Sizes Of The Giant Theropods
Rexby

Honolulu, HI

#534 Jan 9, 2013
5. Saurophoganax: 8 feet, 9 tons

4. Mapusaurus: 9 feet, 9 tons

3. Giganotosaurus: 13 tons, 11 feet

2. Cacharodontosaurus: 15 tons, 12 feet

1. Spinosaurus/ tyrannosaurus: both were 13 feet, 16 tons

Spinosaurus was bigger than tyrannosaurus only because it's spine.If Spinosaurus had no spine, they are the same size.

“Australia's #1 Paleontologist”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#535 Jan 9, 2013
Ignore Rexby's dumb comment, this is an ACCURATE list i guarantee it-

1. Spinosaurus (17m)
2. Oxalaia (14m)
3. Giganotosaurus (13.2m)
Carcharodontosaurus/Saurophaga nax/Chilantaisaurus (13m)
4. Tyrannosaurus (12.8m)
5. Mapusaurus (12.6m)
6. Tyrannotitan (12.2m)
7. Tarbosaurus/Epanterias (12m)
8. Acrocanthosaurus (11.5m)
9. Torvosaurus (11m)

There may be some Theropods i missed but that is generally how the list goes.

“Australia's #1 Paleontologist”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#536 Jan 9, 2013
Woops, slight mix up with numbers. Carch should be #4 and the rest one position lower than what they are written as.

“In God we trust”

Since: Dec 12

Cape Town, South Africa

#537 Jan 9, 2013
Land animals

1.Spinosaurus
2.Carchoroontosaurus
3.Giganotosaurus
4.T. rex
5. Allosaurus(I think)
Super 7 R500

Manchester, UK

#538 Jan 10, 2013
Zach wrote:
WTF it is
1)spino
2) giga
3)mapu
4)carchar
5) trex
6)tyranno
7) sauro
8) acro
9) allo
10) sucho
WTF this thread is 3 years old and almost certainly outdated!!!

“BOOMER WILL LIVE”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#539 Jan 10, 2013
I don't agree with making these elaborate lists. IMO it is best to put it like:

1. Spinosaurus; 17 meters long, 12 tonnes + in weight.
2. Tyrannosaurus, Oxalaia, Carcharodontosaurus, Giganotosaurus, Mapusaurus, Cristatusaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Tarbosaurus, Tyrannotitan, Epanterias, Saurophaganax and possibly adult Baryonyx among others; 11 meters +, 5 tonnes +
Therizinosaurus, 6 tonnes.
3. Several ~ 10 meter theropods.

The large list in second place would only be around 10-20% apart - in terms of weight - at regular sizes (at 11 meters a gracile Cristatusaurus and robust Tyrannosaurus would be about 20% apart; 3.5 tonns vs 4.2 tonnes) and we know too little about them to reliably list them out in order. Therefore it is best to say they are roughly the same size, and basically leave it at that. Tyrannosaurus is probably the longest and largest of the group, with several specimens known to be around to 12 meters - similar to about half of the named group). However, it is also known from several ~11 meter specimens - similar to the other half of the group. Not one of those other theropods come clos to Tyrannosaurus in terms of fossils known, so I find it silly to state that Trannosaurus is larger when it is known from both larger and smaller remains than the single fossil of Oxalaia or Giganotosaurus for example.
Tank Car

Manchester, UK

#540 Jan 10, 2013
shouldnt you be playing Gran Turismo ??

“BOOMER WILL LIVE”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#541 Jan 10, 2013
Only 26 hours a day. This is my 3 hour break.

“Australia's #1 Paleontologist”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#542 Jan 10, 2013
Your list of theropod group sizes is not accurate, there is a few metres difference between many of the theropods you listed. That is a huge difference. Specific estimates like 12.2m and 12.6m may not be accurate or a definitive size i agree but it does at last give us some approximation of who was bigger than who. For the most part, the sizes overlap i also agree. But putting them in direct order is also essential IMO.

“BOOMER WILL LIVE”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#543 Jan 10, 2013
I should have perhaps split the group up further, so ~12 meter theropods are seperate from probably smaller 11 meter theropods, trying to oversimplify things

Saurophaganax, Cristatusaurus, Acrocanthosaurus are all known from limited remains about 11 meters long. There may be 50cm difference between estimated sizes of known individuals... but it's 50cm.
That is why I hesitate putting them in ranked order with the likes of Tyrannosaurus ahead of them when Tyrannosaurus itself is known from many specimens which vary between the same size, smaller and larger than the others.
I could support stating Tyrannosaurus is larger than Allosaurus, because both are known from sufficient remains to state this with confidence even though their sizes overlap (assuming Epanterias = Allosaurus).
So to improve:

-Spinosaurus is clearly the largest.
-Oxalaia may be next (I consider ~13 meters long to be most likely, which would make it larger than Tyrannosaurus (Sue) by weight.
-Tyrannosaurus, Giganotosaurus, Tyrannotitan, Mapusaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, Epanterias and Tarbosaurus are seperated by all of 40cm at most and therefore - imo - trying to seperate them is completely useless.
-Cristatusaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Saurophaganax (and Allosaurus? I recall an 11 meter specimen that was noteworthy for another reason that I can't think of at this time) are seperated by even less and are also un-seperable imo.

I completely disagree with trying to seperate it more than this.

“Australia's #1 Paleontologist”

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#544 Jan 10, 2013
I understand the logic, the overlap in the sizes of these Theropods is undeniable but putting them in order based on specific estimates represents a "current snapshot" of the present way of thinking. This snapshot will surely change however as new info is gained, so in a way it is kind of accurate at the time the estimates are made or until new evidence is found. Such lists aren't set in stone, there is room for adjustments. That's why i think it doesn't hurt to put them in specific order if you use the latest and most up to date estimates for each.

Are you a supporter of the supposed "15/16m" fragmentary Tyrannosaurus rex specimens that have been found? Do you consider that accurate?

A lot of people bring this up when i say T.rex was just over 12m and i don't think it is a valid argument, the evidence for such size is very very fragmentary. If it was fact, then Utahraptor would be a confirmed 11m long based on "fragmentary evidence", but it's not...

“BOOMER WILL LIVE”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#545 Jan 10, 2013
Meh, not a fan of the lists myself (though as this thread itself shows, this wasn't always the case), butits cool.

I accept that such large individuals would have existed, but don't compare such blatant freak individuals to the rest of the fossil record - and treat them with a grain of salt to boot.

Back in the day when myself and Mattking had opposite views on everything, he pointed out that many animals tend to vary by about 20% in terms of size, with individuals rarely venturing outside that range. Sue is already a large Tyrannosaurus (~20% larger than the smallest known adult incidently), yet UCMP 137538 is a full 20% larger than Sue alone (based on a toe bone...).

Although to be fair the size of those Utahraptor fossils is completely un-confirmed (Big Al / Altanative even emailed the author for a copy along with a couple of other papers, and recieved all but the Utahraptor centric one), whilst I belive UCMP is (but it's a toe bone....)
Rexby

Honolulu, HI

#546 Jan 10, 2013
Who is smarter, me or paleoSTUPID?
torvosaurus

Viktorsberg, Austria

#547 May 26, 2013
Celestial emperor Fang wrote:
old adult giga is about same size as young or early adult stage T-rex and smaller than average prime-old adult T-rex
it may be bigger than MOR 555 it may be not, it dependent on objective of the one that constructed
carch and giga and same size preserved parts of the skull, why is carch 160cm and giga 180cm, because Sereno is conservative and Coria is liberal. But Coria write paper in joint with Philip Currie, Coria abandon his earlier 180cm skull estimate and accept the more moderate 160cm, because Philip Currie is more conservative and will not accept 180cm
MOR 555 is smaller than Acrocanthosaurus. The smaller of the two giganotsaurus specimens is already nearly the size of the largest of 31 T. rexes, FMNH PR 2081. The larger one would probably exceed it by a ton or more.
The 180cm skull was probably an incorrect reconstruction, it doesn't match any other carnosaur's skull shape.
150-160 is a better estimate for the holotypic skull, 160-170 being good estimates for MUCPv-95
torvosaurus

Viktorsberg, Austria

#548 May 26, 2013
Spinodontosaurus wrote:
I don't agree with making these elaborate lists. IMO it is best to put it like:
1. Spinosaurus; 17 meters long, 12 tonnes + in weight.
2. Tyrannosaurus, Oxalaia, Carcharodontosaurus, Giganotosaurus, Mapusaurus, Cristatusaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Tarbosaurus, Tyrannotitan, Epanterias, Saurophaganax and possibly adult Baryonyx among others; 11 meters +, 5 tonnes +
Therizinosaurus, 6 tonnes.
3. Several ~ 10 meter theropods.
The large list in second place would only be around 10-20% apart - in terms of weight - at regular sizes (at 11 meters a gracile Cristatusaurus and robust Tyrannosaurus would be about 20% apart; 3.5 tonns vs 4.2 tonnes) and we know too little about them to reliably list them out in order. Therefore it is best to say they are roughly the same size, and basically leave it at that. Tyrannosaurus is probably the longest and largest of the group, with several specimens known to be around to 12 meters - similar to about half of the named group). However, it is also known from several ~11 meter specimens - similar to the other half of the group. Not one of those other theropods come clos to Tyrannosaurus in terms of fossils known, so I find it silly to state that Trannosaurus is larger when it is known from both larger and smaller remains than the single fossil of Oxalaia or Giganotosaurus for example.
Giganotosaurus, Mapusaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, possibly Saurophaganax, Tyrannotitan and Chilantaisaurus would all likely be longer than T. rex at 13m+ despite being known from only few specimens. I think sticking to that is not too optimistic.
largest mapsuaurus fossils belong to something 10% larger than Giga holotype, which is already at least as long as Sue, probably longer.
The largest Giganotosaurus is 2-8% bigger
C. saharicus would be comparable to the largest specimens of Giga and Mapu, or maybe longer but less bulky.
Tyrannotitan would be about the size of the Giga holotype based on the femur lenght which exactly fits the mean between the original and Carrano figures.
Saurophaganax would have to be 11-13m depending on which humeral lenght you trust more. Chilantaisaurus also has a huge humerus but it seems neovenatorids maybe, jsut maybe, had proportionally longer arms than allosauridae.
torvosaurus

Viktorsberg, Austria

#549 May 26, 2013
Celestial emperor Fang wrote:
<quoted text>
The only three scientists that calculated T-rex and giganotosaurus at same time (exlcuding Henderson's bullshit data) in academic source
#1 Philip Currie, Kennth Carpnter
MOR 555, 4160kg
MUCPv-CH1, 4160kg
#2 Frank Seebacher (2001)
AMNH 5027 6650kg
MUCPv-CH1 6594kg
#3: G.Mazzeta cited Henderson's T-rex estimate and gives his own estimate of giga (2004)
MUCPV-CH1 8000kg, or 6550kg
MUCPV-95 10100kg, or 8200kg (Mazzeta's own crude estimate and Per. P Christiansen's equation)
T-rex cited:
FMNH PR 2081, 10220kg, or ~8200kg
AMNH 5027, 7200~7900kg
in the third match, G.Mazzeta clearly favor giga by using that piece fragment MUCPv-95 , but with not fragmentary anterior dentary bone, T-rex still wins
The first one is based on femur-circumference, making it worthless unless you want to tell me MOR 555 was nearly twice the size of Acrocanthosaurus (while based on scanned skeletons it is actually marginally smaller).
I didn't see those cited figures in Mazetta, but they are alltogether far exagerated (your own preferred figures I presume). Mazzetta however clearly stated MUCPv-95 would exceed the size of sue.
Yes, it is a partial dentary, but at least it is 61cm in lenght, 18cm deep at the symphysis. It is still a pretty large piece, not some tiny fragment.

Other papers also clearly agree it would be bigger, such as Coria & Salgado, 1995 (even the holotype!), Coria & Calvo, 1998 (stating it to have exceeded other giant theropods by quite a bit, which is a stretch tough) and Barroc & showers, 1999 (6t T. rex, 8t Giganotosaurus holotype!).
If you want to use inconclusive studies, we can do that, but then please don't only use the ones that fit your view, and don't use fiogures not even given in the studies.
Crazy Fish

Bournemouth, UK

#550 May 27, 2013
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2013050...

BTW all of the studies you listed were published before Sue was (Brochu, 2003).
Seebacher (2001) estimated AMNH 5027 and CM 9380 at ~6.6t, and estimated MUCPv-CH1 at ~6.5t. Sue is much larger than either of those specimens.
Giganotosaurus type specimen is clearly smaller than Sue.

“Clash of the titans!”

Since: May 13

Isla Sorna,JP

#551 May 27, 2013
The biggest theropods are listed in order from big to small.
1.)Spinosaurus- 13-18m
2.)Tyrannosaurus? Carcharadontosaurus? Gigantosaurus-12-13m.Giga- 13.2m Carch - 13m? T.rex- 15-16.8m????!!! UCMP
3.)Maupusaurus-11-12m 14m?
4.)Tarbosaurus-12m,Torvosaurus 12m,Epanterias,12m
5.)Tyrannotitan-11m

Since: May 13

Rome, Italy

#552 Jun 9, 2013
1. Spinosaurus: 14.4 meters
2. Mapusaurus: 13.6 meters
3. Giganotosaurus: 13.2 meters
4. Carcharodontosaurus: 12.8 meters
5. Saurophaganax: 12.5 meters
6. Tyrannosaurus: 12.3 meters
Lemupine

Bournemouth, UK

#553 Jun 9, 2013

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
Spinosaurus vs. t-rex (Dec '07) 8 hr T-rex_Rules 5,848
Spinosaurus would easily beat T rex in a fight (Jun '14) 8 hr T-rex_Rules 347
If Neanderthals found there way to Late Cretace... 11 hr VeloRaptor 4
Basilosaurus vs Liopleurodon vs Mosasaurus Wed VeloRaptor 15
Poll Gigantopithecus vs Short faced bear (Jun '12) Wed jci 10
Poll which is the worse fanboy? (Feb '13) Tue Ianchilds 33
Tell me a animal that can beat megalodon. No ar... (Jan '13) Tue Ianchilds 70
More from around the web