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 (129,979 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:
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jun 28 2013, 10:38 PM
^where?
What I said was claimed by a user in this forum, but I do not remember which one. In fact, my only source for what is said Terrier & Henderson, where the published length is +12 meters. Anyway, this is C. iguidensis not C. saharicus, then Tyrannosaurus wins very easily.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
That lenght was a misquotation and never stated by sereno. he gives no total elnght in any publication, and the lenght he does state is a very different one.

I don't know whether the maxilla in iguidensis is the largest specimen. The description clearly expresses it to be significantly smaller than in saharicus, and yet it states the overall size to be "the same large body size". Doesn't have to mean much, but maybe the maxilla is not part of the largest individual that was found.

Also, this was clearly intended to be a thread for a large Carcharodontosaurus, since as you already said a 10-11m version would not be a worthy opponent. C. iguidensis was claimed to be larger by many sources and many (inluding myself) used to believe that. Of course it should best be changed to saharicus, but this forum's matchups don't properly separate them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The profile also covers both.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
In this case...
Carcharodontosaurus saharicus

Length: 12.79 meters
Weigth: 6-8 tons
Skull: 1.56 meters

Posted Image
Tyrannosaurus rex

Length: 12.29 meters
Weigth: 6-8 tons
Skull: 1.46 meters

Posted Image


50/50
Edited by Big G, Jun 28 2013, 11:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spinodontosaurus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]

If C. iguidensis is ~83% the size of SGM-Din 1, then it would have been close in size to the C. saharicus holotype (~87% the size of SGM-Din 1, going by Sereno's estimations)... So perhaps the 'similar size' comparison was with the C. saharicus holotype?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Based on the nasal at least, it seems highly unlikely the neotype is mere 15% bigger. Possibly a rounded figure based on an old reconstruction?
I cannot see how to fit a nasal that fits perfectly into a 1,15m skull into a 1,36m one. But yeah, he might have meant that, which would be another possible explanation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
thesporerex
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
t-rex wins but carcharodontosaurus won't go down easliy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Teratophoneus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Both were around the same size. Neither has significant advantages; Tyrannosaurus had a bite a bit stronger, but Carcharodontosaurus has a bite suitable for slicing, so no need the bite force. 50/50.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Carcharodontosaurus iguidensis loses because of being quite a bit smaller.

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus simply overwhelms the Tyrannosaurus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Teratophoneus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
brolyeuphyfusion
Jul 17 2013, 01:30 AM
Carcharodontosaurus iguidensis loses because of being quite a bit smaller.

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus simply overwhelms the Tyrannosaurus.
"overwhelms" I think it's a bit exaggerated for two animals of similar size.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The Dino King
Jul 17 2013, 01:34 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jul 17 2013, 01:30 AM
Carcharodontosaurus iguidensis loses because of being quite a bit smaller.

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus simply overwhelms the Tyrannosaurus.
"overwhelms" I think it's a bit exaggerated for two animals of similar size.
They are not of similar size imo
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Teratophoneus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
brolyeuphyfusion
Jul 17 2013, 01:49 AM
The Dino King
Jul 17 2013, 01:34 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jul 17 2013, 01:30 AM
Carcharodontosaurus iguidensis loses because of being quite a bit smaller.

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus simply overwhelms the Tyrannosaurus.
"overwhelms" I think it's a bit exaggerated for two animals of similar size.
They are not of similar size imo
Both were around 8 tons.

Posted Image

^ In this scale, Tyrannosaurus looks smaller than the actual animal because the feet of Tyrannosaurus were positioned more lower than those of Carcharodontosaurus.
Edited by Teratophoneus, Jul 17 2013, 01:57 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spinodontosaurus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Sue is seemingly larger than Giganotosaurus specimen MUCPv-95 (by all of 200kg, so virtually the same to be fair). MUCPv-95 seems to have had a longer skull than Carcharodontosaurus specimen SGM-Din 1. Seeing as that is all we have to go on in terms of scaling, claiming Carcharodontosaurus is larger than Tyrannosaurus is more than far-fetched.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Teratophoneus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Spinodontosaurus
Jul 17 2013, 02:49 AM
Sue is seemingly larger than Giganotosaurus specimen MUCPv-95 (by all of 200kg, so virtually the same to be fair). MUCPv-95 seems to have had a longer skull than Carcharodontosaurus specimen SGM-Din 1. Seeing as that is all we have to go on in terms of scaling, claiming Carcharodontosaurus is larger than Tyrannosaurus is more than far-fetched.
SMG din-1 seems to be dimensionally larger than "Sue" (12.3 m and 3.5 m vs 12.6-12.9 m and 3.7 m), so it depends on what you mean by bigger. But I agree about the fact that the weight is better to assess the size, and I think that both were the same size, or 8 tons.
Edited by Teratophoneus, Jul 17 2013, 04:42 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
^T. rex is only bigger than MUCPc-95 when assuming the same density, while studies point out to carnosaurs being denser (either way, also if we make them as much more pneumatic as stan appearantly got in Hutchinson as compared to Bates).

What best to scale SGM DIN 1 from is debatable, but "12,6-12,9m" is very conservative imo
Also it doesn't seem it has a shorter skull than the 6,5% MUCPv-95

And in the end, that's still comparing it [perhaps the only adult Carcharodontosaurus, or otherwise one of two specimens we can estimate and ~14m long] to the biggest known T. rex in more than 30 individuals.
Edited by theropod, Jul 17 2013, 09:10 PM.
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.