| 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 (129,992 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: | |
|---|---|
| Black Ice | Jan 22 2013, 06:09 AM Post #511 |
![]()
Drom King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
at theropods pps jokes. You ok bro?
|
![]() |
|
| Temnospondyl | Jan 25 2013, 03:36 AM Post #512 |
|
Stegocephalia specialist.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Carcha was 16 m. long. That was a specimen found in Morocco. Sue is 12,1 m. long. Problem? p.s. No trolling, I'm seriously. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Jan 25 2013, 05:50 AM Post #513 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Post evidence please! I don't have problems with the neotype (tough there's no published estimate, so I'm not sure about this one), but there is no evidence for a Carcharodontosaurus larger than 14m. And you know that Sue was 12,29m long? Source: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0026037 Sorry if I sounded a bit rude, but I get a bit annoyed, this isn't the first time you're talking about a fantastic 16m Carcharodontosaurus. Edited by Jinfengopteryx, Jan 25 2013, 05:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jan 25 2013, 06:50 AM Post #514 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
sorry lopho, that's just the same BS as your 11m lophostropheus such an animal simply doesn't exist. Where did you even get that from? |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Jan 25 2013, 01:49 PM Post #515 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why would tyrannosaurus win? You just sort of contradicted yourself. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jan 25 2013, 02:05 PM Post #516 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think he meant that Tyrannosaurus would win more often than not... |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Jan 25 2013, 02:09 PM Post #517 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I see |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jan 25 2013, 02:17 PM Post #518 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
By now, this is my opinion of this battle: Tyrannosaurus vs Carcharodontosaurus saharicus = 77/23 in favor of Carcharodontosaurus Tyrannosaurus vs Carcharodontosaurus iguidensis = 60/40 in favor of Tyrannosaurus |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Jan 25 2013, 02:26 PM Post #519 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I never actually knew that there were two species of carcharodontosaurus. Either way, it should be well known that carcharodontosaurus had better weaponry than tyrannosaurus. |
![]() |
|
| Black Ice | Jan 25 2013, 02:33 PM Post #520 |
![]()
Drom King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Better weaponry is strictly based on personal tastes when it comes to bites on opposite ends of the spectrum. |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jan 25 2013, 04:06 PM Post #521 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The most likely outcome in most cases for me. Tyrannosaurus subdues Carcharodontosaurus with a tremendeous crushing bite to the neck. However, it could succumb shortly after due to the massive gruesome exsanguination produced by Carcharodontosaurus, depending of how much of damages the later inflicted to rex. That being said, in terms of sheer direct, brute strenght, Tyrannosaurus prevails. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jan 25 2013, 04:14 PM Post #522 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Have you even seen or heard about Sereno's Carcharodontosaurus specimen? That one is huge...about 20% larger than the Acrocanthosaurus-sized holotype of C. saharicus, which would make it about ~14 meters long...and about ~9.5 tonnes(scaling from a 5.5-tonne Acrocanthosaurus)... I would like to see how Tyrannosaurus can overpower that...oh wait, it won't! |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jan 25 2013, 04:22 PM Post #523 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, the last updated data I've read of Carcharodontosaurus shows an downsized animal, with a skull length only comparable to the skull of Tyrannosaurus. Both animals are very similar in size but Tyrannosaurus is more robust. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jan 25 2013, 04:26 PM Post #524 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That seems to be the holotype specimen. |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jan 25 2013, 04:34 PM Post #525 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Check this : CARCHARODONTOSAURUS SAHARICUS The syntype teeth are now considered lost and Brusatte & Sereno (2007) designated a partial skull (SGM Din-1) from the upper Kem Kem beds, penecontemporaneous with the Baharˆıje Beds in Egypt, as the neotype of C. saharicus; it was claimed that “these Egyptian fossils were never cast” (Brusatte & Sereno 2007, p. 904) but in fact an endocast from BSP 1922 X46 was made and currently resides in Berlin as MB.R.2056. The neotype includes much of the skull and indicates an individual of giant size. Using a reconstructed premaxilla based on those of Giganotosaurus and Mapusaurus, we estimate the skull length of this specimen as close to 142 cm, equivalent to large specimens of Tyrannosaurus rex (e.g. FMNH PR 2081, at 139 cm). The femoral cross sectional proportions of BSP 1922 X46 suggests an animal of lower total mass than a Tyrannosaurus of approximately equal femoral length. GIGANOTOSAURUS CAROLINII The reconstructed skull (Coria&Salgado 1995) includes a posteriorly oriented quadrate that outlines a trapezoidal lower temporal fenestra. This unusual configuration is genuine but several other skull contacts are not preserved, leading to ambiguity regarding its total length. We believe the original skull reconstruction is likely too long (153 cm), and as with Carcharodontosaurus (see above) we consider Giganotosaurus to have had a skull almost exactly comparable in length to that of Tyrannosaurus. Likewise, our measurements of femur length in the holotype (136.5 cm, left) record a smaller size than originally reported (143 cm; Coria & Salgado 1995) and therefore an animal of lower overall body mass. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14772019.2012.713753 No wonder, all the giants appear to be just rivaling with Mr Rex, but nobody dwarfs nobody at this point. Only, the North American giant coelurosaurian displays a more robust body structure (jaws, neck, chest, legs), which explains why I favor it. This is a more direct, brutal predator. Which does not mean the giats carcharodontosaurids wouldn't win sometimes. Edited by Grey, Jan 25 2013, 04:36 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| 2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Register for Free |
|
| 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)
at theropods pps jokes. You ok bro?


2:22 AM Jul 14