here said that at all. At any point in the thread. Ever. Idk why you'd even think that. It is only one factor in striking strength, that's what I've been trying to say...so when you used a lifting strength feat to say he has high striking, you'd see these two things are not directly equatable.

*In all, my interjection was supposed to be just that: an interjection. I'm not trying to take over the other guys arguement or even make a big thing here. It should have been one post and done. In a perfect world, you would simply understand what is already common knowledge for everyone else here, reassess, and then continue your discussion with the other guy.

As for the thread, I'm already on Superman's side. All I wanted here was to explain that one thing about lifting/striking before I go about my day.

@nightmare52: All I'm saying is there are many factors in striking strength is not the only one and Supes cannot go on that alone. He has a plethora of other great feats of striking. But if we use your logic than N52 Supes is a Jupiter buster.

• OK , reply if u needed to continue to see from my point of view.
• So , bodybuilders can't hit harder than average person ???

1. I am just trying to explain that lifting strength has its effect on punching since most of people here believe that lifting strength wouldn't even increase punching strength not even by 5℅ !!!

@nightmare52: Responding to your second bulletpoint, this is my last reply and final attempt to lay it out for you.

Assuming your bodybuilder is equal to your average person in all regards and simply has higher strength, yes, they would hit harder. However, the fact they are a bodybuilder does not automatically mean they hit harder than anyone smaller than them because strength is not the ONLY factor, although it can help because it is still A factor.

Another factor would be speed, most tend to break striking strength down to a combination of speed and strength. This is just basic physics, a higher speed=a greater impact, and more strength does not always indicate more speed.

Then there is technique. A regular, heavy bodybuilder would not hit harder than a slightly lighter boxer, because the bodybuilder does not know the most effective way to deliver a punch while the boxer does. To simplify this to its maximum for you, one person can simply be better at punching than another, regardless of build.

Then consider mobility, excess muscle mass can sometimes actually get in the way and hinder ones ability to achieve maximum impact. Footwork and general maneuvering are imperative in getting the best angle with a strike for maximum impact, one with better maneuverability can get better potential from their blows.

Then you can consider muscle grouping: strong arms and calves will give a fast, versatile (maneuverable) punch, but a strong back and thighs will give a slower, straighter punch far more followthrough. Either one can have the greater weight or lifting strength with particular muscle groups, yet still lose to the other. Say your bodybuilder skips leg day...that's an entire muscle group that matters in punching, his greater upper body strength only does so much.

Even the type of striking is a factor. You won't see a bulky bodybuilder throwing and high kicks or building the momentum a smaller, nimble fighter can. In that way, the smaller guy could be kicking with more force...or it can be the other way around, with the upper body.

These are just a few of the factors that go into striking power. This is why lifting strength does not immediately correlate into striking strength. This is why it is possible for a smaller, faster, more skilled puncher to hit harder than a bodybuilder with nothing but strength, even assuming this bodybuilder is training all the right muscle groups for fighting instead of just trying to look pretty.

It's easier just to use striking feats.

I love how people don't want to count superman's flying punches, but hulk's leaping had on collision with a space whale is perfectly acceptable.

Superman has effortlessly portrayed more striking power than Hulk has with his best one. It's not comparable. Superman is and always has been superior to MCU Hulk.

Are you being serious right now?

Superman's striking power feats that are preformed while flying should not count. Fact that he is flying already increases his striking power. I know it is in character for him to blitz and punch which is making those feats 100% legit and useful during the all "who would win" argument but pure striking power contest? Yeah we should focus on pure striking power feats that are preformed while he wasn't running or flying.

Superman's BEST Striking feat(without flight):

I think Hulk's Levithan feat is comparable to this

• I think this should be my last reply to since u r completely naive and again and again ur comparing body builder to boxer for no reason .
• Finally I am finishing with this if u want to , A strengthless can't punch harder and ur consistently trying ignore lifting strength has its effect on punching without any proof other than comparing bodybuilders with boxer which is irrelevant to the current scenario since there is no comparison here.

I am pretty serious do u have any proof to prove that I am wrong ?????

@maiamaku: he didnt leap

@nightmare52: I don't need proof to show you that a leviathan (something bigger than the size of entire buildings weighs a helluva lot more than 30 tons.

I think you need to go back to school and resit maths and science.

First of all, I don't even think you understand what you meant, judging by your response. Second, if I possessed the level of comprehension that you currently have, I'd be wasting my time, too.

Have a good day.

dang

@thelocust619: Your consideration of all factors contributing to a punch's power is perfectly applicable to human punches, but I just don't think they're as applicable to this question. I don't think relatively minor variations like the strength of different muscle groups, mobility, and technique, which produce variations on much less than one order of magnitude for humans, are the best lens through which to discuss striking power of characters whose striking power could be one to two orders of magnitude apart, and whose striking power is so wildly inconsistent within their films in comparison to real-life humans'. To nitpick a bit, as for technique, it doesn't seem like there is an appreciable difference in punching technique between Hulk and Superman.

You want to avoid using Superman's strength feats as references for striking power, but I think they're pretty valid for use considering we know that he has very fast striking speed anyway (as suggested by visual, in-film speed and by Mach cones), at least relative to Hulk. If strength and strike speed are the most important factors, disregarding the other factors that seem to be non-distinguishing between Superman and Hulk, then why shouldn't greater strength feats for Superman (vs Hulk) only contribute to higher striking power if Superman's striking speed seems to be higher on average than Hulk's (just judging visually from a variety of strikes)?

@teefurtree: All of those examples were general, not specific to any particular circumstance. I already said my goal was merely to explain that...again...lifting strength doesn't directly correlate to striking strength. On technique, Superman employs a bit more IMO, only because many of Hulk's strikes can simply be considered mindless thrashing.

The question is on striking, so the only object we need to look at is striking. Looking at his lifting strength says nothing when we have direct feats...think about it, what is looking at a lifting strength feat even going to do for you? Are you going to argue "Superman hits way harder than we are shown on screen"? Lol we have the striking feats, we can see how hard he hits already. Arguing anything but what we are blatently shown dozens if times is pretty pointless IMO.

There's no need to look at it in parts when we see the effects firsthand: Clark can destroy a train with a guy from a few dozen meters while standing/still, and can pierce buildings and freakin punch through city-crushing gravity pulses while flying. Dragging an ocean liner is nowhere near a display of striking ability anyway, hes dragging a chain over his shoulder using mostly his back and legs. It could correlate to a massivery amount of follow through, but we can simply look at his striking feats to see exactly how much follow through he has instead of guessing from a lifting feat that is only part of the equation.

At his best, Hulk's strikes are probably better from a standstill with his Leviathan feat, but the flying brick tactic is still a strike so overall Superman is well beyond him. Ignoring the flying brick would be literally taking away a strike technique, like saying Bruce Lee can't use roundhouse kicks in a striking contest. This is speed trumping power, btw: like it or not, Hulk has the better standing feat (the stronger "punch"), but using all he has, Superman can hit much harder (the stronger "strike").

My interest is less in how this applies here specifically and more in ensuring we all understand the difference. It's pretty critical to understand fundementals like lifting/striking feats.

@thelocust619: yea hopefully in Thor 3 gulf gets some good striking feats

Considering the Hulkbuster's only opponent was Hulk himself, that's not saying much.

@mk39: Also considering Hulk was ripping the Hulkbuster apart and tanked a skyscraper busting attack and was only brought down by a sicker punch whilst in the state of depowering.....

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like what you're saying is, "Hulk is not stronger than Hulkbuster. Hulk buster is not strong so Hulk is not strong." But between the two of them, Hulk is the one that has feats independent of that fight scene. We should be using Hulk to judge Hulkbuster's strength, not the other way around.

• I definitely wasted time with a person who believe strength has nothing to do with punching and can't accept that his statement is a mistake.
• Have a good day or night.

1. Really 1 ton tank can do better damage than that flying fish did to this building.
2. I am pretty sure u any of the class u mentioned above !!!
3. And u need to explain why it didn't demolished this building when it died , if l u have attended any of those classes u mentioned above ??!!