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
Carcharodontosaurus saharicus v Tyrannosaurus rex
Topic Started: Jun 8 2012, 05:34 PM (130,005 Views)
Taipan
Member Avatar
Administrator

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus
This huge meat eater was 45 feet long (5 feet longer than T-rex) and weighed 8 tons, making it one of the largest carnivores that ever walked the earth. This African carnosaur had a gigantic 5’4" long skull and enormous jaws with 8" long serrated teeth. It walked on two legs, had a massive tail, bulky body and short arms ending in three-fingered hands with sharp claws. Carcharodontosaurus is one of the longest and heaviest known carnivorous dinosaurs, with various scientists proposing length estimates ranging between 12 and 13 m (39-43.5 ft) and weight estimates between 6 and 15 metric tons. Its long, muscular legs, and fossilized trackways indicate that it could run about 20 miles per hour, though there is some controversy as to whether it actually did, a forward fall would have been deadly to Carcharodontosaurus, due to the inability of its small arms to brace the animal when it landed. Carcharodontosaurus was a carnivore, with enormous jaws and long, serrated teeth up to eight inches long.

Posted Image

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

_________________________________________________________________________________

Blue orca
 
Tyrannosaurs Rex vs Carcharodontosaurus
Edited by Taipan, Apr 24 2015, 10:18 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dark allosaurus
Nov 21 2012, 07:02 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Nov 20 2012, 09:40 PM
Bite force actually matters, it is not everything, but I won't call it unimportant, because T-rex too has serrated teeth and Carcharodontosaurus' teeth may be sharper at the edges, but I don't think it overcomes the advantages of tooth lengh and bite force, bite damage is a factor in favour of T-rex, tough I thing the gape advantage will overcome that. The one who gets the first bite wins. I'm not sure who it is going to be, but I give T-rex an ege, because of the binuclear vision and it can attack the face, so I'm leaning towards it, but this is a close fight.
bite force does NOT matter at ALL.

Well then by your logic, a komodo dragon's bite is useless without venom? It is not.
Bite force does matter, but it depends on the dentition. T. rex would be pretty helpless without a strong bite as it has teeth requiring a lot of force. a carcharodontosaur ahs sharper teeth and thus it doesn´t need a strong bite force. Bite force is important in two animals with similar jaw designs, it is not important if they use different techniques for dealing damage like in this case. However generally claiming bite force wouldn´t matter is wrong, it does, but how much is needed depends on other factors as well.

You still need force anyway, but with sharper teeth the amount of force shrinks, this is why Carcharodontosaurus bite force can be thrice weaker but still allow an equally dangerous bite.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fist of the North Shrimp
vá á orminum
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Also, I want to apologise to Black Ice,
sometimes sarcasm is hard to understand on the web, And I did not knew what his actual intentions were.
The whole problem lay in my interpretation of theropods post, which was not was he actual meant.
@ theropod, I know some stuff about upcoming phylogenies of Allosauroidae, and it will be pretty interesting, though atm I have to keep quiet about this.
Edited by Fist of the North Shrimp, Nov 21 2012, 08:56 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fragillimus335
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Dark allosaurus
Nov 21 2012, 07:02 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Nov 20 2012, 09:40 PM
Bite force actually matters, it is not everything, but I won't call it unimportant, because T-rex too has serrated teeth and Carcharodontosaurus' teeth may be sharper at the edges, but I don't think it overcomes the advantages of tooth lengh and bite force, bite damage is a factor in favour of T-rex, tough I thing the gape advantage will overcome that. The one who gets the first bite wins. I'm not sure who it is going to be, but I give T-rex an ege, because of the binuclear vision and it can attack the face, so I'm leaning towards it, but this is a close fight.
bite force does NOT matter at ALL.

Well then by your logic, a komodo dragon's bite is useless without venom? It is not.

Some animals have relatively weak bites in terms of crushing but some are still capable of delivering nasty bites. That is the reason why bite force dont really matter
Don't be silly, of course bite force matters. Would you rather get bitten by an alligator, or a different alligator with a bite only half as strong? I am not a Tyrannosaurus lover, but its bite was tremendously strong, and could have likely crushed a similarly sized theropods neck with a few bites.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tooth type matters more than bite force...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
A bone crushing bite is far more deadlier than a razor sharp bite, the former can quickly disable the opponent if aimed to the neck, the latter would have to cause as much bleeding as possible while not disabling the opponent instantly. Imagine either predator had a bite to each others neck, Carchy would be the first to fall down, simple as that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
bone crusher
Nov 21 2012, 07:06 PM
A bone crushing bite is far more deadlier than a razor sharp bite, the former can quickly disable the opponent if aimed to the neck, the latter would have to cause as much bleeding as possible while not disabling the opponent instantly. Imagine either predator had a bite to each others neck, Carchy would be the first to fall down, simple as that.
If Carcharodontosaurus bit the Tyrannosaurus in the neck, the carnosaur can destroy the Tyrannosaurus' jugular vein, and it's to the afterlife for Tyrannosaurus...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
mantis: I´m looking forward to it!

bone crusher: sorry, that´s frankly nonsense. Slicing teeth can also cause quick dead and if carcharodontosaurus bit T. rex throat it would be over for the tyrant. by your logic being bitten to the neck by a shark your size wouldn´t kill you instantly?

Fragillimus: that´s what I meant as well, if two animals have the same tooth design the bite force matters a lot, but it is rather pointless to use it as a factor in a case were one simply doesn´t require as much force.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Verdugo
Member Avatar
Large Carnivores Enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
brolyeuphyfusion
Nov 21 2012, 07:29 PM
bone crusher
Nov 21 2012, 07:06 PM
A bone crushing bite is far more deadlier than a razor sharp bite, the former can quickly disable the opponent if aimed to the neck, the latter would have to cause as much bleeding as possible while not disabling the opponent instantly. Imagine either predator had a bite to each others neck, Carchy would be the first to fall down, simple as that.
If Carcharodontosaurus bit the Tyrannosaurus in the neck, the carnosaur can destroy the Tyrannosaurus' jugular vein, and it's to the afterlife for Tyrannosaurus...
If T rex bit Carcharodontosaurus neck, Carcharodontosaurus vertebrate would be shattered in pieces
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Archosaur
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Verdugo
Nov 21 2012, 10:46 PM
brolyeuphyfusion
Nov 21 2012, 07:29 PM
bone crusher
Nov 21 2012, 07:06 PM
A bone crushing bite is far more deadlier than a razor sharp bite, the former can quickly disable the opponent if aimed to the neck, the latter would have to cause as much bleeding as possible while not disabling the opponent instantly. Imagine either predator had a bite to each others neck, Carchy would be the first to fall down, simple as that.
If Carcharodontosaurus bit the Tyrannosaurus in the neck, the carnosaur can destroy the Tyrannosaurus' jugular vein, and it's to the afterlife for Tyrannosaurus...
If T rex bit Carcharodontosaurus neck, Carcharodontosaurus vertebrate would be shattered in pieces
T rex has a clear advantage in bite. It's skull is massively constructed in order to produce a tremendous bite force and sustain the forces generated by a struggling prey. Also tyrannosaurids in general had much more powerfull neck muscles and robust neck vertebra than carcharodontosaurids. Also we should consider tooth morphology, t rex teeth had a taller-wider crown, bigger roots but also had serrations, which means that can penetrate and rip flesh efficiently. Carcha was not well adapted to kill a prey item as fast as t rex. It's skull and mandible was not adapted to handle the stresses of biting on a struggling animal for a prolonged time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Archosaur
Nov 21 2012, 11:39 PM
Verdugo
Nov 21 2012, 10:46 PM
brolyeuphyfusion
Nov 21 2012, 07:29 PM
bone crusher
Nov 21 2012, 07:06 PM
A bone crushing bite is far more deadlier than a razor sharp bite, the former can quickly disable the opponent if aimed to the neck, the latter would have to cause as much bleeding as possible while not disabling the opponent instantly. Imagine either predator had a bite to each others neck, Carchy would be the first to fall down, simple as that.
If Carcharodontosaurus bit the Tyrannosaurus in the neck, the carnosaur can destroy the Tyrannosaurus' jugular vein, and it's to the afterlife for Tyrannosaurus...
If T rex bit Carcharodontosaurus neck, Carcharodontosaurus vertebrate would be shattered in pieces
T rex has a clear advantage in bite. It's skull is massively constructed in order to produce a tremendous bite force and sustain the forces generated by a struggling prey. Also tyrannosaurids in general had much more powerfull neck muscles and robust neck vertebra than carcharodontosaurids. Also we should consider tooth morphology, t rex teeth had a taller-wider crown, bigger roots but also had serrations, which means that can penetrate and rip flesh efficiently. Carcha was not well adapted to kill a prey item as fast as t rex. It's skull and mandible was not adapted to handle the stresses of biting on a struggling animal for a prolonged time.
I hate it when people only look the advantages for one side and disadvantages for the other. Look at the pros and cons of both sides, people! Tyrannosaurus may have a strong crusher, but Carcharodontosaurus has an potent slicer!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Archosaur
Nov 21 2012, 11:39 PM
Verdugo
Nov 21 2012, 10:46 PM
brolyeuphyfusion
Nov 21 2012, 07:29 PM
bone crusher
Nov 21 2012, 07:06 PM
A bone crushing bite is far more deadlier than a razor sharp bite, the former can quickly disable the opponent if aimed to the neck, the latter would have to cause as much bleeding as possible while not disabling the opponent instantly. Imagine either predator had a bite to each others neck, Carchy would be the first to fall down, simple as that.
If Carcharodontosaurus bit the Tyrannosaurus in the neck, the carnosaur can destroy the Tyrannosaurus' jugular vein, and it's to the afterlife for Tyrannosaurus...
If T rex bit Carcharodontosaurus neck, Carcharodontosaurus vertebrate would be shattered in pieces
T rex has a clear advantage in bite. It's skull is massively constructed in order to produce a tremendous bite force and sustain the forces generated by a struggling prey. Also tyrannosaurids in general had much more powerfull neck muscles and robust neck vertebra than carcharodontosaurids. Also we should consider tooth morphology, t rex teeth had a taller-wider crown, bigger roots but also had serrations, which means that can penetrate and rip flesh efficiently. Carcha was not well adapted to kill a prey item as fast as t rex. It's skull and mandible was not adapted to handle the stresses of biting on a struggling animal for a prolonged time.
I don´t like this kind of one sided argumentation.

Carcharodontosaur swouldn´t btie and hold onto a prey item for a long time, they would deliver a fast bite and let go of it, if necessary they could still btie again as they used their forelimbs to control their position relative to prey, not solely their jaws.

T. rex wasn´t great at both and carcharodontosaurus only at slicing, this is an illogical assumption. t. rex is mainly a crusher, but it is able to tear flesh. Carcharodontosaurus is mainly a slicer, btu it could damage bones. T. rex is not great at slicing flesh AND great at crushing.


The neck muscle part is not only unbased, but also oversimplyfied. sure, its neck is mroe massive, but hat´s simply because the head is heavier. it wouldn´t have significantly greater strenght due to that, what it has on the carhcarodontosaur in neck strenght was needed to hold the heavy skull.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Verdugo
Member Avatar
Large Carnivores Enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
they would deliver a fast bite and let go of it,

There is NO evidence to claim that Carchar would bite faster than T rex. In fact, it is quite likely that T rex would bite faster, stronger jaw muscles + shorter skull and jaw allow lower moment arm than Carchar. In result T rex would likely to have quicker bite
Quote:
 
if necessary they could still btie again as they used their forelimbs to control their position relative to prey

The forelimbs are rather small, look at Giganotosaurus forelimbs, it isn't much bigger than those of Rexy.

The forelimbs which is positioned under the body would barely do crap against taller or as tall animals like T rex
Quote:
 
The neck muscle part is not only unbased, but also oversimplyfied. sure, its neck is mroe massive, but hat´s simply because the head is heavier. it wouldn´t have significantly greater strenght due to that, what it has on the carhcarodontosaur in neck strenght was needed to hold the heavy skull.

According to the new 2011 estimate, T rex neck muscles weighs up to half a tonne, yes half a tonne of pure muscles, T rex neck muscles is about half the weight of its thigh muscles.

There is a comprehensive study about Rex neck muscles which conclude that T rex neck is EXTREMELY powerful, so powerful that it could move its massive 1000+lbs head with ease, effortlessly. The neck muscles would not only allow brute force to overpower its prey, shaking its prey, pulling, tearing its prey apart but also allow it to strike fast.

The study is quite comprehensive and long, i myself don't have time to read it. So this is the link for the paper
Quote:
 
I don´t like this kind of one sided argumentation.

I agree and you (and Conherentsheaf) have convinced me. I believe that T rex would only beat Carcharodontosaurus with 60% of chance (i used to think T rex would have at least 70% of chance). After watching the freakin fearsome bite of the Komodo dragon and looking again at Carcharodontosaurus skull, i change my image about Carcharodontosauridae.

It seems likely that Carcharodontosarus killing bite in Planet dinosaur is accurate, the bite is truly deadly
Edited by Verdugo, Nov 22 2012, 01:31 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dark allosaurus
Nov 21 2012, 07:02 AM
bite force does NOT matter at ALL.
What if T-rex faces something with 10 kg bite force, I think it will loose then.
Dark_Allosaurus
 
Well then by your logic, a komodo dragon's bite is useless without venom? It is not.
T-rex CAN SLICE MEAT. Maybe the edges of it's teeth are less sharp, but it's teeth are much sharper than in crocodiles and these can kill animals. T-rex teeth really aren't that blunt and they are serrated at both sides (like those of Carcharodontosaurus), so how they can't slice meat? And it's gape really isn't THAT terrible. Maybe Carcharodontosaurus gape and it's more flexible neck allows it to get a faster bite, but perception trough vision isn't less helpful. Maybe binuclear vision is not much of an advantage, but neither gape is. Both is just for an easier hit. If they bite each others face (theropods do it sometimes), do you think bite force can be completely ignored? I never said slicing is useless (by the way, meaning something is less good≠useless, that's caricaturing it), I favour slicing over crushing, but:
T-rex tooth:
Posted Image
Carcharodontosaurus tooth:
Posted Image
WHAT makes T-rex that horrible inferior in slicing?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
brolyeuphyfusion
Nov 21 2012, 02:27 PM
Tooth type matters more than bite force...
Well, their teeth aren't that horrible different, Carcharodontosaurus teeth are slightly sharper at the edges, but both can easily cut trough meat, maybe T-rex needs more force to bring it's teeth trough skin, but it has more force. When having penetrated the skin, both will do equally well in slicing, but T-rex bite marks will be deeper and do more damage to the skeleton. It's bite isn't as fast, but the bite damage is greater. Carcharodontosaurus has the gape and the flexible neck for a fast bite, but T-rex is less likely to miss. I know, many animals don't need B-vision, but many also don't need a wide gape, so we shouldn't call all the slight advantages of T-rex worthless and all the slight advantages of Carcharodontosaurus absolutely needed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Verdugo
Nov 22 2012, 01:26 AM
Quote:
 
they would deliver a fast bite and let go of it,

There is NO evidence to claim that Carchar would bite faster than T rex. In fact, it is quite likely that T rex would bite faster, stronger jaw muscles + shorter skull and jaw allow lower moment arm than Carchar. In result T rex would likely to have quicker bite
Quote:
 
if necessary they could still btie again as they used their forelimbs to control their position relative to prey

The forelimbs are rather small, look at Giganotosaurus forelimbs, it isn't much bigger than those of Rexy.

The forelimbs which is positioned under the body would barely do crap against taller or as tall animals like T rex
Quote:
 
The neck muscle part is not only unbased, but also oversimplyfied. sure, its neck is mroe massive, but hat´s simply because the head is heavier. it wouldn´t have significantly greater strenght due to that, what it has on the carhcarodontosaur in neck strenght was needed to hold the heavy skull.

According to the new 2011 estimate, T rex neck muscles weighs up to half a tonne, yes half a tonne of pure muscles, T rex neck muscles is about half the weight of its thigh muscles.

There is a comprehensive study about Rex neck muscles which conclude that T rex neck is EXTREMELY powerful, so powerful that it could move its massive 1000+lbs head with ease, effortlessly. The neck muscles would not only allow brute force to overpower its prey, shaking its prey, pulling, tearing its prey apart but also allow it to strike fast.

The study is quite comprehensive and long, i myself don't have time to read it. So this is the link for the paper
Quote:
 
I don´t like this kind of one sided argumentation.

I agree and you (and Conherentsheaf) have convinced me. I believe that T rex would only beat Carcharodontosaurus with 60% of chance (i used to think T rex would have at least 70% of chance). After watching the freakin fearsome bite of the Komodo dragon and looking again at Carcharodontosaurus skull, i change my image about Carcharodontosauridae.

It seems likely that Carcharodontosarus killing bite in Planet dinosaur is accurate, the bite is truly deadly
Quote:
 
There is NO evidence to claim that Carchar would bite faster than T rex. In fact, it is quite likely that T rex would bite faster, stronger jaw muscles + shorter skull and jaw allow lower moment arm than Carchar. In result T rex would likely to have quicker bite


would you mind reading and complaining about what I wrote afterwards instead of reacting to things I actually didn´t write?

I wrote the following:
Quote:
 
...they would deliver a fast bite...


Now in which univeres is Fast=/=faster than that of animal X?
It looks as if you are getting defensive without even a reason.

but yes, Carcharodontosaurus would likely have the faster bite, as we are already talking about that. The skull is simply far lighter and narrower, once more needing less force to move, and the jaw muscle strenght doesn´t affect the result, its the neck which moves the skull, and obviously the inertia of a carcharodontosaurus skull is far lower than that of t. rex as it is NOT reinforced against lateral movements, simply because it doesn´t have to use its jaws to restrain the prey. being aroudn 20cm longer wouldn´t change that.

Quote:
 
The forelimbs are rather small, look at Giganotosaurus forelimbs, it isn't much bigger than those of Rexy.

The forelimbs which is positioned under the body would barely do crap against taller or as tall animals like T rex

Very funny, they haven´t even been found! The forelimb size of Carcharodontosaurus and Giganotosaurus is entirely speculative, but basing on Acrocanthosaurus (NCSM 14345 does have a 37cm humerus, and it is only 11,5m long. the arms are a good deal larger than in T. rex and the manus is less reduced, even tough the animal is smaller) they are FAR FAR FAR.... larger than those of T. rex, even tough smaller than those of Allosaurus.

And T. rex isn´t taller.

Quote:
 
According to the new 2011 estimate, T rex neck muscles weighs up to half a tonne, yes half a tonne of pure muscles, T rex neck muscles is about half the weight of its thigh muscles.

There is a comprehensive study about Rex neck muscles which conclude that T rex neck is EXTREMELY powerful, so powerful that it could move its massive 1000+lbs head with ease, effortlessly. The neck muscles would not only allow brute force to overpower its prey, shaking its prey, pulling, tearing its prey apart but also allow it to strike fast.

You mean the estimate generally overestimating the size compared to other estimates, the study whose modely look like this:
Posted Image
Models from the study (estimating limb and body dimensions in tyrannosaurus...) which is CC, skeletal C. scott hartman, no infridgement intended-for comparisonal puposes only
see the difference? I know why I don´t believe in that reconstruction...

Strike fast is out of question, but faster than a carcharodontosaurid? Evidence? You are basically claiming it would both be tremendously strong and extremely fast, superior in both, basing merely on the assumption carcharodontosaurus would have far smaller neck muscles which isn´t studied but unlikely seeing giganotosaurus does even have enlarged spinous processes at the base of the neck for muscle attachment.

It remains like this; Carcharodontosaurus has a lighter skull on a probably thinner neck, built for greater speed in bite. T. rex has a thicker neck to carry a heavier skull with a greater crushing power, well designed for being used for restraining prey-something carcharodontosaurids use their arms for if necessary.

btw thanks for the paper, I´m going to read it as soon as possible.
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.