October 01, 2013Tarbosaurus has a thinner skull than T. rex, with less muscle attachments. Its eyes were positioned more to the side, were slightly bigger, its nares were smaller and its teeth were thinner and smaller proportionately. The holotype Tarbosaurus was huge, being Sue length. However, the rest center between 33 and 36 feet as a maximum length. Tarbosaurus has legs well adapted for running, perhaps for hunting Deinocheirus (though it would only catch it by ambush). I see a bite force of 4 tons being the maximum.
Oxalaia has been downsized. It now is Suchomimus length at 40 feet. There are several variables that affect the outcome here. If Oxalaia was a Baryonichine related to Suchomimus and Baryonyx, it would have only a short muscle ridge. Also, it would have narrow jaws and a somewhat weak bite, though its jaws would have been good at resisting force. Its teeth, however, would be slightly curved and serrated. If it was a Spinosaurine, it would have a muscular ridge, be potentially as robust as or more so than Tarbosaurus, judging by this Spino skeletal compared to Rex's.
[img]http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/849/overheadskeletal.jpg[/img]
A large muscular ridge would give it a power edge. Also, a spinosaurine Oxalaia would have powerful jaws, capable of a near 3 ton bite at 40 feet. However, its teeth would be only marginally curved and very finely serrated. Its claws and arms would be deadly as well, the claws themselves likely topping 2 feet.
I say Tarbo beats Suchomimus-like Oxalaia, but loses to Spinosaurus-like Oxalaia. However, the latter would be very close.
