| 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: |
| Carcharodontosaurus saharicus v Tyrannosaurus rex | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 8 2012, 05:34 PM (129,997 Views) | |
| Taipan | Jun 8 2012, 05:34 PM Post #1 |
![]()
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. ![]() 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. ![]() _________________________________________________________________________________
Edited by Taipan, Apr 24 2015, 10:18 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Verdugo | Dec 9 2012, 11:09 PM Post #436 |
![]()
Large Carnivores Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Regarding with the 17m Spinosaurus, the latest estimates from scientists don't seem to support it _ Andrea Cau (2008):
![]() http://s6.postimage.org/43c62fan5/Spinosaurus_Theropod_Blogspot_Version2.jpg _ Dave Hone (2008-2011): ![]() http://s6.postimage.org/kfm7s5oyp/David_Hone_Spino_size.png _ Greg Paul (2010): ![]() http://s6.postimage.org/ho2y1jqg1/Spinosaurus_Greg_Paul.png _ Tom Holtz (2012): ![]() http://s6.postimage.org/d0wvzs335/Spinosaurus_Holtz.png Spinosaurus holotype is said to be 14m which is larger than other Theropod, including T rex. But it is likely to be over-exaggerated Let see Andrea Cau compare Spinosaurus holotype with Sue
http://s6.postimage.org/c16l42nxd/dorsals.jpg http://s6.postimage.org/otzahqowx/mandibles.jpg So it seems Spinosaurus holotype isn't that big like people said. How can Spinosaurus paratype come out to be that big ?, Spinosaurus paratype is only 20% bigger than the holotype.
Have you read it ?. Read it again carefully man, if you lazy reading it, then i have an overall summary for you
Understand now ?? |
![]() |
|
| Verdugo | Dec 9 2012, 11:31 PM Post #437 |
![]()
Large Carnivores Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
T rex neck muscles would be very massive, probably much more than those of Carnosaur
T rex neck muscles would be much thicker if you look at it from above ![]() http://s6.postimage.org/62xd7kuch/Theropod_neck_muscles.png ![]() ![]() ^ Giga and Carchar would likely to have slightly thicker neck than Allosaurus, but definitely nowhere near as massive as T rex ![]() ^ If you does notice, even the T rex in the scale is a meter shorter, it still have significantly thicker cerval vertebrate. At size parity, T rex neck would be much more massive than those of Carnosaur |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 9 2012, 11:55 PM Post #438 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^I do totally understand your points, but that isn´t the same as agreeing with them. More on the spinosaurus issue later, lets first take the neck muscles: Did you ever see me doubting that T. rex had huge neck muscles and a robust neck? NO, I never did, but I doubt that relative to the skull weight Tyrannosaurs have much stronger necks,a dn that´s the functional strenght it will in the end be able to use. The neck is undeniably thicker than that of a carnosaur, but it isn´t double the thickness or something like that, and it appears visually even more impressive than it is, due to the different posture it is shown in. Edited by theropod, Dec 10 2012, 12:01 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 10 2012, 12:12 AM Post #439 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
about Spinosaurus: http://home.comcast.net/~eoraptor/Megalosauroidea.htm#Spinosaurusaegyptiacus
http://www.reocities.com/Athens/bridge/4602/spinoskull.pdf
Compare that to other theropods proportions and you might ultimately understand what I mean, in order for Spinosaurus to be as small as you state and as some assume because they want to be cautious it has to differ a lot from its relatives. So do not claim a size estimate that is supported by the proportions of related animals to be debunked, jsut because some choose to reconstruct it shorter. |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Dec 10 2012, 12:27 AM Post #440 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Theropod you must also realize this is only the lateral view, you have to measure it cubically. T rex neck is also thicker from top and front view too hence the fact it's whole neck volume is much thicker. Gregory S Paul mentioned in his book that t rex has the most reinforced and bulldog like S curved neck of any theropod dinosaurs, you can even see how much bigger its cervical vertebrae are in comparison. Your analogy of heavier skull means extra strength needed to support it is somewhat flawed. Yes, you do need that extra strength to carry the extra weight but the total power which it exerts is still vastly superior to a weaker and slender set of neck. Just compare a lion's neck to a leopard's neck, sure the lion has to carry the much heavier head but we all know which cat can pull a buffalo carcass by itself using its neck power. About speed, even Hartman gave his nod to T Rex for its speed over any similar sized Allosaurid. He specifically mentioned the extra large ilium of t rex gives it the extra muscle needed to move faster compared to the smaller legs of Giga. All in all Sue is heavier then giga end of story, the comparison shows giga has longer skull, femur and bigger arms but most of the other bones are bigger cubically in Sue. My personal belief is that T Rex should weigh more on average if only due to being proportionally much bulkier and robust, thus more chance to gain tonnage at same length. The only way I see Giga wins this fight is by outweighing rexy significantly. On average T Rex takes this 70/30. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 10 2012, 12:38 AM Post #441 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^Too much for me, you are just repeating the same exagerated and oversimplyfied things. sure, T. rex has a far stronger neck, as I wrote to carry a heavier head. No doubt that it was a bit stronger in that regard, as it used its skull to control its opponents. But you are totally exagerating how much stronger it was. The difference between T. rex and carch and a lion and a leopard is obvious, the lion is 2-3 times as large as the leopard, which means it is simply overall larger and stronger. What would be at parity, or if the leopard was larger? If you would happen to read my posts you knew I acknowledge T. rex was faster than Carcharodontosaurus, but that isn´t the same as being more agile. An allosaur is a different story, it is far more slender and most likely faster and actually the highly reduced ilium in Giganotosaurus is just Hartmans reconstruction, Greg Paul shows a much larger one in his skeletal. What puzzles me is how you can believe that T. rex was far more speedy AND far more bulky, powerful and heavier. if you want to use average, Giganotosaurus easily outweights Rex, what you mean is lenght parity. T. rex average was likely somewhere between 11,5 and 12m, that of Giganotosaurus most likely above 13m... |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Dec 10 2012, 12:49 AM Post #442 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
First of all Greg's drawing is outdated so we're using Hartman's for now agreed? I can believe T Rex being faster, bulkier and more powerful simply because its design. Rexy is not a scaled up carnosaur. Hartman, Paul and many others have come to this consensus, why can't you? Ok, maybe we shouldn't use average for now since we only have a handful of fully grown adult specimen of robust form for either species. But giga holotype is definitely lighter than Sue at this point do you accept? |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Dec 10 2012, 12:58 AM Post #443 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Just to complete it: ![]() Fig. 8. A–C: Lateral flesh reconstruction of neck and jaw musculature of Tyrannosaurus rex (A), Allosaurus fragilis (B), and Ceratosaurus nasicornis (C). Tendinous attachments are rendered as white. Neck muscle abbreviations are as in Figure 4. B: In Allosaurus fragilis, the novel course of m. longissimus capitis superficialis is evident. In Ceratosaurus m. longissimus capitis profundus and m. rectus capitis ventralis are restored as robust, based on the large size of their insertions. M. transversospinalis capitis has a relatively small insertion on the parietals in Ceratosarus, and this muscle is restored here as slender compared with that in Tyrannosaurus and Allosaurus. Jaw muscle contractions are: m. a.m.e. med. 5 m. adductor mandibulae externus medialis. m. a.e.s., m. adductor mandibulae externus superficialis; m. a.e. post., m. adductor mandibulae posterior; m. dep. mand., m. depressor mandibulae; m. pt. ant., pterygoideus anterior/dorsalis; m. pt. post., m. pterygoideus posterior/ventralis. BTW, here is your source: http://www.ohio.edu/people/es180210/Snively%20pdfs/snively_russell_theropod_necks.pdf |
![]() |
|
| Temnospondyl | Dec 10 2012, 01:52 AM Post #444 |
|
Stegocephalia specialist.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Looks more like allosaurus skull
|
![]() |
|
| Black Ice | Dec 10 2012, 02:02 AM Post #445 |
![]()
Drom King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You call broly a kid because he disagrees with you, not because he said T.rex is inferior to another theropod. There's nothing wrong with saying that as it's an opinion. However you seem to thunk it's a fact that T.rex is the ultimate theropod. In all seriousness before all the intelligent discussion here is overuled by fanboyism and insult I think it's better if you and others try to avoid personal insults and such when someone disagrees with your claims. Edited by Black Ice, Dec 10 2012, 02:03 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 10 2012, 03:59 AM Post #446 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This isn´t a matter of being outdated or not, it is a matter of how you choose to reconstruct it, and hartmans drawing as a matter of facts reconstructed a smaller ilium. You don´t see me using Pauls skeleton elsewhere, do you? Both are not exactly what I think this animal looked like, Pauls seems to elongated, with an exagerated head, Hartmans is imo rather a bit too short, with an artificially shortened skull. For now, I´m using Hartmans, and it is absolutely sufficient to show my points. I just think it is a rather biased opinion. Of course it isn´t an upscaled carnosaur, but as simple as that, people are all the time ignoring that while T. rex legs are proportionally longer, at compared to lenght, and the hip region more expanded, it is also overally heavier than a carnosaur of the same lenght, even more so if said carnosaur is an allosaurid. You are turning things as if T. rex was superior in everything, while everything has a downside in biology. You think it is heavier, bulkier, stronger, faster, more agile-hell, why should any theropod differ from T. rex? It is somewhat bulkier, making it less vulnerable and heavier at lenght parity. It was likely a bit faster due to its proportionally longer legs with longer tibiae. An allosaurid with its even more slender built would outrun and outmaneuver it tough, its advantages are not sufficient to allow it to be far bulkier and yet more mobile. That isn´t the same as being more agile, far faster, far bulkier, far heavier etc. as you state, is it? I do NOT accept your opinion of a 13m giganotosaurus necessarily being notably liughter than sue, no. Overall, they are similar in bulk. Your top view images don´t even show Giganotosaurus or charcharodontosaurus, and I already mentioned they lack gastralia and cannot be compared so well. Edited by theropod, Dec 10 2012, 04:03 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| CrazyFish | Dec 10 2012, 07:27 AM Post #447 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hey guiz, y u so mad. No seriously, all I see is fanboys being anal about Spinosaurus' length when it isn't even relevant to the topic. Though I will say - as Scott Hartman pointed out, anything from 13 meters to 17 meters is reasonable for Spinosaurus. Only difference between a 13 meter and 17 meter one is tail length. A tail based near directly on Baryonyx gives a ~16 meter Spinosaurus. Hartman's 'standard' Spinosaurus is just over 15 meters, his short tail one just over 13 meters and long tailed one about 17 meters. None of them are wrong as it stands. We just don't know. RE: Carcharodontosaurus vs Tyrannosaurus... Yeah, two theropods equal length and height, one has much stronger skull neck and body not to mention is bulkier (=more mass = larger). It's a no brainer. |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Dec 10 2012, 10:32 AM Post #448 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I believe there's no reason why Hartman should choose an inaccurate way to reconstruct his latest drawing is there? But I'm happy we're sticking to his drawing for now so we can have consistency. Not every theropod has to be like t rex and I never said it's superior in everything such as hunting or chasing etc, after all we see the same thing in mammals, they all evolve differently to suit their environment, hunting style etc. But, for a virtual fight scenario T Rex does excel more so than your carnosaurs. Again, speed and agility is very likely on T Rex side compared to a giga, an advantage is an advantage. Hartman's drawing shows gastralia in giga so at least you can compare it from the lateral view. Again is there any reason why you still can't accept Sue being heavier? Sue is not a slightly shorter version of giga, it's bulkier in most parts and the half meter length advantage in giga (if there is one at all) is not nearly enough to tip the scale over no pun. |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Dec 10 2012, 11:15 AM Post #449 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
![]() This should be accurate for you theropod, 143cm femur for giga and 138cm femur for Sue. |
![]() |
|
| MysteryMeat | Dec 10 2012, 03:32 PM Post #450 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
We have one good Giga specimen that weighs about the same as an average rex, and you are talking "average" already? Also if you consider both giga specimens, probably from an area the size of a US county. While rex average is based on many specimens from entire western north America. Spino is a different story, i think even a 14.4 meter spino would out way a 12.5 meter rex. |
![]() |
|
| 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 |
2:22 AM Jul 14
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)










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
















2:22 AM Jul 14