| 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: |
| Spinosaurus aegyptiacus v Tyrannosaurus rex | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM (459,345 Views) | |
| Wolf Eagle | Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM Post #1 |
![]()
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. ![]() 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).
Edited by Taipan, Apr 24 2015, 10:10 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| theropod | Sep 24 2012, 06:20 AM Post #541 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
a base that no-one would ever accept and that I personally don´t consider a base at all because of the ignorance in the calculation. you have a T. rex specimen much larger than the growth rates would predict for it´s age and then you use those exact growth rastes to calculate it´s size, assuming it grew much faster until it was 16 and then grew exactly like other specimens (still a population too small to have reliable data on the growth patterns btw). |
![]() |
|
| Fist of the North Shrimp | Sep 24 2012, 07:15 AM Post #542 |
|
vá á orminum
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Keep in mind that today there are still differently sized specimens of the same species(Crocs, Humans, and whatnot), so the growthrates do not speak against a particular large specimen.
Edited by Fist of the North Shrimp, Sep 24 2012, 07:25 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Gecko | Sep 24 2012, 09:19 AM Post #543 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A better comparison would be a giant 2,000 lb Gharial and a 1000 lb American Crocodile if the size difference really was 6 m longer. After all, theropod fights were probably all biting. I don't see this being a shoving match(Which Spinosaurus would probably win if it was that big.) I think most theropod fight are down to who has the better bite(In this case Tyrannosaurus). I'm not counting Spinosaurus out, I just think even with a size advantage Spinosaurus would lose this one more often then not.(But not by a lot more like a 60/40 favoring Tyrannosaurus) I'm also interested in how Spinosaurus hugely outclasses Tyrannosaurus? Spinosaurus' biggest advantage is it's mass. (It also probably had bigger arms but that's not going to make a big difference) |
![]() |
|
| Fragillimus335 | Sep 24 2012, 02:11 PM Post #544 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Due to being more than twice as heavy as Tyrannosaurus is was far superior in strength, and also due to its massive dimensions, it would be very difficult for the rex to bite, (small gape). The Spino also had a height advantage of 1.5 meters at the hips, and a bite force second only to tyrannosaurs. Similar to your comparison, a 1000 pound False gharial would destroy a 500 pound alligator. The false Gharial is a much closer analogue to Spinosaurus than an actual Gharial. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Sep 24 2012, 02:13 PM Post #545 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Remember guys, bite force isn't everything... |
![]() |
|
| Verdugo | Sep 24 2012, 02:36 PM Post #546 |
![]()
Large Carnivores Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Honestly, Spinosaurus is nowhere near as formidable as black bear, that one bad comparison. Black bear has more powerful bite than pit bull, thicker fur, hide, much bulkier -> more durable, superior grappler while pit-bull has no grappling ability, not to mention that bear is INCREDIBLY agile for their size, a PACK of wolves are unable to out maneuver 1 grizzly. Black bear outclassed in ALL aspect, black bear still win most of the time even at equal size. While Spino would lose to T rex nearly 100% if they are the same size. You underrated bear A LOT, do you need some facts to prove bear TRUE power ?? |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Sep 24 2012, 03:04 PM Post #547 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oxalaia would have been a better match for Tyrannosaurus, Spinosaurus is just too large and powerful |
![]() |
|
| Kunfuzzled | Sep 24 2012, 03:23 PM Post #548 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Definitely true, as much as I love Tyrannosaurus, I have to say that I see very little cases where an healthy adult Spinosaurus is taken down/killed by a Tyrannosaurus. Although pound for pound Tyrannosaurus was stronger than Spinosaurus, the vast difference in size will inevitably result in Spinosaurus's victor 85+% of the time. Oxalaia is definitely in the size range where Tyrannosaurus would stand a much better chance |
![]() |
|
| Fragillimus335 | Sep 24 2012, 03:57 PM Post #549 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think bears are very powerful! I was illustrating the amount of a mismatch this battle is by comparing the combatants to modern day animals. An 18 meter Spinosaurus and a 12.2 meter Tyrannosaurus. Spinosaurus is just to big for Tyrannosaurus, mismatch, Spino 95%. ![]() Spino by Broly Edited by Fragillimus335, Sep 24 2012, 04:09 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Verdugo | Sep 24 2012, 07:38 PM Post #550 |
![]()
Large Carnivores Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I won't discuss about the size scale, it's too biased for me |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Sep 24 2012, 09:55 PM Post #551 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^it isn´t, it is far less biased than using the largest confirmed out of 31 specimens against the most conservative figure for the only adult spinosaurus... |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Sep 24 2012, 10:13 PM Post #552 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There is a long time I don't trust broly scales. Too much fiction for my taste.
Edited by Grey, Sep 24 2012, 10:16 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Sep 24 2012, 10:40 PM Post #553 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I made that Spinosaurus as a 17-meter individual, not an 18-meter one I hate conservatives, always assuming that the 175 cm skull belongs to a 14-meter individual... while ignoring the skull:body ratio of other spinosaurids... Grey, you are the one fantasizing, not me. You are always picking the most conservative Spinosaurus estimates, and you always have your info spoon-fed to you. You are so stuck to the "Tyrannosaurus is the king, the most best dinosaur of all universe, and the most strongest!" statement, that you just can't handle an animal that would destroy your precious Tyrannosaurus rather easily |
![]() |
|
| Fragillimus335 | Sep 24 2012, 10:58 PM Post #554 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In my scale I'm comparing a 12.2 meter Tyrannosaurus, which would be in the top 5 largest Tyrannosaurs known to science, even if we include some of the dubious freaks, with an 18 meter Spinosaurus. A slightly above average estimate of the only adult Spinosaurus specimen we have. Does this make you feel any better, this scale shows the largest confirmed Tyrannosaurus known to science, Sue- 12.3 meters, with an average ~16.8 meter Spinosaurus. ![]() Guess who still wins. Edited by Fragillimus335, Sep 24 2012, 10:58 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Grey | Sep 24 2012, 10:58 PM Post #555 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I favor Spinosaurus over Tyrannosaurus you genius ! Only, I don't childy ridiculise T.rex when using comparisons. Edited by Grey, Sep 24 2012, 11:01 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| 2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Dinosauria light | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:24 AM Jul 14
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)



![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)







2:24 AM Jul 14