Poll: Who wins?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Giganotosaurus carolinii
16.67%
2 16.67%
Tyrannosaurus rex
83.33%
10 83.33%
Total 12 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Giganotosaurus carolinii v Tyrannosaurus rex
#16
Quote: it was the fastest of the large theropods

The T-rex? 

Quote:The more we find out about it the more impressive it becomes.

Yep, but probabily it is the most studyied dinosaur ever.

Quote:Tyrannosaur conflict is well documented, and we know that face-biting was something that the species often did. Neither animal is agile enough to flank the other effectively (and if one was, a recent study suggests that the Tyrannosaur would be favored), so considering that these animals would be coming at one another with their jaws first and foremost, I really don't think a Giganotosaurus' skull would be able to withstand the forces placed on it by the Tyrannosaurus' jaws without suffering extensive and potentially crippling damage. A Tyrannosaurus' skull could certainly withstand the Giganotosaurus' bite, but I don't see it going favorably for the carnosaur the other way around. Either animal could attempt to go for the neck, but I don't think the Tyrannosaurus is at any disadvantage in that instance compared to the carnosaur since that would fall under the purview of a 'critical area'.

this sounds more like intra-specific conflicts. Two animals fighting the same way, face to face. But I can consider. 


Quote:The thing is, a Tyrannosaurus doesn't have conical teeth. The teeth are serrated, and while they are not quite as effective as the blade like teeth of Giganotosaurus at cutting, they are quite capable of pulverizing as well as evisceration. Your examples, while they mean well, are also somewhat misguided. A crocodile's jaws, while capable of crushing, are built for grip because their primary method of hunting is to grab the selected prey item and drown it. With Hyenas, their bite force is used for breaking bones, usually employed fully on already dead animals. A Tyrannosaurus has a much different gape, with significantly more force behind significantly more penetration points.


I know that, but birds of prey have sarreted claws, but the main function is to drill and hold. I think this serrated on the teeth of the t-rex served more to the act of feeding. Look at the difficulty for crocodiles to cut their food.

About the size, I did not know the average weight size for the t-rex specimens. This can be a problem for Giganatosaurus.This is a problem for Giganotosaurus. But only one good copy of Giga was found, and another could have ( or not) almost the same weight as Sue. 


Ok, 50/50 is better.
Reply
#17
Quote:The T-rex?

Quote:Early theropods are found to have low CLP scores, while the coelurosaurian tyrannosauroids and compsognathids are found to have high CLP scores.

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep19828

Quote:Yep, but probabily it is the most studyied dinosaur ever.

Being understudied often inflates an extinct animals abilities, its why many people still believe gigantosaurus and spinosaurus were signfigacantly heavier than tyrannosaurus despite evidence to the contrary.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Komododo's post:
  • Jurassicdangerousdinosaur
Reply
#18
Quote:I know that, but birds of prey have sarreted claws, but the main function is to drill and hold.

Since when are bird of prey claws serrated? They may have keels that can help them penetrate or cut better, but they're not serrated to my knowledge. I know of no animal claw that is so.

Quote:I think this serrated on the teeth of the t-rex served more to the act of feeding. Look at the difficulty for crocodiles to cut their food.

While cutting may not have been the primary function of tyrannosaurid teeth, they'll definitely allow for better cutting when it comes to killing a live animal. After all, any serrations at all are better than none at all.
[Image: 9wf8nho.png]
Reply
#19
(12-05-2018, 08:20 AM)Melanosuchus Wrote: this sounds more like intra-specific conflicts. Two animals fighting the same way, face to face. But I can consider. 

I know that, but birds of prey have sarreted claws, but the main function is to drill and hold. I think this serrated on the teeth of the t-rex served more to the act of feeding. Look at the difficulty for crocodiles to cut their food.

About the size, I did not know the average weight size for the t-rex specimens. This can be a problem for Giganatosaurus.This is a problem for Giganotosaurus. But only one good copy of Giga was found, and another could have ( or not) almost the same weight as Sue. 

It is intra-specific combat, but considering that these are two fairly similar large bodied theropods and the documentation we have of Tyrannosaurus, we can be reasonably sure of how the Tyrannosaur would approach this fight. Given that these theropod’s main weapons are their jaws, it is not outside of reason to assume that face-biting would occur in this hypothetical fight, and given what we know, the Tyrannosaurus has a clear advantage structurally should that happen.

I understand what you are trying to say, but jaws and claws are two very different adaptations that perform entirely different things so it ends up being a somewhat poor comparison. We really dont have a modern day model that works the way Tyrannosaurus’ jaws did. Crocodiles have powerful jaws, but they still dont employ the same biting strategy that a Tyrannosaurus did. Crocodiles dont really employ crushing bites while hunting (even if they are capable of it) because their hunting strategy does not work that way (also, Crocodiles dont really have difficulty with that- they rip the carcass apart by other means), and Hyenas only have four large canines with which to properly employ all that power. A Tyrannosaurus had dozens and employed all of them.

Which is entirely possible. It’s also entirely possible that our current G. Carolinii skeleton is an outlier and the average is notably smaller. I hope we get to revisit this topic with more information in the future, because for the time being I give it to the Rex on the grounds that it’s a more massive animal with several means to harm the carnosaur that the carnosaur doesnt have on it.

EDIT: I'd like to note that it would require an almost 14 meter long Giganotosaurus to outweigh a 12.35 meter Tyrannosaurus. No large bodied terrestrial theropod has ever reliably reached that length outside of estimates that usually end up being inaccurate. Again, just food for thought.

Edit 2:

In 1983, a partial Tyrannosaurus left dentary was discovered in the Elephant Butte Reservoir in New Mexico. The specimen was catalogued as NMMNH P-1013-1 and was described in 1986 by American Palaeontologist David D. Gillette. It was a partial dentary measured 89.5 cm in length and probably would have around 102.2 cm in total length when compared to the complete dentary of FMNH PR 2081 (Sue). That’s a large dentary, to put that into perspective the dentary of Sue only measures 98 cm. Scaling from Sue yields a total Pre maxilla to Paroccipital skull length of 158.5 cm and a total body length of 12.87 meters, compared to Sue’s 154 cm skull length and 12.35 m body length.

Again, impossible to scale it accurately, but applying the same logic to other partial Tyrannosaurus estimates as we do to MUCPv-95, and we get some absolutely monstrous Tyrannosaurs that could have exceeded 9000kg. Almost 1.5x the weight of the G. Carolinii holotype.
[Image: ltiZ2aC.jpg]
[-] The following 2 users Like Maxilla's post:
  • Jurassicdangerousdinosaur, Melanosuchus
Reply
#20
Despite Giganotosaurus being my preference in nigh every way compared to a T. Rex, I believe it'd lose here more often than not unless it got a crippling bite in early on.

Its jaws are only useful if it can actually use them to full efficiency. I think a T. Rex would be ragdolling it long before that though.
There are many types of people in this world; None of them are as smart as they think they are.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)