type of allosaurus bigger than t rex?
Kay

Sarasota, FL

#21 May 23, 2011
Taylor Reints wrote:
<quoted text>
GIGANOTOSAURUS = 42-46 ft long, 12,000-14,000 lbs
CARCHARODONTOSAURUS = 39-43 ft long, 13,200-16,000 lbs
TYRANNOSAURUS = 44-48 ft long, 12,000-14,000 lbs
My estimates can be seen here by clicking the link: http://theropods.blogspot.com/2011/04/theropo... Scroll down to the header entitled, "Theropod Size Conclusions".
My estimates can be explained here:
Giganotosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus - http://theropods.blogspot.com/2011/03/theropo...
Tyrannosaurus - http://theropods.blogspot.com/2011/03/theropo...
No t rex found was 44 feet long, let alone 48. and FYI, t rex was NOT bigger than giga.
Spinodontosaurus

Cockermouth, UK

#22 May 24, 2011
Sue is the largest Tyrannosaurus specimen found that is definitive. Given the sheer mount of disparity between Tyrannosaurus individuals sometimes, I fail to see why any of these super large figures should be taken seriously; STAN's femur (or tibia, I dont recall of the top of my head which one) is LONGER than SUE's even though Sue would be just over 24%larger in life assuming equal body build (which was absent; Sue was MUCH bulkier).
Indeed based on Stan, and presumably other large headed Tyrannosaurus', MOR 008 would be fractionally smaller than Sue to the point they might as well be the same size.

“Epic Facepalm!”

Since: May 11

Queen Creek, AZ

#23 May 24, 2011
Okay, then, maybe my lower and higher estimates should be shrunken, 41-46 ft long.

“Epic Facepalm!”

Since: May 11

Queen Creek, AZ

#24 May 24, 2011
Kay wrote:
<quoted text>No t rex found was 44 feet long, let alone 48. and FYI, t rex was NOT bigger than giga.
I never said Tyrannosaurus rex was bigger than Giganotosaurus carolinii. They weigh roughly the same but Tyrannosaurus is a few feet longer, due to G. carolinii's femur circumference results.

CIRCUMFERENCE REFERENCE - Not only does the Illiterate Scholar video-chat about it I have a reference!
Mazzetta, G.V., Christiansen, P., Fariña, R.A.(2004). "Giants and Bizarres: Body Size of Some Southern South American Cretaceous Dinosaurs". Historical Biology, 16: 71-83.

“Epic Facepalm!”

Since: May 11

Queen Creek, AZ

#25 May 24, 2011
Mazzetta, G.V., Christiansen, P., Fariña, R.A.(2004). "GIANTS AND BIZARRES: BODY SIZE OF SOME SOUTHERN SOUTH AMERICAN CRETACEOUS DINOSAURS". Historical Biology, 16: 71-83.

Body masses of some South American dinosaurs are
estimated. The sauropod Argentinosaurus huinculensis reached 73 tonnes, and therefore, is the largest of all land animals whose mass has been rigorously obtained. Another sauropod, Antarctosaurus giganteus, was the second largest, at nearly 69 tonnes, while Antarctosaurus
wichmannianus reached 34 tonnes. A third sauropod, the bizarre-looking Amargasaurus cazaui, was much smaller, with a body mass of only 2.5 tonnes. Among theropods, the body mass of the strangely looking, horned Carnotaurus sastrei, was volumetrically estimated at 1.5 tonnes, while allometric equations on limb measurements
yielded overestimations. Moreover, the holotype
specimen of Giganotosaurus carolinii (MUCPv-CH-1)
was about as large as the average-sized Tyrannosaurus rex, and only marginally smaller than “Sue”, the largest specimen. However, a new dentary of Giganotosaurus (MUCPv-95) is 8% longer than that of the holotype. Assuming geometric similarity, that individual must have had a body mass above 8 tonnes and hence must have been the largest theropod ever found.

http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/tmp/papers/Mazze...
Brachiotitan

Calgary, Canada

#26 May 24, 2011
Turannosaurus was not longer than Giganotosaurus. BUT, the only reason that Giganotosaurus was longer was because of it's freakishly long skull. If the heads were cut off both animals, Tyrannosaurus would be longer than Giganotosaurus.

Since Tyrannosaurus was bulkier and taller than Giganotosaurus, and there is no proof that Giganotosaurus was denser, it is just common sence that Tyrannosaurus would be heavier.

“Epic Facepalm!”

Since: May 11

Queen Creek, AZ

#27 May 24, 2011
Brachiotitan wrote:
Turannosaurus was not longer than Giganotosaurus.
I gave a reference supporting the viewpoint of T. rex being longer than Giganotosaurus. What more could you ask for? T. rex was taller, longer and probably even heavier. Face it, they said Giganotosaurus carolinii was the new king a few years ago, but T. rex stole back its name and rightful position in the Dinosaur as the largest neotetanuran and possibly even theropod.
Other Lizard

San Francisco, CA

#28 May 24, 2011
Why does everyone hate on Spino?
troodon88

United States

#29 May 24, 2011
personally 40-43 area seems like what it is to me
Other Lizard

San Francisco, CA

#30 May 24, 2011
You do realize that it is DEFINITELY larger than Suchomimus? And that Suchomimus IS 40-43ft?

“Yours truly....”

Since: May 11

Perryville, Missouri

#31 May 24, 2011
i was talking about rex not spino
Kay

Sarasota, FL

#32 May 24, 2011
Other Lizard wrote:
Why does everyone hate on Spino?
It's simple. They can't stand T rex not being the best anymore.
Kay

Sarasota, FL

#33 May 24, 2011
Spinodontosaurus wrote:
Sue is the largest Tyrannosaurus specimen found that is definitive. Given the sheer mount of disparity between Tyrannosaurus individuals sometimes, I fail to see why any of these super large figures should be taken seriously; STAN's femur (or tibia, I dont recall of the top of my head which one) is LONGER than SUE's even though Sue would be just over 24%larger in life assuming equal body build (which was absent; Sue was MUCH bulkier).
Indeed based on Stan, and presumably other large headed Tyrannosaurus', MOR 008 would be fractionally smaller than Sue to the point they might as well be the same size.
The tibia wasn't as tall as rex's. That means Rex was taller, not longer.
Spinodontosaurus

Cockermouth, UK

#34 May 25, 2011
Taylor Reints wrote:
<quoted text>
I gave a reference supporting the viewpoint of T. rex being longer than Giganotosaurus. What more could you ask for? T. rex was taller, longer and probably even heavier. Face it, they said Giganotosaurus carolinii was the new king a few years ago, but T. rex stole back its name and rightful position in the Dinosaur as the largest neotetanuran and possibly even theropod.
The large dentary of Giganotosaurus suggests an animal longer than Sue, though only a little longer. Giganotosaurus was NEVER the largest, the holotype found back in 1995 was smaller than Tyrannosaurus AND Spinosaurus wer known to be at the time, and Spinosaurus was known only from sub adult remains at the time.

I personally have a strong dislike for the femur method and only cite itif there is a lack of other estimates (though even then I prefer simply using a close relative as a rough guide). It does not take acount of build nor of bone density.

“Epic Facepalm!”

Since: May 11

Queen Creek, AZ

#35 May 25, 2011
Spinodontosaurus wrote:
<quoted text>
The large dentary of Giganotosaurus suggests an animal longer than Sue, though only a little longer. Giganotosaurus was NEVER the largest, the holotype found back in 1995 was smaller than Tyrannosaurus AND Spinosaurus wer known to be at the time, and Spinosaurus was known only from sub adult remains at the time.
I personally have a strong dislike for the femur method and only cite itif there is a lack of other estimates (though even then I prefer simply using a close relative as a rough guide). It does not take acount of build nor of bone density.
READ:
* http://theropods.blogspot.com/2011/03/theropo...
* http://theropods.blogspot.com/2011/03/theropo...

“Epic Facepalm!”

Since: May 11

Queen Creek, AZ

#36 May 25, 2011
Other Lizard wrote:
Why does everyone hate on Spino?
READ:
* http://theropods.blogspot.com/2011/03/theropo...
Read the comments on this post, please.
Spinodontosaurus

Manchester, UK

#37 May 25, 2011
UCMP 118742 is a Sue sized adult, whats the big deal? A 16 year old Tyrannosaurus would more or less be an adult one, based on the more recent study of Tyrannosaurus growth curves.
It's maxilla is NOT longer than Sue's, I dont know where that came from. If the figures on Mortimer's database are based on the deformed Sue skull, then Sue's corrected maxilla is about the same length as the UCMP 11742 maxilla. If not, Sue is a fair deal LARGER.
Ok, so lets presume for a moment that the older 18 year old for an adult Tyrannosaurus is the correct figure, who is to say there isnt a reason why the thing never reached adulthood? Perhaps it suffered from a form of gigantism causing it to die at an early age.
With extinct animals, you have to take evrything with a grain of salt, hence why people werent leaping around saying that the Spinosaurus holotype was really 16m as an adult or anything; because there are too many uncertainties.

And, again, why must Sue be used as the standard? The larger headed individuals suggest MOR 008 is fractionaly SMALLER than Sue, whilst they would also through the UCMP 118742 figures out of the window entirely.

The second links reinforces what I was saying, that the larger specimen of Giganotosaurus is longer than Sue.(I do though disagree about the height, the fact that Giganotosaurus' femur is so much longer makes up for its shorter tibia and foot).

The last link makes a critical mistake in its evaluation of Spinosaurus' size; the lower end estimates are based on the SUB ADULT holotype, not MSNM V4074. It is like saying that 11m and 13m Tyrannosaurus exist, its true size is unknown so lets call it 12m.
Therrien and Hendersons paper made a foolish presumption that every theropod had the same proportions (and used a 1.57m Giganotosaurus skull that doesnt exist), which is obviously far from true.

I personally think the best way to look at it is as follows:
Most theropods top off at about 13m and 6t (Tyrannosaurus, several carcharodontosaurids, Baryonyx etc.)
Spinosaurus (and probably one or two other un-discovered spinosaurids) completely dwarfs them due to its unique niche vs other theropods (not just spinosaurids, look at how big dromaeosaurids got when Austroraptor tried its hand at piscivory).

Either way, I think we agree that Tyrannosaurus if anything is probably slightly larger than Giganotosaurus.
Other Lizard

Palo Alto, CA

#38 May 25, 2011
Taylor Reints wrote:
<quoted text>
READ:
* http://theropods.blogspot.com/2011/03/theropo...
Read the comments on this post, please.
I was the one who made those comments, so how could i not read it?
wazza

Bradford, UK

#39 Jul 24, 2011
no allosaurus is bigger than t-rex but there is a allosaur that is bigger saurophaganax could have reached 15 metres

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#40 Jul 24, 2011
Nice joke. Can you stop eating crack now?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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
Leogorgon, a gorgonopsian larger than inostranc... (Sep '09) 7 hr The boss 9
Spinosaurus or Tyrannosaurus? Jul 22 Coelophysis 13
Spinosaurus vs. t-rex (Dec '07) Jul 20 maya 5,825
Tyranna, King of the Dinosaurs. (Feb '12) Jul 20 Coprolite 40
The planet of Dinosaurs (Jan '12) Jul 20 Coprolite 158
I made my new forum called "imperial palace 2" ... (Feb '13) Jul 20 Coprolite 13
Is fossilshack.com legit? Are all the fossils a... Jul 18 Ian_soy 1
More from around the web