| 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: |
| Saurophaganax maximus v Tyrannosaurus rex | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 15 2012, 10:02 PM (59,193 Views) | |
| DinosaurMichael | Dec 15 2012, 10:02 PM Post #1 |
|
Apex Predator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Saurophaganax maximus Saurophaganax ("lizard-eating master") is a genus of allosaurid dinosaur from the Morrison Formation of Late Jurassic Oklahoma (latest Kimmeridgian age, about 151 million years ago). Some paleontologists consider it to be a species of Allosaurus (A. maximus). Saurophaganax represents a very large (13 metres (43 ft) long). Saurophaganax was one of the largest carnivores of Late Jurassic North America. Ray even gave an estimate of the body length of fifteen metres and Chure of fourteen, though later estimations have been lower. The fossils known of Saurophaganax (both the possible New Mexican material and the Oklahoma material) are known from the latest part of the Morrison formation, suggesting that they were either always uncommon or appeared rather late in the fossil record. Saurophaganax was large for an allosaurid, and bigger than both its contemporaries Torvosaurus tanneri and Allosaurus fragilis. Being much rarer than its contemporaries, making up one percent or less of the Morrison theropod fauna, not much about its behavior is known. Stovall in Oklahoma also unearthed a considerable number of Apatosaurus specimens, a possible prey for a large theropod. ![]() 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 DinosaurMichael, Dec 15 2012, 10:02 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| theropod | May 1 2013, 01:39 AM Post #286 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That figure was never estimated, said old estimate was miscited and wasn't only made by a journalist withotu qualifications and apparently lacking knowledge on dinosaurs but also published in some sort of popular-scientific journal and as if that wasn't enough the figure was 13m, not 15m. I've posted a link to rays article somewhere, if anyone is interested, but it isn't worth the read, really. Nothing scientific in there. A proper scientific size range for this species would be 10,5(in case the humerus is really only 48cm, and no, I did not receive an answer from Chure, the mail-adress might be outdated)-13m. As I said plenty of evidence points out to larger allosaurids rivaling or exceeding the largest Tyrannosaurs in size, but those animals are very enigmatic and not Saurophaganax. At the upper range Saurophaganax would play in the same general league as T. rex, but it would be somewhat lighter and not large enough to win imo. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | May 1 2013, 02:15 AM Post #287 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Don't forget the general allometry of most theropods, in which the forelimbs proportionally get smaller as the theropod gets larger, this is seen in many theropod clades, carnosaurs included. This could potentially get Saurophaganax into the 15-meter range, but that's quite a bit of speculation. |
![]() |
|
| Big G | May 1 2013, 02:36 AM Post #288 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Here's my opinion on this fight, renovated: depends on the size of the Saurophaganax. Imo, it would not be so easy for a Saurophaganax of 10.5-13 meters beat a 12.3 meters long T.Rex, as it weighed less, and so it was not as bulky as T.Rex. Only a Saurophaganax of 14 or 15 meters could beat a T.Rex, but these estimates are very uncertain. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | May 1 2013, 07:17 AM Post #289 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't like this kind of calculation, it will become more and more absurd as the figures go farther from the data range. Yes, a very liberal estimate could reach such figures, that's true (and might be comparable to some figures for carcharocles megalodon that I know of). I think this allometry should suffice as a reason why the upper range, ~13m, based on less long-armed specimens is more likely. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | May 31 2013, 10:34 PM Post #290 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sorry for replying to this so late, but aside from the more dagger-like teeth of sauro, how does it have a deadlier bite? I agree that it had much more useful forearms, but remember that theropod forearms weren't their main weapons. Unless sauro had a huge size advantage, tyrannosaurus wins Edited by Godzillasaurus, May 31 2013, 10:36 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | May 31 2013, 10:49 PM Post #291 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why do you think it needs a huge size advantage? It's weaponery is clearly very powerful. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | May 31 2013, 10:58 PM Post #292 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Tyrannosaurus was more robust and had a much more powerful bite. I am not saying that sauro's weapons weren't deadly, I am just saying that, in a scenario where the carnosaur and the tyrannosaur are of similar sizes, the tyrannosaur would win |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jun 1 2013, 12:21 AM Post #293 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Don't perpetuate biased myths made by youtube fanboys. |
![]() |
|
| MysteryMeat | Jun 1 2013, 12:32 AM Post #294 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Saurophaganax is comparable in size at more liberal estimates. Therefore, I think advantage goes to Tyrannosaurus in general.
Depends on what he meant. If it is similar length, rex wins, similar weight, the carnosaur will likely be longer, taller, and has a bigger mouth. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jun 1 2013, 01:07 AM Post #295 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Bite force is irrelevant, but it is entirely possible pulling forces during a Saurophaganax bite (at weight parity) would be just as great as adductor forces during a T. rex bite. How deadly a bite is does not depend on bite force, bite force is a mere adaption to a certain kind of prey were it is beneficial. In other cases, it can be the opposite. When will people stop to rate how deadly a bite is solely based on how strong the adductor mandibularis is? There are enough other things to consider here: Ventroflexive moment arms: clear victory for the allosaur slicing efficiency: clear victory for the allosaur dorsoventral strenght of the skull: undecided adductor force: clear victory for the tyrannosaur lateral strenght of the skull: clear victory for the tyrannosaur depressor force and gape: clear victory for the allosaur neck mobility and striking speed: clear victory for the allosaur I don't see why bite force alone should be the deciding factor here. At weight parity, there is zero reason why T. rex should have the deadlier weaponery. Robusticity doesn't really matter here, unless the parity you mean is lenght parity (I of course mean at equal body mass). At equal body mass the allosaur would be longer, taller, have better reach, much longer arms, claws and likely also a longer skull. I however agree it is likely Saurophaganax didn't reach equal body mass to T. rex, at least not that of large specimens. |
![]() |
|
| Spinodontosaurus | Jun 1 2013, 01:08 AM Post #296 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Note sure how stating an opinion that actually makes a great deal of sense is "perpetuating biased myths". I made my opinion on carnosaur vs Tyrannosaurus at parity clear in that 'giant theropod battle' thread in the fantasy section; Tyrannosaurus would win imo. |
![]() |
|
| Carcharadon | Jun 1 2013, 02:29 AM Post #297 |
![]()
Shark Toothed Reptile
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well actually i switch over to t.rex now
Edited by Carcharadon, Jul 25 2013, 06:26 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Teratophoneus | Jun 1 2013, 02:44 AM Post #298 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Saurophaganax was long as Tyrannosaurus, so there isn't a real advantage of size. In addition, according to this, Saurophaganax is "only" 3 tons, less than half of Tyrannosaurus. ![]() Although for the moment I think Saurophaganax was 11-13 meters. ![]() ![]() Both were 13 meters, but Tyrannosaurus was heavier (8-9 tonnes compared to 5.5-6 tons), and so I think it would take this. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jun 1 2013, 03:08 AM Post #299 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Did you just take liberal estimates for Tyrannosaurus and compared them to conservatives for Saurophaganax? That's a no-no! If you use ~6 tonnes for Saurophaganax, you have to take ~5.8 tonnes for Sue, and average Tyrannosaurus would be even smaller. And Tyrannosaurus was not ~13 meters long, but rather only 12.3 meters for the largest confirmed specimen. Also the vast majority of Greg Paul's estimates represent shrinkwrapped animals. |
![]() |
|
| Teratophoneus | Jun 1 2013, 03:15 AM Post #300 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm pretty sure that "Sue" was an adult of big size, but not the biggest. I do not exclude that a 13-meter Tyrannosaurus existed. But the length does not matter. 5.5-6 tons is the max estimate I've heard. No one ever saw a Tyrannosaurus live, so I took the highest possible estimate ... the weight is too speculative. Edited by Teratophoneus, Jun 1 2013, 03:16 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Dinosauria light | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:26 AM Jul 14
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)


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









2:26 AM Jul 14