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
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
Who wins?
Gorgosaurus libratus 5 (100%)
Rajasaurus narmadensis 0 (0%)
Total Votes: 5
Gorgosaurus libratus v Rajasaurus narmadensis
Topic Started: Mar 8 2012, 08:26 PM (8,797 Views)
Taipan
Member Avatar
Administrator

Gorgosaurus libratus
Gorgosaurus is a genus of tyrannosaurid theropod dinosaur that lived in western North America during the Late Cretaceous Period, between about 76.5 and 75 million years ago. Fossil remains have been found in the Canadian province of Alberta and possibly the U.S. state of Montana. Paleontologists recognize only the type species, G. libratus, although other species have been erroneously referred to the genus. Like most known tyrannosaurids, Gorgosaurus was a bipedal predator weighing more than a metric ton as an adult; dozens of large, sharp teeth lined its jaws, while its two-fingered forelimbs were comparatively small. Gorgosaurus was most closely related to Albertosaurus, and more distantly related to the larger Tyrannosaurus. Gorgosaurus was smaller than Tyrannosaurus or Tarbosaurus, closer in size to Albertosaurus and Daspletosaurus. Adults reached 8 or 9 meters (26 to 30 ft) from snout to tail. Paleontologists have estimated full-grown adults to weigh more than 2.4 tonnes (2.7 short tons). The largest known skull measures 99 centimeters (39 in) long, just slightly smaller than that of Daspletosaurus.

Posted Image

Rajasaurus narmadensis
Rajasaurus was an abelisaurid, a member of a group of theropod predators known to have lived only on landmasses that were part of the supercontinent Gondwana, such as Africa, India, Madagascar, and South America. Rajasaurus closely resembles Majungasaurus, a contemporary abelisaur from Madagascar, an island that had separated from the Indian landmass about 20 million years earlier.[4] It was found to be an abelisaurid through a phylogenetic analysis of anatomical characteristics, and was described as a carnotaurine abelisaurid (the subfamily including Carnotaurus) because of the configuration of its nasal bones and its possession of a growth ("excrescence") on its frontal bone. Rajasaurus is distinguished from other genera by its single nasal-frontal horn, the elongated proportions of its supratemporal fenestrae (holes in the upper rear of the skull), and the form of the ilia (principle bones of the hip) which feature a transverse ridge separating the brevis shelf from the hip joint. Rajasaurus was identified from a partial skeleton including a well–preserved skull (with a complete braincase and 70% of the rest of the skull bones recovered), hip bones and parts of the hind legs, backbone and tail. This specimen, GSI 21141/1–33, serves as the type specimen of the genus and species. Rajasaurus measured about 7.6–9 m (24.9–29.5 ft) long, 2.4 m (7.9 ft) in height, and weighed about 3 to 4 tons. The skull was short, measuring 60 cm (23.6 in) in length, and bore a distinctive low rounded horn. This horn is made up of outgrowths from the nasal and frontal bones.

Posted Image

___________________________________________________________________

ShadowPredator
Mar 8 2012, 12:31 PM
Rajasaurus vs Gorgosaurus
Edited by Taipan, Nov 13 2016, 01:34 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SameerPrehistorica
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Rajasaurus being slightly heavier...eventhough 50 / 50
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Palaeogirl
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Rajasaurus 70/30. Gorgosaurus could do a lot of damage, though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DinosaurMichael
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Gorgosaurus wins. Being a Tyrannosaurid. It has more advantages such as a bone crushing bite, and being more robust. Rajasaurus though bigger had pretty weak jaws and due to being an abelisaurid. It's arms would be too short to help it win as well.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megafelis Fatalis
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
DinosaurMichael
Mar 9 2012, 08:03 AM
Gorgosaurus wins. Being a Tyrannosaurid. It has more advantages such as a bone crushing bite, and being more robust. Rajasaurus though bigger had pretty weak jaws and due to being an abelisaurid. It's arms would be too short to help it win as well.
Abelisaurs have a very robust and thick bones, similar to Tyrannosaurs, but there bites are no match for Tyrannosaurs's bite, so Gorgosaurus wins 60% IMO.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wolf Eagle
Member Avatar
M E G A P H Y S E T E R
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think Gorgosaurus wins here. The Rajasaurus would have had a very weak bite, not comparable to that of the Tyrannosaur.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DinosaurMichael
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Prehistoric Cat
Mar 9 2012, 04:24 PM
DinosaurMichael
Mar 9 2012, 08:03 AM
Gorgosaurus wins. Being a Tyrannosaurid. It has more advantages such as a bone crushing bite, and being more robust. Rajasaurus though bigger had pretty weak jaws and due to being an abelisaurid. It's arms would be too short to help it win as well.
Abelisaurs have a very robust and thick bones, similar to Tyrannosaurs, but there bites are no match for Tyrannosaurs's bite, so Gorgosaurus wins 60% IMO.
Really? Thanks for telling me. I give Rajasaurus a bit of a chance now, but I still think Gorgosaurus would win this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShadowPredator
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
50/50, this trannosaur being an Albertosaurid it's more gracile than other tyrannosaurs,
So Rajasaurus would be Larger, more robust and powerful, it's head is more suited to ramming, and its tail is probably better to be used as a weapon, but the Gorgosaurus is quite a bit faster and more agile with that powerful bite.
This fight could go 100s of directions, the Gorgosaurus could kill with a quick bite to the throat or the Rajasaurus could win by ramming the gorgo down and crushing it,
Ambush-Raja
Face to face- 50/50
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Temnospondyl
Stegocephalia specialist.
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Who has their scale?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Rajasaurus is much more heavily-built, and larger, so Rajasaurus has the advantage, bite isn't everything

Gorgosaurus = 8-9 meters long, 2.4 tonnes
Rajasaurus = 7.6-9 meters long, 3-4 tonnes

62/38 in favor of Rajasaurus imo
Edited by SpinoInWonderland, Aug 25 2012, 11:40 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carcharadon
Member Avatar
Shark Toothed Reptile
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
brolyeuphyfusion
Aug 25 2012, 02:01 AM
Rajasaurus is much more heavily-built, and larger, so Rajasaurus has the advantage, bite isn't everything

Daspletosaurus = 8-9 meters long, 2.5 tonnes
Rajasaurus = 7.6-9 meters long, 3-4 tonnes

62/38 in favor of Rajasaurus imo
This is Gorgosaurus, not Daspletosaurus.
Edited by Carcharadon, Nov 13 2012, 08:14 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Seriously, the one hates tyrannosaurs and the other-one overrates them in exchange. there is no way daspletosaurus would "devastate Rajasaurus"

I think this is 50/50. Rajasaurus bite certainly could compare to that of Gorgosaurus, why should it have been "very weak"? it was the more massive animal, but the tyrannosaur was faster and more agile.

Does this skull look weak to you?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dark allosaurus
Aug 25 2012, 06:48 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Aug 25 2012, 02:01 AM
Rajasaurus is much more heavily-built, and larger, so Rajasaurus has the advantage, bite isn't everything

Daspletosaurus = 8-9 meters long, 2.5 tonnes
Rajasaurus = 7.6-9 meters long, 3-4 tonnes

62/38 in favor of Rajasaurus imo
This is Gorgosaurus, not Daspletosaurus.
lol, my mistake, edited it
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fishfreak
Member Avatar
Friend of the fish
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
50/50 slightly leaning towards raja. Gorgo is faster, more agile, whereas raja is bigger and more robust, and IMO both have equal weaponry
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Verdugo
Member Avatar
Large Carnivores Enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Prehistoric Cat
Mar 9 2012, 04:24 PM
DinosaurMichael
Mar 9 2012, 08:03 AM
Gorgosaurus wins. Being a Tyrannosaurid. It has more advantages such as a bone crushing bite, and being more robust. Rajasaurus though bigger had pretty weak jaws and due to being an abelisaurid. It's arms would be too short to help it win as well.
Abelisaurs have a very robust and thick bones, similar to Tyrannosaurs, but there bites are no match for Tyrannosaurs's bite, so Gorgosaurus wins 60% IMO.
How many time do i have to cite that Abelisaurids have WEAK bite, probably even weaker than a same size Carnosaur. Abelisaurids are built to bite fast (due to their short jaw and powerful jaw muscles), but their mobile, flexible lower jaw don't allow to bite hard. This is for the last time
Andrea Cau
 
Not all theropodi have the mandibular joint developed in the same way. The condition Monolophosaurus (Currie & Zhao, 1993) can be considered "classic", found in many other taxa, such as Dilophosaurus, the dromaeosauri and allosauroidi.
The condition in Majungasaurus (and in all known abelisauroidi) represents the evolution of the extreme mobility of the joint intramandibolare. Similarly as in snakes, the joint surfaces between the red and yellow are minimized, and the mandibular outer window (not visible in these images) is very wide. The result is a bite easily distensible, but relatively weak as power. Therefore, it is plausible that the mandible of abelisauri was very effective to grasp and adapt to relatively large prey whole, but on the whole was rather weak, and unable to generate and sustain forces. The reduction of the length of the skull, combined with the development of temporal muscles, therefore indicating a quick bite, but not particularly powerful. As I have discussed in other posts, it is the muscles of the neck, well developed to generate lateral forces, to be appointed to be shaken vigorously prey. In the absence of adaptations brontofagici allosauroidi at the base of the skull, but I do feel that abelisauridi were not specialized to tear large sections of tissue from prey of great size. However, this is by no means a deficit predatory: it is probable that any animal that fell into the mug these theropodi (and the list is long: the young sauropods crocodiles, ornithischi theropodi and medium-sized) was a potential prey for abelisauridi, which easily gripped the prey thanks to the great mobility of the body and shook vigorously before swallow almost whole.


Posted Image

BTW, does anyone feel Rajasaurus weight is overestimated, how can a 9m Abelisaurid weigh almost twice as much as a 9m Tyrannosaurids (heavily built one like Daspletosaurus)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.