Giganotosaurus vs. T. rex

[Sakib]

Spinosaur King wrote:

<quoted text>
?????are you kidding?T rex would win its the king.plus,science says that to.
Here are the statistics:
Giganotosaurus:
43-47 feet long
5-6 tons in weight using the new method.
16 feet tall
Speed:Mabye 25 mph
Weapons:large 4 foot jaw with thin,fragile teeth for slicing meat,4 foot arms arms with three fingers,long talons on hind legs.
Conclusion:Giganotosaurus was indeed a powerful predator,top of the food chain.It was powerfully built with a long tail for balange but its jwas weren't that strong.Also its teeth were fragile and if they hit bone they would break.Gianotosaurus is indeed a contender for the kings throne.
Tyrannosaurus rex:
upto 43 feet long,mabye 45 feet.
4.5-5 tons in weight using the new method.
15 feet tall
Speed:25mph
Weapons:Large,powerfull 4 foot jaws capable of a 235,000 newton bite force with strong,deeply rooted teeth for pulveriesing and crushing prey,strong 3 foot arms with 2 fingers,long talons on its hind feet,highly advanced brain,binocular vision,exelent sense of smell nd hearing.
Conclusion:Tyrannosaurus rex was the apex predator of its time.HUGLY muscled with a long tail for balance.And a more advanced brain,binocular vision and other acute scenses gave t rex and edge.
So Tyrannosaurus rex HAS NOT been dethroned yet and would win.So back in 1908 they were right to doub this animal "tyrannosaurus rex,the tyrant lizard king".
LONG LIVE THE TRUE KING!!!!!

I don't know what delusional paradise you came from, but NO animal at T. rex's or giganotosaurus's size could run 25 mph. 19 for rex, I'm not sure how many for giganotosaurus.

You disregard size altogether. You mention a heavily muscled T. rex, but nothing of the huge size advantage giganotosaurus has.

[PaudieN1]

Sakib wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't know what delusional paradise you came from, but NO animal at T. rex's or giganotosaurus's size could run 25 mph. 19 for rex, I'm not sure how many for giganotosaurus.
You disregard size altogether. You mention a heavily muscled T. rex, but nothing of the huge size advantage giganotosaurus has.

T.Rex owns Giga in every aspect except size so T.Rex wins and T.Rex is the King

[Marcus]

I bet on Giganotosaurus

[Predator X]

Sakib wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't know what delusional paradise you came from, but NO animal at T. rex's or giganotosaurus's size could run 25 mph. 19 for rex, I'm not sure how many for giganotosaurus.
You disregard size altogether. You mention a heavily muscled T. rex, but nothing of the huge size advantage giganotosaurus has.

The huge size advantage that is 4 feet? The huge weight advantage that is not over 1 ton? How about the huge intelligence advatage, bite advantage, more muscular built advantage, better vision advantage? You said yourself that you mean turning around. That means a shorter object would turn faster. Cause the HUGE size advantage you talk about in theory T.rex could turn faster. Yet, you gave NO argument whatsoever that Giga would be able to turn faster. Wide ribcage does not matter at all if you turn around your axle on your hips. Giga's total HUGE weight advantage of nearly 1 ton!!! would mean it's heavier, so T.rex heavier head would not matter cause Giga is still heavier in total.

[PaudieN1]

Marcus wrote:

I bet on Giganotosaurus

Then you are completely biased. You think your opinion is correct and science is right? Well science is right and you're wrong. It's obvious that T.Rex wins.

[PaudieN1]

I ment you think science is wrong?

[Big Al]

I'll always say:
Tyrannosaurus is a theropod-killer theropod

[Spinosaur King]

Sakib wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't know what delusional paradise you came from, but NO animal at T. rex's or giganotosaurus's size could run 25 mph. 19 for rex, I'm not sure how many for giganotosaurus.
You disregard size altogether. You mention a heavily muscled T. rex, but nothing of the huge size advantage giganotosaurus has.

My conclusion is based on proper scientific FACTS.And since when has giga got a "huge" size advantage.

oh and i come from science,you just start insultingh people when your wrong.

[Gianmario92]

Sakib, Giganotosaurus did not have a huge size advantage, it had a very slight size advantage, the size advantage Giga has over T.Rex is huge to us humans, of course an hypothetical 1100 kg human would easily defeat a 100 kg human, but when animals are so large, its not the same things, if you scale down Giga and Rex 100 times we have a 80 kg Giga and a 70 kg T.Rex, the size difference is slight.

[Spinosaur King]

thankyou gianmario.

[Marcus]

PaudieN1 wrote:

<quoted text>Then you are completely biased. You think your opinion is correct and science is right? Well science is right and you're wrong. It's obvious that T.Rex wins.

Lol, if anyone is biased here is you, sure aint me.
Anyway Giganotosaurus was a bit larger then T.rex, it was more agile and it had also longer arms, claws. It hunted in pack to bring the large Argentinosaurus down. This will sujest that it was smarter then T.rex sense pack animals are as a rule more cleaver then solitary animals.
It´s true that T.rex had stronger jaws, more bite-force but Giganatosaurus had more advantages.

[Predator X]

Marcus, are you realy that dumb or are you just pretending to so you can realy, realy irritate us?

As stated 1000 times, arms wont do anything in this fight. You have no evidence that proves Giganotosaurus is more agile. It's not smarter then T.rex. EVERY research or book I read clearly states Giganotosaurus was bigger but dumber then T.rex. Being a pack animal certainly is no evidence. They may work together better, but that wont matter in a ONE ON ONE fight.

[Spinosaur King]

Marcus wrote:

<quoted text>
Lol, if anyone is biased here is you, sure aint me.
Anyway Giganotosaurus was a bit larger then T.rex, it was more agile and it had also longer arms, claws. It hunted in pack to bring the large Argentinosaurus down. This will sujest that it was smarter then T.rex sense pack animals are as a rule more cleaver then solitary animals.
It´s true that T.rex had stronger jaws, more bite-force but Giganatosaurus had more advantages.

ok now YOUR the one thats biased,paudieN1 and everyone else here isn't exept you..Giga wasn't more agile,arm legnth dosen't matter,t rex may well have hunted in pacts to,and C>T scans of their brains show that t rex was FAR cleverer.

SCIENCE PROVES that t rex would win.

[Big Al]

Gianmario92 wrote:

Sakib, Giganotosaurus did not have a huge size advantage, it had a very slight size advantage, the size advantage Giga has over T.Rex is huge to us humans, of course an hypothetical 1100 kg human would easily defeat a 100 kg human, but when animals are so large, its not the same things, if you scale down Giga and Rex 100 times we have a 80 kg Giga and a 70 kg T.Rex, the size difference is slight.

That's right gianmario

[Big Al]

Actually tyrannosaurus was more agile and faster than giganotosaurus, bein dat tyrannosaurids have arctometatarsus while carcharodontosaurids havent

[Big Al]

And 2 me both giganotosaurus and tyrannosaurus didn use arms in battle (i guess)
Link of theropoda about allosauroid arms
http://translate.google.com/translate... |en&tbb=1&ie=utf-8

[PaudieN1]

Marcus wrote:

<quoted text>
Lol, if anyone is biased here is you, sure aint me.
Anyway Giganotosaurus was a bit larger then T.rex, it was more agile and it had also longer arms, claws. It hunted in pack to bring the large Argentinosaurus down. This will sujest that it was smarter then T.rex sense pack animals are as a rule more cleaver then solitary animals.
It´s true that T.rex had stronger jaws, more bite-force but Giganatosaurus had more advantages.

You really are the limit! We give you the facts, they prove T.Rex wins, yet you still argue against evidence and yet you claim you are not biased! Just listen to yourself. You are a contender for the most biased person to ever use this website.

[Marcus]

Spinosaur King wrote:

<quoted text>
ok now YOUR the one thats biased,paudieN1 and everyone else here isn't exept you..Giga wasn't more agile,arm legnth dosen't matter,t rex may well have hunted in pacts to,and C>T scans of their brains show that t rex was FAR cleverer.
SCIENCE PROVES that t rex would win.

Then can I ask for the link?

[aaa]

Back from a long absence.

Anyways, science dosent prove either animal wins in a fight. To be completely honest, the slight "advantages/disadvantages " would mean very little in an all out fight. Theyre both the same size. We're not talking raptor vs rex. In all reality it is essentially rex vs itself. I really dont think any animal has the clear advantage here.

Whoever draws blood first has the biggest chance of winning.

====

On another subject:

Everybody has heard that giga is "supposedly" 7-8 tons (1 ton higher than rex). BUT has anyone thought this to be a little off? 7-8 seems like a rough overestimate to me for the following reasons:

1. Giga was no doubt lighter in build. However i dont see how 3-5 feet of difference in length can add 1 ton to weight. Unless youre telling me its head alone weighed in excess of 1000 lbs. For those of you who argue giga had a wider body. Are you telling me that a few inches can dictate 2000 lbs of difference? OR are you telling me that giga was more than 15 ft wide?

2. Giga comes from a lineage of lightly built predators. Allo and friends were lightly built. Even though giga isnt a direct descendant, its body plan shows that its allo like. What reason does anyone have to suggest that it would be unproportionately heavier?

Allo ~30 ft, 2-3 tons
Giga ~45 ft, 7-8 tons??

15 feet adds 5 tons? <-- I dont think so

3. The last reason is based on my assumption from looking at "giga skeletons". Look closely at them. You can see giga was like allosaurus in that it had a long tail, short body, avg head size.

As far as im concerned tail length doesnt add a whole ton, especially not if the animal is only 3-5 ft longer than its competitor.

Wanna argue against that? Cheetahs have MUCH longer tails in comparison than bobcats. Do you see any 500 lb cheetahs chasing gazelle?

My 2 cents

[PaudieN1]

aaa wrote:

Back from a long absence.
Anyways, science dosent prove either animal wins in a fight. To be completely honest, the slight "advantages/disadvantages " would mean very little in an all out fight. Theyre both the same size. We're not talking raptor vs rex. In all reality it is essentially rex vs itself. I really dont think any animal has the clear advantage here.
Whoever draws blood first has the biggest chance of winning.
====
On another subject:
Everybody has heard that giga is "supposedly" 7-8 tons (1 ton higher than rex). BUT has anyone thought this to be a little off? 7-8 seems like a rough overestimate to me for the following reasons:
1. Giga was no doubt lighter in build. However i dont see how 3-5 feet of difference in length can add 1 ton to weight. Unless youre telling me its head alone weighed in excess of 1000 lbs. For those of you who argue giga had a wider body. Are you telling me that a few inches can dictate 2000 lbs of difference? OR are you telling me that giga was more than 15 ft wide?
2. Giga comes from a lineage of lightly built predators. Allo and friends were lightly built. Even though giga isnt a direct descendant, its body plan shows that its allo like. What reason does anyone have to suggest that it would be unproportionately heavier?
Allo ~30 ft, 2-3 tons
Giga ~45 ft, 7-8 tons??
15 feet adds 5 tons? <-- I dont think so
3. The last reason is based on my assumption from looking at "giga skeletons". Look closely at them. You can see giga was like allosaurus in that it had a long tail, short body, avg head size.
As far as im concerned tail length doesnt add a whole ton, especially not if the animal is only 3-5 ft longer than its competitor.
Wanna argue against that? Cheetahs have MUCH longer tails in comparison than bobcats. Do you see any 500 lb cheetahs chasing gazelle?
My 2 cents

Slight advantage? So now a large brain, powerful muscles and a 20 ton bite force are now a small advantage? T.Rex has major advantages in every area except size which is almost equal.