| 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 (59,207 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 | Dec 16 2012, 10:35 PM Post #76 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
much better, thanks! |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 16 2012, 10:41 PM Post #77 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The problem is just that your Saurophaganax is NOT 14m. it is 1262px long, the T. rex is 1127px. you may be wondering, but the difference can already greatly affect weight... |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Dec 16 2012, 10:52 PM Post #78 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
12-meter Tyrannosaurus and 14-meter Saurophaganax![]() click image for a full-sized version |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Dec 16 2012, 11:01 PM Post #79 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Even on parity, Saurophaganax has the advantage, it is more agile due to lighter build and has sharp carnosaurian teeth plus the axe head mechanism, and a pretty strong bite force(but not as strong as Tyrannosaurus') |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Dec 16 2012, 11:19 PM Post #80 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sue is 12.5m so vs a 14m sauro it's a 1.5m difference, so 135px difference sounds about right. You always act like a slight length difference even a few cm matters a lot in weight especially for a much slender built carnosaur, yet totally play down how much bigger t rex is in cubical dimension. Sauro can add another half meter yet its weight would still be lighter. The comparison I made should more or less illustrate that. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 16 2012, 11:23 PM Post #81 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
30cm of additional lenght in this case do make a notable difference in cubic dimensions. You are playing down how much greater dimensional size affects weight. sue is 12,3m |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Dec 16 2012, 11:42 PM Post #82 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
OK, say it's notable but still not nearly as heavy as a T Rex as the study confirms. I can scale up the sauro 30cm longer but the result is gonna be more or less the same you can bet on it. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Dec 17 2012, 12:07 AM Post #83 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are you even scaling the dinosaurs right? I'll give you a tip: Use the grid function and have each square as a meter, makes it easier to scale up things properly |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Dec 17 2012, 12:07 AM Post #84 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah it's compression from natural preservation. But the 3d scan data has already taken that into account and readjusted the value along with the straight line gastralia which seems evident in Hartman's drawing. The tail would also likely be that bulky according to the new study. The digital volume method is more scrutinized and scientific outright, a 9.5t Sue is thus vindicated by Hutchinson. |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Dec 17 2012, 12:12 AM Post #85 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thanks to Verdugo for the documentation regarding theropods skull strength and Theropod for the discussion regarding Tyrannosaurus body mass. That's stuff like this which makes progress a debate. I rely more likely on the comparisons of bone crusher than Broly, bone crusher may be fan of T.rex but Broly has demonstrated his bias more than enough and shows less flexibility in arguments. Can someone explains me the sheer difference between Broly scales and bone crusher or Verdugo scales ? The 14-15 m allosaurid (which does not exist in modern records) of Broly seems so much larger than in the others scales... Edited by Grey, Dec 17 2012, 12:14 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| blaze | Dec 17 2012, 01:02 AM Post #86 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
broly uses Big Al's skeletal, bone crusher and Verdugo use DINO 2560's skeletal. Big Al is likely to be a different species, it's older and lacks the large arms, has a slightly proportionally shorter tail and proportionally longer hindlimbs than the younger (stratigraphic age) specimen. Because of this (proportionally shorter tail, longer hindlimbs) when scaled to the same length it ends up bigger than DINO 2560. EDITED. Edited by blaze, Dec 17 2012, 02:08 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Dec 17 2012, 01:10 AM Post #87 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@blaze: There is nothing wrong with using Big Al's skeletal, and Big Al is almost complete so it might be the best one to use
Edited by SpinoInWonderland, Dec 17 2012, 01:12 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 17 2012, 01:18 AM Post #88 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
When I scale up Allosaurus to 14m it seems quite obvious it is at least a bit heavier than sue. I´m too using Big al as that´s also the one I think is the closest match in terms of proportions, with a bit shorter arms as usually seen in larger theropods, and seemingly (save for the head) a bit bulkier. |
![]() |
|
| blaze | Dec 17 2012, 01:52 AM Post #89 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@broly I only pointed out the differences and why they exist. |
![]() |
|
| 7Alx | Dec 17 2012, 02:21 AM Post #90 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Despite i am huge Saurophaganax fan, but i am not obsesed with its size. I don't trust Chure's 14 m due huge innacuracies. 12 m Allosaurus with 82.5 cm femur sounds really ridiculous. Even 8.5 m UUVP 6000 (DINO) had longer femur than it. If allosaur was 12 m in length, it would had around 1.2 m femur, if not more. I don't think largest known found specimens would be >14 m in length, more like 12-13 m at best. However Saurophaganax was still likely one of the largest jurassic theropods. I doubt any large known theropod would exceed 13 m except Spinosaurus, some of them would be close though. Edit: Here is size comparison. The first one is OMNH 1935 based on UUVP 6000 (DINO) The second one is also OMNH 1935, but based on MOR 693 ![]() The difference is much bigger than i expected
Edited by 7Alx, Dec 17 2012, 02:58 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