Why Spinosaurus Wins

Its bite was certainly very strong, but it was not monstrously strong. Its strong biting force seems to be attributed to its immense size, nothing more. In fact, I do not think bite force is necessarily the most accurate way to determine if an animal is strong or not, as spinosaurus occupied a niche and had a lifestyle/ecology that did not require such a strong biting force; it was very strong because it was evolved to hunt powerful freshwater fish through the utilization of its gripping anatomy. So of course it was a strong animal, but that was due to its lifestyle in which such a strong bite force in unnecessary.

Quote: Look at its jaw structure, it looks a lot like a crocodile's, and guess what has the strongest bite force today... CROCODILES!!

Do not think of spinosaurus as a scaled-up crocodile; it was certainly not analogous to most species of crocodilian. Spinosaurus was really only similar to the false gharial or freshwater crocodile if anything. Those species seem to be where the bulk of the theories surrounding spinosaurus' lifestyle come from; they were awfully similar in snout morphology to the theropod in this case in terms of width and specialization. That said, those species do not necessarily possess gracile jaws necessarily (which is yet another reason to believe that spinosaurus was not a weak animal) and are generalist (opportunist) predators, capable of taking down reasonably-sized mammals on occasion. This leads into the next point that spinosaurus hunted fish most of all but was capable of killing dinosaurs.

Quote: And also who is to say that spinosaurus only ate fish and small dinosaurs. Im pretty sure a carnivorous dinosaur THAT big must have killed and eaten dinosaurs as big as sauropods

The fish that spinosaurus ate were pretty huge; they were no goldfish. The point is that spinosaurus was evolved to kill such fish, and with such a robust snout, pointed conical teeth designed for piercing deeply and gripping with much efficiency, and lack of an exceptional bite force it is really no surprise. Spinosaurus' jaws and teeth were designed for gripping without injury, but that is because it evolved to occupy such a niche. You must not think that spinosaurus was weak because it hunted fish, as that is what its specialization lies in.

Its teeth were more "heavily" pointed than those of tyrannosaurus (designed for crushing) and those of allosaurs (designed for ripping), so it was much better designed for this kind of lifestyle.

Well, yeah. I'm on Team Spino, but I do see advantages in Tyrannosaurus. If you ask me, the location would decide on the winner. In a forest, Tyrannosaurus would win, in a field or prairie, either could win. In a wetlands area or a lake, Spinosaurus would win. Watch Monsters Ressurected: Biggest Killer Dino for more info. (I do warn you, in that video Spinosaurus is a bit OP.) Rex Fan 684 said this discussion is dead. I'm just posting this to STOP THIS STUPID ARGUMENT!!! IT'S POINTLESS!!! DO SOMETHING ELSE WITH THE JP SERIES OR DINOSAURS!!! Sorry about that, just getting the message through your heads.

     (P.S. The meusem with the Spinosaurus bones wasn't blown up. There was a Nazi base really close to it, and that was bombed. The meusem was destroyed from the impact.)

i actually agree with Sci-Fi King25. Spino doesn't always win, in certain cases the Rex can Also Win, in the forest the T-Rex has advantages. the forest is thick so a spino probably will tangled over the branches and T - Rex could easyly crush it skull. in open field the Spino have more advantage. the open field makes a lot of spaces. so the spino have plenty room to make an escape of T-Rex bite, and kill the Rex.

I'm reeeeeaaaaaaaaaally getting tired of this thing. Really? Why are we talknig about this for 13 years?!?!

Well to answer your question in the best and probably only light. 

Idiots who think they're paleontoligists Keep pouring alcohol on an open wound... Thus causing more problems, While the simple fact this is a  fact vs opinion war. Everyone needs to have their opinion Which is almost BARELY ever fact. I'm not tageting spino fans, Im not targeting rex fans, Im targeting the people who keep bloody bringing it up as if its as important to them as their loved ones.

Just give it up and let the Bloody Facts Speak for themselves. 

Enough bloody said. Give it a rest. Have an Unbiased opinion. 

For years this has been debated and it all started in 2001. Fast forward 13 years later and it's still going on. At least with the help of time we got more imformation on these two monsters. I'm seeing a lot of baised Rex fanboy's which is a shame. But i'll give credit where it's due. In the end we still can only assume. For this post i'll put the final nail in this coffin:

Tyrannosaurus Rex Advantages:

13M long

Weight 7-9 tons

Height 20ft

1. Way bigger bite force (estimated to be around 6-9 tons)

2. Dense bones/skull meaning can use it's head to charge

3. Bigger brain. May have used tactics to take down it's prey

Spinosaurus Advantages:

17-18m long

Weight 11-13 tons

Height 20-24 ft (without spine)

1. 6ft long robust arms equipped with 13-15 inch claws

2. 2-3 ton bite force (though no where near as big as Rex's it's still a force that can kill.

3. It can easily use it's weight as an offense to muscle it's way over. Both Rex and Spino had binocular vision and speed so it's an advantage

In the end, I'd say Spino has a 70% chance of winning. Rex needs to get close to Spino to attack it. But nothing is getting near Spino with those arms.

Winner: Spinosaurus

Tyrannosaurus Rex Advantages:

13M long

Weight 7-9 tons

Height 20ft

1. Way bigger bite force (estimated to be around 6-9 tons)

2. Dense bones/skull meaning can use it's head to charge

3. Bigger brain. May have used tactics to take down it's prey

Tryin to be fair with my arguments, so let's start with rexy.

Tyrannosaurus bones were quite hollow actually, not dense as you've stated. The skull wasn't heavily enforced, so a 'ramming' technique probably would not be utilized. It's all about those jaws in this animals case.

Tyrannosaurus did not reach a height of 20 feet, that's a fabrication passed on from various dino documentaries. "Sue", the largest tyrannosaur that's fairly complete, had an estimated hip height of around 7-8 feet, a head height of 13 feet. Pretty tall, just not that tall. Also, an average tyrannosaurus measured 11.6 meters and weighed 6/7 tons.

6ft long robust arms equipped with 13-15 inch claws

We haven't found its arms, so that's mere speculation. Most of what you have posted on spino is speculation, but i've covered that in my previous posts. Can you provide any sources with these claims?

I'm seeing a lot of baised Rex fanboy's which is a shame. But i'll give credit where it's due. In the end we still can only assume. For this post i'll put the final nail in this coffin:

This. Apparently you are too blind to see, or are just ignoring the fact that there have been many biased spinosaurus claims on this thread. Your 'final nail in the coffin is full of inaccuracies and myths founded on dinosaur documentaries and false proof.

Alright, from now on you reply to me on THIS topic since it does suit it more reasonable. As for your responses:

1. It's still open for debate. And it is a move on instinct that even todays animals do.

Well at least you and me can agree on that. Though I was being generous since rex fans love to hype up the myth that is C. Rex. But those were my previous estimateds.

2. It's most likely the outcome. Look at the others such as Suchomimus or Baryonyx. A long robust arm is needed if scaled.

3. No, your vision of Spinosaurus was based of false information. Their is no proof on Spino being at a max 8-9 tons and grew only 50ft. Not to meantion it being weaker to Rex. Bit force is the only thing. Name me others if you can.

PS: Planet Dinosaur is the most somewhat accurate for a 17m Spinosaurus. A couple minor issues today but still good.

 It's still open for debate. And it is a move on instinct that even todays animals do.

Which animals do that? to my understanding most big cats and felids grapple and/or rely on their jaws. Crocs don't even do that from my understanding.

Though I was being generous since rex fans love to hype up the myth that is C. Rex. But those were my previous estimateds

C-rex is not a myth, it is an actual fossil find.

BBC article on C.Rex

No, your vision of Spinosaurus was based of false information. Their is no proof on Spino being at a max 8-9 tons and grew only 50ft.

Paul Sereno and the folks over at national Geographic would have to disagree with you.

New spino finds and exhibit

 Planet Dinosaur is the most somewhat accurate for a 17m Spinosaurus

I liked planet dinosaur, don't get me wrong. But you can't use a documentary as any sort of evidence to back up what you've stated.