Poll: Who wins?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Smilodon gracilis
50.00%
4 50.00%
Deinonychus antirrhopus
50.00%
4 50.00%
Total 8 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Smilodon gracilis v Deinonychus antirrhopus
#1
Smilodon gracilis
Smilodon gracilis ("the slender Smilodon") was the smallest and earliest species of the genus Smilodon. It first appeared in the United States about 2.5 million years ago, probably a descendant of Megantereon, and lived until about 500,000 years ago. It lived mainly in the eastern regions of the Americas. Smilodon Gracilis ranged in weight from 120 to 220 lb (55 to 100 kg) and ranged in height from 39 to 47 inches (1 to 1.2 m). Their teeth are about 7 in. Smilodon gracilis was comparable in size to extant jaguars

[Image: Smilodon-gracilis-2016b-738x591.jpg]

Deinonychus antirrhopus
Based on the few fully mature specimens, Deinonychus could reach 3.4 metres (11.2 ft) in length, with a skull length of 410 mm (16.1 in), a hip height of 0.87 metres (2.9 ft) and a weight of 73 kg (161 lb), though there is a higher estimate of 100 kg (220 lb) Its skull was equipped with powerful jaws lined with around sixty curved, blade-like teeth. Studies of the skull have progressed a great deal over the decades. Ostrom reconstructed the partial, imperfectly preserved, skulls that he had as triangular, broad, and fairly similar to Allosaurus. Additional Deinonychus skull material and closely related species found with good 3D preservation show that the palate was more vaulted than Ostrom thought, making the snout far narrower, while the jugals flared broadly, giving greater stereoscopic vision. The skull of Deinonychus was different from that of Velociraptor, however, in that it had a more robust skull roof like that of Dromaeosaurus, and did not have the depressed nasals of Velociraptor. Both the skull and the lower jaw had fenestrae (skull openings) which reduced the weight of the skull. In Deinonychus, the antorbital fenestra, a skull opening between the eye and nostril, was particularly large.

[Image: G124%20Deinonychus_big.jpg]
[Image: wildcat10-CougarHuntingDeer.jpg]
Reply
#2
The deinonychus has very large jaws in proportion to body size and large, deadly sickle claws. But the smilodon is more robust than modern cats and has those sabre teeth. But in a knife-man vs grappler fight, the grappler isn't going to be in a very good position. I think the deinonychus would win, though it's close.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Lightning's post:
  • Godzilla2020
Reply
#3
I agree to an extent Lightning. A lot would depend on the accuracy of the weight estimates for Deinonychus. The 73 kg would be fighting at a weight disadvantage, but at the 100 kg estimate, I think the Deinonychus would have the advantage.
[Image: wildcat10-CougarHuntingDeer.jpg]
Reply
#4
This is a good matchup; personally I think it could go either way. There’s an incident in which a Smilodon killed a young glyptodont with a skull bite, but I discussed it with people in a Mammalian Evolution Discord server, and apparently it couldn’t be S. populator (who was the one thought to have done it) because, temporally, only S. gracilis matched with it.
There was also a paper being discussed and Ville Sinkkonen proposed an idea that, based off current evidence of intraspecific conflict, they (or at least S. populator) may have used it’s teeth like a walrus. I forget his exact argument for it, but part of it was due to the relative positioning of the bite (which was around the nasal cavity, not the brain-case, so it wasn’t fatal) and how, if it had opened it’s jaws to do it, the angle would have potentially been different, or something like that iirc. I’ll look at his argument when I can.
[Image: 5u3d6w.jpg]
Reply
#5
Quote:There was also a paper being discussed and Ville Sinkkonen proposed an idea that, based off current evidence of intraspecific conflict, they (or at least S. populator) may have used it’s teeth like a walrus. I forget his exact argument for it, but part of it was due to the relative positioning of the bite (which was around the nasal cavity, not the brain-case, so it wasn’t fatal) and how, if it had opened it’s jaws to do it, the angle would have potentially been different, or something like that iirc. I’ll look at his argument when I can.

It was proposed before that Smilodon could have used closed-mouthed stabs with its canines to penetrate the thoracic cavity of its prey and create a pneumothorax. In fact, its particular prey, horses and bison, would have been particularly vulnerable to such an attack if it were to have happened to them (Wilson et al. 2012). This is during hunting as opposed to fighting, but has the same idea of walrus-like close-mouthed stabs.
[Image: 9wf8nho.png]
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ausar's post:
  • zergthe
Reply
#6
Within that paper, they reference an incident in which “A canine of S. fatalis has been observed to penetrate 85 mm into another S. fatalis skull in an attack that probably required a closed jaw”. If it’s true, that would be pretty cool, considering how people still believe in the myth the teeth were delicate.
[Image: 5u3d6w.jpg]
[-] The following 1 user Likes zergthe's post:
  • onlyfaizy786
Reply
#7
(05-16-2019, 10:05 PM)Lightning Wrote: The deinonychus has very large jaws in proportion to body size and large, deadly sickle claws. But the smilodon is more robust than modern cats and has those sabre teeth. But in a knife-man vs grappler fight, the grappler isn't going to be in a very good position. I think the deinonychus would win, though it's close.
Dude you are neglecting another ability of smilodon, they pretty paw boxer with
immensely powerful body and large and sharp retracted claw more slicer then deinonychus claws, perfect for wrestling large prey to the ground. And that position one bite can finish the game with deep wound.
[Image: t70ok8.jpg]
Reply
#8
The claws likely had keratin on them which would make them much sharper than we’ve thought, in which what we thought never really took into account the likely keratinous sheaths on them. Plus it doesn’t matter if Smilodon’s claws were sharper when your opponent has two claws about as big as the Smilodon’s teeth that could likely tear through flesh with the ease of, bare minimum, an active predatory modern reptile.
[Image: 5u3d6w.jpg]
[-] The following 1 user Likes zergthe's post:
  • Godzilla2020
Reply
#9
Quote:more slicer then deinonychus claws

I'm not really sure where you're getting that from.
[Image: 9wf8nho.png]
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ausar's post:
  • Godzilla2020
Reply
#10
(05-18-2019, 03:43 AM)zergthe Wrote: The claws likely had keratin on them which would make them much sharper than we’ve thought, in which what we thought never really took into account the likely keratinous sheaths on them. Plus it doesn’t matter if Smilodon’s claws were sharper when your opponent has two claws about as big as the Smilodon’s teeth that could likely tear through flesh with the ease of, bare minimum, an active predatory modern reptile.
the grip of four strong legs are more perfect for fight on ground and give better position for grapple and control then 2 legs deino.
[Image: t70ok8.jpg]
Reply
#11
Deinonychus had clawed forelimbs too, you know that, right? I doubt they were as strong as a Smilodon's even relatively speaking, but then I guess that brings us back to Lightning's point.

Depending on the weight estimate, of course, as alluded to earlier.
[Image: 9wf8nho.png]
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ausar's post:
  • Godzilla2020
Reply
#12
(05-18-2019, 04:01 AM)Ausar Wrote: Deinonychus had clawed forelimbs too, you know that, right? I doubt they were as strong as a Smilodon's even relatively speaking, but then I guess that brings us back to Lightning's point.

Depending on the weight estimate, of course, as alluded to earlier.

I know that but their forelimbs are weaker then smilodon. And the distance of strike from smilodon paws cover more area then deinonychus tiny forelimbs. From header to header Deinonychus need more bites to take down smilodon however smilodon need one perfect bite to take down deino.
[Image: t70ok8.jpg]
Reply
#13
(05-18-2019, 04:08 AM)onlyfaizy786 Wrote: I know that but their forelimbs are weaker then smilodon. And the distance of strike from smilodon paws cover more area then deinonychus tiny forelimbs. From header to header Deinonychus need more bites to take down smilodon however smilodon need one perfect bite to take down deino.

Deinonychus forelimbs are not "tiny" (link). Even if the dromaeosaurid's forelimbs are not as long as the cat's, that won't matter if both are close up as opposed to swatting each other with their forelimbs. You bring up the prospect of a reach advantage when it comes to forelimb swiping, but then you bring up the lethality of jaws, the use of which is mutually exclusive to trying to keep distance via swiping.
[Image: 9wf8nho.png]
Reply
#14
(05-18-2019, 03:48 AM)Ausar Wrote:
Quote:more slicer then deinonychus claws

I'm not really sure where you're getting that from.


Quote:  smilodon had shorter limbs, a deep, barrel like chest and a bob-tail.  The forelimbs were massive and heavily muscled, much stronger than the hind-limbs.  This indicates that Sabre-Tooths were ambush predators, they were not built for pursuit of prey animals but used their extremely powerful front quarters to bring down quarry.

The fossil specimens demonstrate that these big cats had retractable claws, in common with most members of the cat family including the domestic cat (Felis silvestris catus).  The Sabre-Tooth claws were long and re-curved in shape making them the animals most formidable weapons, ideal for spearing the body of prey and holding on enabling the victim to be pulled down to the ground, for despatching with those massive canines, which would have severed arteries in the neck.  Smilodon like a domestic cat could also dig its claws into the skin further by closing the extended claws, much in the same way as we might close our fingers around an object when we pick it up.  This would dig the points of the claws further into the animal’s hide and make escape much more difficult.

source
[Image: t70ok8.jpg]
Reply
#15
(05-18-2019, 04:15 AM)onlyfaizy786 Wrote:
(05-18-2019, 03:48 AM)Ausar Wrote:
Quote:more slicer then deinonychus claws

I'm not really sure where you're getting that from.


Quote:  smilodon had shorter limbs, a deep, barrel like chest and a bob-tail.  The forelimbs were massive and heavily muscled, much stronger than the hind-limbs.  This indicates that Sabre-Tooths were ambush predators, they were not built for pursuit of prey animals but used their extremely powerful front quarters to bring down quarry.

The fossil specimens demonstrate that these big cats had retractable claws, in common with most members of the cat family including the domestic cat (Felis silvestris catus).  The Sabre-Tooth claws were long and re-curved in shape making them the animals most formidable weapons, ideal for spearing the body of prey and holding on enabling the victim to be pulled down to the ground, for despatching with those massive canines, which would have severed arteries in the neck.  Smilodon like a domestic cat could also dig its claws into the skin further by closing the extended claws, much in the same way as we might close our fingers around an object when we pick it up.  This would dig the points of the claws further into the animal’s hide and make escape much more difficult.

source

This...doesn't prove your claim. Everyone knows what a Smilodon's claws would have been like. You need to prove that they're somehow better at slicing than the claws of a Deinonychus.
[Image: 9wf8nho.png]
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ausar's post:
  • Godzilla2020
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)