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
  • 5
  • 63
Carcharodontosaurus saharicus v Tyrannosaurus rex
Topic Started: Jun 8 2012, 05:34 PM (130,022 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:
Carcharadon
Member Avatar
Shark Toothed Reptile
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
*deleted post*
Edited by Carcharadon, Oct 25 2012, 07:46 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carcharadon
Member Avatar
Shark Toothed Reptile
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
*deleted post*
Edited by Carcharadon, Oct 25 2012, 07:46 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Black Ice
Member Avatar
Drom King
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Charchy in my opinion
Its teeth could cause severe blood loss from rexy or sever an artery
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyrant
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Its teeth could cause severe blood loss from rexy or sever an artery


I addressed this point multiple times before. Stan a tyrannosaur managed to survive having his head punctured multiple times, and since heads typically hold a huge amount of blood I would say that a couple of bites from a flesh ripper woudn't kill a tyrannosaurus, unless its very well placed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Black Ice
Member Avatar
Drom King
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Theres a difference from getting something punctured or crushed
To getting something severed dude
Theres a MAJOR difference
They have different teeth for different purposes
T rex may have been able to survive crushing and puncturing
But getting a artery severed is a whole different ball game
Just cause rex can survive one thing doesnt mean it can survive a totally different method
And "stan" was just one subject. 9/10 same species have evolved protection in some way from same species battles.
Charcharodontosaurus basically had a saw blade in its mouth. T rex didnt evolve methods to protect from that. Charchy could just sever a artery or just allow rex to die from bloodloss. Just because one animals more advanced doesnt mean its superior by default as seen with these prehistoric threads
Edited by Black Ice, Aug 6 2012, 04:26 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
VenomousDragon
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Tyrant
Aug 6 2012, 03:21 PM
Quote:
 
Its teeth could cause severe blood loss from rexy or sever an artery


I addressed this point multiple times before. Stan a tyrannosaur managed to survive having his head punctured multiple times, and since heads typically hold a huge amount of blood I would say that a couple of bites from a flesh ripper woudn't kill a tyrannosaurus, unless its very well placed.
Ripping,tearing and slicing wounds tend to bleed more than puncture wounds and if it were to hit a major artery on trex the fight could very well be over right there.

thing about rapid blood loss is no matter how big you are it remains an effective method of killing you.

as for the match itself I havent actually made up my mind.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyrant
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Ripping,tearing and slicing wounds tend to bleed more than puncture wounds


If you puncture an arm bone, yes. If you puncture a skull, no.

Quote:
 
if it were to hit a major artery on trex the fight could very well be over right there.


Like I said, that bite would have to be very well placed, while all rex has to do is bite the snout and the fights half over.

Quote:
 
thing about rapid blood loss is no matter how big you are it remains an effective method of killing you.


Refer to the Stan post.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Black Ice
Member Avatar
Drom King
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Puncturing and severing are two totally different things.
Your comparing shark teeth to crocodile teeth
Charcharos got a sawblade in its mouth with 8inch knives meant to amputate and sever. it could easily slice through t rexes skin.
T rex has a grinder meant to hold and crush I admit it could crush something on charcharo also now. Alot more animals survive crushing injuries than severed arteries or blood loss and shock. Charchy could bite the thigh for all I care its still gonna sever tendons and muscle. If charchy bites the back or neck. It could sever the spinal column. The teeth in charchys mouth makes its bite just as deadly as t rex
Edited by Black Ice, Aug 6 2012, 05:35 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyrant
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Puncturing and severing are two totally different things.


Once again, the head holds a massive amount of blood.

Quote:
 
Your comparing shark teeth to crocodile teeth


Crocodile teeth? No.

Quote:
 
Charcharos got a sawblade in its mouth with 8inch knives


Trex's teeth are the largest amongst terrestrial animals and is six inches long..,

Quote:
 
meant to amputate and sever.


Cut yes. Seever and amputate, no unless where talking about arms.

Quote:
 
it could easily slice through t rexes skin.


If Stan was fine when he lost several quarts of blood, a tarbosaurus could walk of a bite wound.

Quote:
 
T rex has a grinder meant to hold and crush I admit it could crush something on charcharo also now. Alot more animals survive crushing injuries than severed arteries or blood loss and shock


So most animasl can survive having their skulls crushed? Or a broken neck? No. Again, Stan survived massive amounts of blood pouring down his head multiple times. A bite sized chunk of flesh is not going to kill.

Edit: By the way now that I think of it teeth used for inflciting blood loss is almost useless in a battle between theropods since the first thing that comes into biting range, are the jaws and muzzle; areas of the body with very little blood in them. If carcharodontosaurus bite trex on the snout trex is going to end up with a bad infection if, trex bites carcharodontosaurus on the snout its going to break and carcharodontosaurus is going to be out of commission.
Edited by Tyrant, Aug 6 2012, 05:49 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Black Ice
Member Avatar
Drom King
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
First of t rex had conical banana teeth just like a crocodile so yes. As they both have crushing teeth
Your right the head does hold a massive amount of blood but hell if were using that one "stan" skeleton then what the hell.
Crushing teeth are not suited to severing arteries or blood vessels. So thats most likely why "stan" lived
Charcharos got a saw blade mouth with eight inch teeth(read the bio and I can post ev. If your still not satisfied)
Carchy had longer teeth than t rex in order to cut deeper and get to the blood vessels.
Yes no animal survives getting their skull crushed but if anyones getting their skull bit its rex as charcho had a wider gape than rex.
If charcho so much as even bites the rexes legs or back or hell even the neck.
Those teeth are cutting or severing tendons muscles or if it hits between the vertebra...the spine
Im just pointin out charcho had every bit as dangerous of a mouth as trex did. Not to mention it was larger.

Edit: And you little edit makes no sense whatsoever. Allosaurus giga charchy cerato and many more had blade teeth which they used to combat eachother effectively with
Edited by Black Ice, Aug 6 2012, 06:03 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
7Alx
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Saying Giganotosaurus and other carcharodontosaurids had huge arms because they're Allosauroid is wrong. If Allosaurus had long arms it doesn't mean Giganotosaurus had too. Look at Eotyrannus, a basal tyrannosauroid. Its arms are large, proportionally way larger than in late cretaceous Tyrannosaurids like Tyrannosaurus, Daspletosaurus etc. Paleontologists found fragments of Tyrannotitan arms, which are surprisingly short compared to body size.

Eotyrannus by Shartmann
Posted Image

Tyrannotitan by Conty
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Black Ice
Member Avatar
Drom King
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
arms? Whered arms come from?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyrant
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
First of t rex had conical banana teeth just like a crocodile so yes.


Conical means cone shaped not banna shaped. So no, they are not even comparable.

Quote:
 
Your right the head does hold a massive amount of blood but hell if were using that one "stan" skeleton then what the hell.


Stan had multiple holes in his skull, suggesting this was not a fluke. Plus I think Stan also had a tooth dug into her skull as well. So two out of what? Ten? Trex fossils showed that they survived bad head injuries.

Quote:
 
Crushing teeth are not suited to severing arteries or blood vessels. So thats most likely why "stan" lived


If I smashed a hammer over your head you would still be leaking blood like a geyser.

Quote:
 
Carchy had longer teeth than t rex in order to cut deeper and get to the blood vessels.


That would make sense, except trex actually holds the record for longest teeth(terestrial) at six inches.

Quote:
 
Yes no animal survives getting their skull crushed but if anyones getting their skull bit its rex as charcho had a wider gape than rex.


Okay, assuming that it opens its jaws at full gape and bites on trex's skull what then? Trex would just break its neck.

Quote:
 
If charcho so much as even bites the rexes legs


That would be an incredibly stupid move.

Quote:
 
or back


Neither have the agility to outmanuever each other.

Quote:
 
or hell even the neck.


To reach the neck it would have to duck under trex's bite(unlikely) move in foward, turn its head to the side and bite upwards; which is even more unlikely as all trex has to do then is bite down. And this assuming that it would have the instict to bite the neck as its hunting style most likely didn't use this tactic, while trex's probably did.

Quote:
 
Those teeth are cutting or severing tendons muscles or if it hits between the vertebra...the spine


Like I said, this is going to be a frontal fight. No shimmying, circling, or any acrobatic moves.

Quote:
 
Im just pointin out charcho had every bit as dangerous of a mouth as trex did. Not to mention it was larger.


Maybe in ambush, or agains't large slow herbivores but in my opinion are ineffective weapons against simlar sized theropods.






Edited by Tyrant, Aug 6 2012, 06:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Black Ice
Member Avatar
Drom King
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Ok first off im about to prove you wrong with trex holdin the record charcho exceeded that when it was found
http://dsc.discovery.com/dinosaurs/carcharodontosaurus.html
http://www.fossilicious.com/Carcharodontosaurus-Tooth-1-7-8-inches-pr-16405.html
http://www.paleodirect.com/dt202.htm
Charchy had longer teeth
2nd.banana teeth was a fancy way of describing conical teeth. They are the only teeth suited for crushing so yes crocodiles and rex has similiar teeth
If I sever your artery or a ligament in your leg your hitting the ground point blank
T rex was not very agile and ill explain in my next post
T rex isnt breaking anything neck if its getting its face cut up and ripped by charchys 8inch teeth. You fail to realise that surviving what "stan" went through. Is not a good way to say "any rex" can survive a bloodied face
im gonna break it down why rexes bite was so hard.
In order to be able to crush bone you need to have a high bite force
It doesnt take much to slit a vein or cut a ligament. So no if anything their bites are just as bad.
it may be a frontal fight but if anything with charchy being larger with longer teeth and shark teeth. This fight isnt a rex win
If anything more like 50/50
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
VenomousDragon
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Tyrant
Aug 6 2012, 05:28 PM
Quote:
 
Ripping,tearing and slicing wounds tend to bleed more than puncture wounds


If you puncture an arm bone, yes. If you puncture a skull, no.

Quote:
 
if it were to hit a major artery on trex the fight could very well be over right there.


Like I said, that bite would have to be very well placed, while all rex has to do is bite the snout and the fights half over.

Quote:
 
thing about rapid blood loss is no matter how big you are it remains an effective method of killing you.


Refer to the Stan post.
Your counter to the bloodloss argument relys heavily on stan but these puncture wounds were healed so do we actually know how deep the puncture was?,if some of the teeth were embedded it would actually help prevent blood, did it pierce the brain case? If not the wound is not as serious as your making out to be and it wouldnt have bled significantly more than if it were in any other place. My final problem with this is you seem to be using this as proof that trex could survive a great deal of blood loss but it doesnt matter what you are once you loose a certain percentage of your blood your going down and even before that its going to affect your motor skills.

The problem with Trex crushing the snout of carch is carch's superior gape because of its gape, as long it has its mouth open trex will come off on the worse end of jaw grappleing (thats the term i using i could careless if i made it up on the spot :P )

Ive come to a decision.
the longer this fight goes the better it is for Carch as the bloodloss its bite causes will only make trex weaker over time and if the carch is lucky enough to severe an artery or important tendon the fight will be over however if trex can score a good enough hold to apply that fearsome crushing power the fight will probably be a short one as if the bite does not kill it will likely greatly impair Carch's mobility.

In short i conclude that this battle is a toss up deal with it :P
Edited by VenomousDragon, Aug 6 2012, 06:21 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
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 5
  • 63

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.