Size comparison of Ampicoelias and Bruhathkayosaurus?

Posted in the Dinosaur Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Predator X

Winschoten, Netherlands

#1 Nov 29, 2009
I know this may sound stupid, but anyone has a good comparison of those 2? Ampicoelias is supposed to be longer but lighter, and Bruhatkayosaurus shorter but heavier.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_P_vOYshVCYY/ScZ-ozw...

This one does not seem right to me. Ampicoelias in that picture still looks alot heavier then Bruhathkayosaurus because its body is so much longer and taller if you know what I mean. Look at how huge it is at the hips. In that picture the total body size of Amphicoelias is much bigger then that of Bruhathkaysaurus.

I know this might be stupid, but I'd like a good comparison.
Spinodontosaurus

Southampton, UK

#2 Nov 29, 2009
Predator X wrote:
I know this may sound stupid, but anyone has a good comparison of those 2? Ampicoelias is supposed to be longer but lighter, and Bruhatkayosaurus shorter but heavier.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_P_vOYshVCYY/ScZ-ozw...
This one does not seem right to me. Ampicoelias in that picture still looks alot heavier then Bruhathkayosaurus because its body is so much longer and taller if you know what I mean. Look at how huge it is at the hips. In that picture the total body size of Amphicoelias is much bigger then that of Bruhathkaysaurus.
I know this might be stupid, but I'd like a good comparison.
What i want to know is how they figured out that Bruha was heavier than Amphi even though it was a fair bit smaller.
Predator X

Winschoten, Netherlands

#4 Nov 29, 2009
Bruhathkayosaurus was a titanosaur probably. They are much more heavy built then Diplodocidae. That's why Argentinosaurus is heavier then D.hallorum.
Spinodontosaurus

Southampton, UK

#5 Nov 29, 2009
Predator X wrote:
Bruhathkayosaurus was a titanosaur probably. They are much more heavy built then Diplodocidae. That's why Argentinosaurus is heavier then D.hallorum.
True, although the size diff between Argentino and Diplo is way smaller tha Amphic and Bruhat.
Predator X

Winschoten, Netherlands

#6 Nov 29, 2009
But the weight differnece is bigger

Between Amphi and Bru there is 20 m difference and 50 tons weight difference.
Between D.hallorum and Argentinosaurus there is like ?5? m difference and 57 ton weight difference. I see your point, but Ampicoelias probably was not realy that heavy at all. A 35 m D.hallorum was only 16 tons. Using 3D calculating I get 128 tons for Amphi and 160 for Bru.
Spinodontosaurus

Southampton, UK

#7 Nov 29, 2009
Predator X wrote:
But the weight differnece is bigger
Between Amphi and Bru there is 20 m difference and 50 tons weight difference.
Between D.hallorum and Argentinosaurus there is like ?5? m difference and 57 ton weight difference. I see your point, but Ampicoelias probably was not realy that heavy at all. A 35 m D.hallorum was only 16 tons. Using 3D calculating I get 128 tons for Amphi and 160 for Bru.
Suppose, i forgot how light Diplo is XD
Though i do wonder how a 35m animal can weigh 'only' 15t.
Big Al

Milan, Italy

#8 Nov 29, 2009
Spinodontosaurus wrote:
<quoted text>
Suppose, i forgot how light Diplo is XD
Though i do wonder how a 35m animal can weigh 'only' 15t.
Well, more of da half of its body is tail: a looong tail
And non-macronarian sauropods usually have short legs, so their legs r smaller and lighter
Big Al

Milan, Italy

#9 Nov 29, 2009
On top of dat, an adult giraffatitan weighted 25 t (da specimen of berlin is a subadult, not an adult)
Read this ;)
http://www.topix.com/forum/science/dinosaurs/...
Predator X

Winschoten, Netherlands

#10 Nov 29, 2009
25 tons is realy light for a Giraffatitan. I used to read books that said 60 to 80 tonsXD. Some something different then 25.

But Big Al, do you have a good size comparison. Even with the new method Bru was heavier then Amphicoelias. And the size chart I linked doesnt seem to fit cause Amphi's body looks a lot bigger and longer then that of Amphicoelias.
Spinodontosaurus

Southampton, UK

#11 Nov 29, 2009
Predator X wrote:
25 tons is realy light for a Giraffatitan. I used to read books that said 60 to 80 tonsXD. Some something different then 25.
But Big Al, do you have a good size comparison. Even with the new method Bru was heavier then Amphicoelias. And the size chart I linked doesnt seem to fit cause Amphi's body looks a lot bigger and longer then that of Amphicoelias.
Do you mean Amphi's body looked alot bigger than Bruha's?
Big Al

Limbiate, Italy

#12 Nov 29, 2009
Predator X wrote:
25 tons is realy light for a Giraffatitan. I used to read books that said 60 to 80 tonsXD. Some something different then 25.
But Big Al, do you have a good size comparison. Even with the new method Bru was heavier then Amphicoelias. And the size chart I linked doesnt seem to fit cause Amphi's body looks a lot bigger and longer then that of Amphicoelias.
Ive books sayin dat dimetrodon was a terrible carnivorous dinosaur, dat allosaurus was da ancestor of t-rex and once i even saw a newspaper sayin PLACODERMS WERE MARINE DINOSAURS!!!!!!! LLLLLLLOLLLLL
Predator X

Winschoten, Netherlands

#13 Nov 29, 2009
I know Big Al. Its not that I dont believe you. Its just suddenly a big difference, LOL.

Spinodontosaurus: Thats what I meant. In that picture Amphi's body look ALOT bigger then Bruhathkayosaurus' body.
Predator X

Winschoten, Netherlands

#14 Dec 4, 2009
Anybody?
Spinodontosaurus

Southampton, UK

#15 Dec 4, 2009
Predator X wrote:
Anybody?
The only one i can find is the one you showed.
adi raj

New Delhi, India

#16 Sep 30, 2010
Biggest and the largest was amphicoelias that was propably the size of 2 blue whales but there was another dinosaur which bigger than the blue whale it's name was bruhathkayosaurus but was smaller than amphi.

“BOOMER WILL LIVE”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#17 Sep 30, 2010
Since when was
1. Bruhathkayosaurus nearly 200t? Thats a gross overestimate.
2. Amphicoelias nearly 4OOt!?
Altanative Hyainailouros

Italy

#18 Sep 30, 2010
U know he means LENGHT by "size"... XD

“BOOMER WILL LIVE”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#19 Sep 30, 2010
Hmm, actually i didnt consider that... But thats probally the case. (even then, afaik, large Blue Whales can be in excess of 30m...)
Altanative Hyainailouros

Italy

#20 Sep 30, 2010
Spinodontosaurus wrote:
Hmm, actually i didnt consider that... But thats probally the case.(even then, afaik, large Blue Whales can be in excess of 30m...)
EVERY1 “knows” dat blue whale r 100 ft long n weigh 100 t, right?
Spinodontosaurus

Cockermouth, UK

#21 Oct 1, 2010
I though it was much heavier than that... closer too 200t...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Dinosaur Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The dinosaur display, with cash, at the Beijing... Wed Alan Detrich 1
Spinosaurus would easily beat T rex in a fight (Jun '14) May 19 spinosaurus baryonyx 128
why isn't the theory pterodactyl and raptor? May 14 spinosaurus baryonyx 2
kaiju arena of doom and-friendship!? (Sep '14) May 13 spinosaurus baryonyx 48
i am not jakesaurus!!! May 13 spinosaurus baryonyx 21
Let's Talk About: Godzilla (1998) May 13 spinosaurus baryonyx 2
Spinosaurus vs King Kong (Sep '14) May 12 GetoverIT 18
More from around the web