Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Spinosaurus aegyptiacus v Tyrannosaurus rex
Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM (459,380 Views)
Wolf Eagle
Member Avatar
M E G A P H Y S E T E R
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tyrannosaurus rex
Tyrannosaurus is a genus of coelurosaurian theropod dinosaur. The species Tyrannosaurus rex (rex meaning "king" in Latin), commonly abbreviated to T. rex, is a fixture in popular culture. It lived throughout what is now western North America, with a much wider range than other tyrannosaurids. Fossils are found in a variety of rock formations dating to the Maastrichtian age of the upper Cretaceous Period, 67 to 65.5 million years ago.[1] It was among the last non-avian dinosaurs to exist before the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event. Like other tyrannosaurids, Tyrannosaurus was a bipedal carnivore with a massive skull balanced by a long, heavy tail. Relative to the large and powerful hindlimbs, Tyrannosaurus forelimbs were small, though unusually powerful for their size, and bore two clawed digits. Although other theropods rivaled or exceeded Tyrannosaurus rex in size, it was the largest known tyrannosaurid and one of the largest known land predators. By far the largest carnivore in its environment, Tyrannosaurus rex may have been an apex predator, preying upon hadrosaurs and ceratopsians, although some experts have suggested it was primarily a scavenger. The debate over Tyrannosaurus as apex predator or scavenger is among the longest running in paleontology. Tyrannosaurus rex was one of the largest land carnivores of all time; the largest complete specimen, FMNH PR2081 ("Sue"), measured 12.8 metres (42 ft) long, and was 4.0 metres (13.1 ft) tall at the hips. Mass estimates have varied widely over the years, from more than 7.2 metric tons (7.9 short tons), to less than 4.5 metric tons (5.0 short tons), with most modern estimates ranging between 5.4 and 6.8 metric tons (6.0 and 7.5 short tons). Packard et al. (2009) tested dinosaur mass estimation procedures on elephants and concluded that dinosaur estimations are flawed and produce over-estimations; thus, the weight of Tyrannosaurus could be much less than usually estimated. Other estimations have concluded that the largest known Tyrannosaurus specimens had a weight exceeding 9 tonnes.

Posted Image

Spinosaurus aegyptiacus
Spinosaurus is a genus of theropod dinosaur which lived in what is now North Africa, from the lower Albian to lower Cenomanian stages of the Cretaceous period, about 112 to 97 million years ago. Spinosaurus may be the largest of all known carnivorous dinosaurs, even larger than Tyrannosaurus and Giganotosaurus. Estimates published in 2005 and 2007 suggest that it was 12.6 to 18 metres (41 to 59 ft) in length and 7 to 20.9 tonnes (7.7 to 23.0 short tons) in weight. The skull of Spinosaurus was long and narrow like that of a modern crocodilian. Spinosaurus is thought to have eaten fish; evidence suggests that it lived both on land and in water like a modern crocodilian. The distinctive spines of Spinosaurus, which were long extensions of the vertebrae, grew to at least 1.65 meters (5.4 ft) long and were likely to have had skin connecting them, forming a sail-like structure, although some authors have suggested that the spines were covered in fat and formed a hump. Multiple functions have been put forward for this structure, including thermoregulation and display. Dal Sasso et al. (2005) assumed that Spinosaurus and Suchomimus had the same body proportions in relation to their skull lengths, and thereby calculated that Spinosaurus was 16 to 18 meters (52 to 59 ft) in length and 7 to 9 tonnes (7.7 to 9.9 short tons) in weight. The Dal Sasso et al. estimates were criticized because the skull length estimate was uncertain, and (assuming that body mass increases as the cube of body length) scaling Suchomimus which was 11 meters (36 ft) long and 3.8 tonnes (4.2 short tons) in mass to the range of estimated lengths of Spinosaurus would produce an estimated body mass of 11.7 to 16.7 tonnes (12.9 to 18.4 short tons).

Posted Image
Edited by Taipan, Apr 24 2015, 10:10 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
TheROC
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
A single bite would win ONLY if it bit the neck or head.

A single bite to the flanks won't be particularly detrimental, seeing as T.Rex cannot open its mouth very wide and Spinosaurus' flanks are much wider than the maximum gape of its mouth. They'll be 'pinching' bites with its front teeth at best, which won't go deep at all by virtue.

On the other hand, Spinosaurus' at least double weight advantage, will allow it to knock the Rex down. And a knockdown would be guaranteed win, as that fall alone will be enough to break the T.Rex's ribs.

Both are lumbering, neither can turn quick, so there will be no 'outmaneuvering' at this size scale. Neither will be able to avoid contact with the other if they only start, say, 10 meters apart.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Superpredator
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If spino can land a hit on the t.rex's head or neck with those claws game over. But if t.rex dodges those and bites the head, neck or if he rips of the sail t.rex will win. I say t.rex 6/10
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pliosaur
Member Avatar
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
I'm not sure that the size of spinosaurus is such an advantage its center of gravity is higher to that of the trex and since it is biped,it could more easy fall by a ram from it opponent.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Taurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Also the long spines is another disadvantage for a Spino, it limited Spino's mobility.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Apex
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The size advantage is way too great trex is overrated severely
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drift
Member Avatar
High Spined Lizard
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
apexpredator7
Jan 14 2012, 01:38 AM
The size advantage is way too great trex is overrated severely
I think the alleged size difference is what makes the spino overrated IMO
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SameerPrehistorica
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Tyrannosaurus would win mostly if the Spinosaurus weighs equally or a bit more..But its not possible to beat a 20 tonne Spinosaurus because size always matters.That is thrice the size of T.Rex. Recently read a news that T.Rex weighs more than thought. It seems T.Rex weighs 10 tonnes.Not sure if it is the average weight of female T.Rex or its just some female T.Rex weighs 10 tonnes.Eventhough Spinosaurus is twice the size.


90 % win for Tyrannosaurus ( 6 tonnes ) against Spinosaurus ( 6 tonnes or more )

25 % win for Tyrannosaurus ( 6 tonnes ) against Spinosaurus ( 20 tonnes )

75 % win for Tyrannosaurus ( 10 tonnes ) against Spinosaurus (10 tonnes or more )

50 % win for Tyrannosaurus ( 10 tonnes ) against Spinosaurus ( 20 tonnes )


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
genao87
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Drift
Jan 15 2012, 10:44 AM
apexpredator7
Jan 14 2012, 01:38 AM
The size advantage is way too great trex is overrated severely
I think the alleged size difference is what makes the spino overrated IMO
How you figure that? Any animal that is much larger than its opponent will most likely be the victor. Huge plant eaters such as Argentinosaurus didnt have much defense such has horns or ramming ability. They grew so big that no predator will be able to touch them.

Even with the size advantage, you guys pick T. Rex, and that is even against other animals that outweigh it more than twice its size.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
genao87
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
SameerPrehistorica
Jan 15 2012, 10:41 PM
Tyrannosaurus would win mostly if the Spinosaurus weighs equally or a bit more..But its not possible to beat a 20 tonne Spinosaurus because size always matters.That is thrice the size of T.Rex. Recently read a news that T.Rex weighs more than thought. It seems T.Rex weighs 10 tonnes.Not sure if it is the average weight of female T.Rex or its just some female T.Rex weighs 10 tonnes.Eventhough Spinosaurus is twice the size.


90 % win for Tyrannosaurus ( 6 tonnes ) against Spinosaurus ( 6 tonnes or more )

25 % win for Tyrannosaurus ( 6 tonnes ) against Spinosaurus ( 20 tonnes )

75 % win for Tyrannosaurus ( 10 tonnes ) against Spinosaurus (10 tonnes or more )

50 % win for Tyrannosaurus ( 10 tonnes ) against Spinosaurus ( 20 tonnes )




That is a new calculation that estimated T. Rex to be 9 tons, that same calculation will be applied to others such as Spino, Carcha, Giga. All dinos are heavier under this new method.

How you figure 25% win for T. Rex if it weigh 6 tons against 20 tons Spino? At that size difference you would be lucky if there is 1% on T. Rex size. The same goes for the 10 ton vs 20 ton estimate. T. Rex has small chance, you talking about facing an animal twice its size. At that size as well, both would be slow and heck man, it would be two rocks colliding, the larger rock would win the majority, practically all the time at size difference.
Edited by genao87, Jan 15 2012, 11:23 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Taurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
^ it don't say that it will applied to other theropods as the article do not mention of this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SameerPrehistorica
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Taurus
Jan 16 2012, 12:32 AM
^ it don't say that it will applied to other theropods as the article do not mention of this.
Ya, I didn't heard that too...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Apex
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Drift
Jan 15 2012, 10:44 AM
apexpredator7
Jan 14 2012, 01:38 AM
The size advantage is way too great trex is overrated severely
I think the alleged size difference is what makes the spino overrated IMO
spino overatted :huh: , trex is overated infact the most overated thing EVER so many people dote on it because of it being the top carnivore in their childhood this needs be got over seriosly how can you say spino is overated against a trex???? trex used to be the best predator but now animals have been discovered which are superior
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
genao87
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Taurus
Jan 16 2012, 12:32 AM
^ it don't say that it will applied to other theropods as the article do not mention of this.
It is just a new calculation method to measure the size of dinosaurs. It does not apply to just one animal. Yeah that precise article doesnt talk about it, but this new method was discussed in detailed before this forum went down, well the old forum.

If this is correct, dinosaurs weigh more than what we thought, though not much more.


-Genao87
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DinoLord
Member Avatar
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
T. rex has an advantage. Spinosaurus was a fish eater. Its jaws were made for grasping slippery fish, not attacking large dinosaurs. Ever seen a Spinosaurus tooth? It's like that of a gharial, which aren't exactly known for their strong bites. T. rex had a very strong bite, and was even used to fighting other theropods (T. rex skulls have been found with healed bite marks from other T. rex). The only thing Spinosaurus would have going for it are its size and its arms. If the two were to actually meet, T. rex would likely back off before any confrontation started.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Taurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
genao87
Jan 16 2012, 04:28 AM
Taurus
Jan 16 2012, 12:32 AM
^ it don't say that it will applied to other theropods as the article do not mention of this.
It is just a new calculation method to measure the size of dinosaurs. It does not apply to just one animal. Yeah that precise article doesnt talk about it, but this new method was discussed in detailed before this forum went down, well the old forum.

If this is correct, dinosaurs weigh more than what we thought, though not much more.


It don't say that the new calculation method will applied to other dinosaurs (which comes in various sizes, length and height?)....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.