Comments (Page 1,204)

Thanks guys and yes MrHappy, I know it does sound far fetched with T-Rex beating a tank but maybe it could bite and bend the canon preventing it to fire it's missils or grenades at it, and although T-Rex was not the fastest carnivore, I'm sure it was defintley more faster and agile than a tank, it could jump on it and take it from there heheh. And I agree with everything you say as well Rex Fan. You know, I was actually waiting for someone to make a topic like this but as you said, it deserves it's reputation as "The King" and it is why it is one of my favorite (as well as many others) favorite dinosaurs.

I'm sorry, but I have never heard of Tyrannosaurus' teeth being used to tear flesh and not crush bone. Triceratops and many hadrosaur bones have been found with T-rex bite marks. If it was simply trying to rip off flesh, then why are there so many bite marks? They did not happen by accident. Tyrannosaurus used a combination of it's giant thick teeth and the largest bite force of any land animal to crush bone. [img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/10/15/1287160863528/Gouges-on-the-toe-bone-of-006.jpg[/img] T-rex bite mark. [img]http://australianmuseum.net.au/Uploads/Images/8131/Detail%20teeth_big.jpg[/img] Allosaurs teeth. These represent the standard theropod tooth design which was meant for tearing flesh. [img]http://www.dimensionsinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/T-Rex-Tooth.jpg[/img] Tyrannosaurus teeth. Here we have a tooth design that is not the usual steak-knife shape. Now you're looking at a railroad spike. Perfect for biting and crushing bones.

Ok, then your good. "Seismosaurus" probably did weigh 35-50 tons. Naturally we are not going to have the exact same size estimates, but I do agree with this list in the fact that all these dinosaurs were certainly among the longest.

In fact, this is "Diplo Seismosaurus". In fact, Seismosaurus is a just a species of Diplodocus. You're rigth, Diplodocus generally were not more than 10-12 tons, but this is only for the smaller species of 25-27 meters.

That may be true, but T-rex was also heavier than 7 tons. That goes for Sue as well. You can read about that in my post about T-rex being larger than originally thought. Anyways, like I said about Chilantaisaurus, I only found one scientist, I guess Holtz, saying that it could be about 13 meters and 13,000 lbs. Others may have said that too, but I have not found any reports. Not being rude, but I don't think Chilantaisaurus exceeded 35 ft and 3.5 tons. Just my opinion though.

Yangchuanosaurus was reclassified as a species of Metriacanthosaurus. Or at least a species of Yangchuanosaurus was. Sorry, but that's what the facts say. I am not being rude, just stating what I found. Everything I found about Yang/Metri size was in the ballpark of 26-33 ft. I don't really care if you think I'm right or wrong, just stating what I have found.

Not bad, a few things are off though. Diplodocus probably could not get to 38 tons. I doubt it could get past 20. Unless you are combining Diplo with Seismosaurus. Then I think it's alright. Large theropods are my specialty though. I know a fair amount about sauropods, but not as much as the big carnivores. That's what I devote most of my time as far as research goes to.

Sorry, forgot to mention... Sizes based off of my research and estimates.

Perhaps Tyrannosaurus is overrated a little bit, but then again, perhaps it deserves it's reputation. No Tyrannosaurus was not the longest carnivore, Spino has that title with a length of 56 ft or so. But I think it got bigger than 40 ft. Tyrannosaurus probably averaged 40-43 ft, but maxed out at 46-50. As far as weight goes, that's were T-rex takes the gold. On the average, it probably weighed 8 tons, but was quite capable of reaching 9 or more. You can read about that in my post about T-rex being larger than originally thought. Anyways, t-rex90 is right. Spino probably maxed out at 7 tons. Giga was around 8, Carchar was in the 6 ton range, Mapu was smaller than most think at around 3.5-4 tons, and TyrannoT was about 5. Tarbosaurus had a weight comparable to TyrannoT or Carchar. T-rex certainly had the largest bite force. Minimally T-rex had a bite force of about 6,800 lbs and had a max bite force of 18,000 pounds. They do have a site in Montana that has a group of Tyrannosaurus' of different sizes and ages together. I do mean together, not within 10 miles of each other or something. Other large carnivores like Yutyrannus, Albertosaurus, Daspletosaurus, Allosaurus, and numerous carcharodontosaurs have been found together as well. Small predators also hunted and lived in groups. T-rex almost certainly did the same. T-rex may be a little overrated, but I think he deserves that reputation. They don't call him the king for nothing. [img]http://www.badhaven.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Roar2.jpg[/img]

T-Rex vs a tank and winning would be far-fetched. Otherwise, well said.

I like your list, but I think it is a little off...

I think Metriacanthosaurus should be considered its name was seen briefly on one of the embryo tubes in the original Jurassic Park, so it would be possible for it to appear as the primary antagonist.

T-Rex was not the biggest carnivore in terms of length but it was in weight, at about 9 tons, Spinosaurus was only at 7.2 tons, Charcaradontosaurus 8 tons, Giganotsaurus was around the same weight as T-Rex but not nearly as powerful, Mapusaurus only got up to 3-3.5 tons, not even close compared to the others mentioned here, and Tyrannotitan weighed in at 4-5 tons. T-Rex was built for fighting armored prey like Triceratops and Ankylosaurus, that's why it's jaws were so powerful, the biggest bite force it had was 30,000 newtons to 60,000 newtons, enough to crush a car, so I would'nt be surprised if someone told me that the T-Rex would've won if it ever went up against a tank. It is still by far the biggest predatory dinosaur with the most powerful bite. Also, T-Rex was said to be as smart as a house cat, there's evidence that proves the it took care of it's young during it's hatchling and even juvenille years, so why could'nt they hunt in packs as a family? No, the reason most people dislike the Spinosaurus in JP3 is because the outcome was bullshit. Spinosaurus was mainly designed for catching fish while T-Rex actually was made for killing dinosaurs. That and it was the movie's way of passing the torch to the Spino as the main big predator in the film. Hey, it's not some dinosaur's fault (T-Rex, Triceratops, Brontosaurus aka Apatosaurus, etc.) if so many people love them so much. And besides, I'm pretty sure those were the first dinosaurs everyone knew of when they were kids. If it weren't for them then I wouldn't even have gotten into dinosaurs in the first place. T-Rex is and will always be the king of the dinosaurs.

Of course you agree with this discussion S-Rex. Could say the same about Spino in some ways.

these are some very, very good points

Wow, thank you for all your responses.

I thought hyenas only had a bite of 900 pounds of pressure, but I don't know how that compares, and most dinosaurs had a much stronger bite than a Hyena.

You bring up some good points. The bite wouldn't have only taken a day to kill the Hadrosaur though. It might have taken a day for it to start feeling the effects, but it would likely survive for a week or so before it is so weak it can't keep up with the herd and gets left behind. As far as overrated goes, I'm not so sure. 40 feet is a good size. It might not have been able to beat every theropod it was pitted against, but it could beat them more times than not (in my opinion) due to evolutionary advantages.

Allosaurus fragilis was 35 ft, A. amplexeus can grown up to 12.1m. Chilantaisaurus is estimated up to 13m by Holtz. Tyrannosaurus may have been up to 15m, but it is not a sure thing. So I put the size of the largest Tyrannosaurus confirmed, "Sue."

I have several favourites, Carnivores= Albertosaurus, Deinonychus or Saurophaganax Herbivore= Shuntangosaurus, Albertoceratops or Mamenchisaurus

Hyenas are scavengers and have one of the most powerful bites today. Tyrannosaurus also was a predator, but it likely preferred to ambush its prey, as otherwise it would have to risk running, and a fall would be fatal. I also am pretty indifferent to the most popular dinos, but I like Dilophosaurus. I view it as a giant lion: powerful and built for killing large prey, but not as often as it scavenged. Thanks for reading!

mine is spinosaurus or giganotosaurus for carnivore... for herbivore.. definitely, stegosaurus, my fave since I was a child...

It is NOT Metriacanthosaurus. China and England are two very different places. The dino did have four claws and and a shorter snout, more like the Aelisaurs. As for the length, it was, up to. Allosaurus length and height, 36 feet long 12 feet tall.

Yesssss, it is completely overrated, but there are some things in the favor of T. rex being a predator. Binocular vision means it can gauge depth and a charge would be successful. Powerful bite, it has thick teeth, and a bite to go with it, it can't be a coincidence that it just happens to be on T. rex, a scavenger would have a much weaker jaw and long sharp thin teeth. It is overrated because, just randomly guessing, 70% of the people who know about this dinosaur has it as their favorite. I'm indifferent, and don't particularly like the very popular dinosaurs.

Yes, it's possible, but they did use the dinosaurs closest living relatives crocodiles and birds. Birds may even be dinosaurs. I think it's pretty close. Perhaps not exact, but pretty close.

Sorry, ignore that orange arrow, haha

[img]http://blog.everythingdinosaur.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Phylogeny-Sauroniops1.jpg[/img] Seems pretty accurate to me. Notice the abelisaurs relationship with the ceratosaurs

Interesting. I feel that this method may be a little shaky, because the true dinosaur tissue to bone ratio could be different than anything alive today

As far as Chilantaisaurus goes, it was recorded at 2-3.5 tons. I could only find weights, but based on that weight, it seems to only be 30-35 ft long. One scientist said 13,000 lbs, but being that there was only one scientist who said that, unless I missed something which is possible, it seems unlikely. At that length, it would be around 40 ft, but I doubt it to be honest.

Which ceratosaur had more less than 4 fingers? I'm not being rude, just wondering if I forgot one. Personally, I exclude Deltadromeus because, in my opinion, it's exact placement is too sketchy. Seems very allosaurian to me. The abelisaurs/ceratosaurs were outside both the Carnosaur and Coelourosaur groups. The tyrannosaurs were pretty advanced coelourosaurs so the abelisaurs could not have descended from early tyrannosaurs.

I think it was. Either as Yangchuanosaurus or Metricanthosaurus. I can't remember.

As far as I know it is real.

In that range it seems, 9-10. I always thought that Tyrannosaurus was heavier than most thought. This may prove I was right. Not bragging or anything, but I thought T-rex weighed at least 8 tons. Could have weighed 9+. And Sue is 43 ft which is commonly said to be the average size. Possible max size of 46-50 ft. A 46+ foot Rex would probably weigh in the ballpark of 11-12 tons.

It is pretty cool. I think DinoFights has it scheduled in the DinoFights lineup, so hopefully that will get it some recognition.

I have heard about it, or something similar, but I don't know much about it. Based on the pics, it seems like a spinosaur. However, the teeth seem to suggest a diet of almost purely fish. I am not stereotyping the spinosaur family, but those teeth look like the perfect fish catcher. Very crocodile like, perfect for catching large, slippery prey.

So Sue was like 10 tons?

They can use the DNA they are able to extract from Rex bones and slicing the bones very thin reveals "tree rings" which can show what the growth rate was. They combine this data with info gathered from the few juvenile skeletons they do have. T-rex stayed pretty small until about age 10-12. Then it packed on the pounds and grew nearly 4000 lbs a year! This rapid growth stopped around 18-20. They continued to grow all their lives, but much more slowly. They died around 30. When the rapid growth began, they also lost the feathers they probably had. [img]http://www.badassoftheweek.com/trex1.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.cbv.ns.ca/marigold/history/dinosaurs/datafiles/tyrannosauruspic.jpg[/img]

Allosaurus probably was only around 33-36 ft long. Tyrannosaurus averaged about 12-13 meters(40-43 ft), but maxed out at 14-15 meters(46-50 ft). I mean no disrespect, just stating my opinions.

i dont know

It would certainly help, but I have a hard time believing it. Possible, but not likely. Would make it far more terrifying though, if that's possible, haha [img]http://0.tqn.com/d/dinosaurs/1/0/k/D/-/-/dilophosaurusAB.jpg[/img]