Planet Dinosaur Wiki
All Contributors
• 8/9/2017

Who will win? T. rex or spinosaurus

Spinosaurus: Length: 55 feet long. Quick facts: spinosaurus was the largest theropod on earth. It weighs about 6-10 tons. It had long arms and long claws. Spinosaurus walked in all fours but can stand on two legs if it was threatened or upset. But it mainly hunted fish and small dinosaurs. It may also had hunted dinosaur eggs. Tyrannosaurus rex: Length: 43-51 feet long. Quick facts: sue was only the most complete but not the largest. Umcp 137538 was confirmed to be the largest. Tyrannosaurus rex hunted triceratops, ankylosaurus, edmontosaurus, and even the mighty sauropod alamosaurus. It hunted in packs from 5-10 members. Tyrannosaurus rex had a bite force about 12,000 pounds or higher. It's skin had a lot of muscles making it thick. It may have been able to tough out wounds with some specimens surviving the injures but it is still unknown. But to me some may had been able to tough it out. It also had small arms that can lift up to 4,000 pounds. It also had bacteria in its mouth. So who will win? Tyrannosaurus rex will win due by having bone crushing jaws and hunting more dangerous prey. Spinosaurus will win 40% while Tyrannosaurus rex will win 60%. Spinosaurus claws cannot reach Tyrannosaurus rex. Due by potbelly and long neck. So it can only win if it takes place in water. Tyrannosaurus rex can just bite the sail or just bite the neck. Tyrannosaurus rex can swim but not that good. So spinosaurus can try to drown it. But Tyrannosaurus rex can still kill it but if they end up fighting on the surface. But if the spinosaurus kills it it will die. If Tyrannosaurus rex it can die from blood lost but that will be very low most times Tyrannosaurus rex will survive the injures. So this is why Tyrannosaurus rex rules for a reason.

0 2
  • Upvote
  • Reply
• 8/18/2017

I can find 2016 papers that still say that T. rex is 40 feet here is a snippet from one of the scientific papers that actually deals with UCMP (published 9/6/17):

"UCMP 137538 is known from a single 13-centimeter long pedal phalanx, which has been assumed to be a left pedal phalanx from comparisons with FMNH PR2081. That is a weak assumption, as the bone looks quite different from that of FMNH PR2081. For starters, it may not even be a tyrannosaurid. It could have been a gigantic therizinosaur, since a herbivorous lifestyle isn't limited by the constraints of a carnivorous one, such as the need to run down prey. If you read the original describing paper about UCMP 137538, you will see that the only real diagnosis done is the one assigning it as a theropod. It's assignment to Tyrannosaurus is based on nothing but size and location, both of which are weak arguments for assigning isolated fossils to specific genera/species. It's also partly based on the assumption that Tyrannosaurus is the only large theropod living at North America at the Maastrichtian age, which is quite an almost-baseless assumption, considering that the vast majority of the dinosaurs are very likely undiscovered.

The problem is, it's just an isolated toe bone. Even the enigmatic Amphicoelias fragillimus is known from better remains(A D9/D10 vertebra). The giant sizes come from scaling it up from FMNH PR2081, and the naive fanboys seemingly only scale from that specimen. FMNH PR2081 isn't the only tyrannosaur specimen however. And Tyrannosaurus isn't the only tyrannosaur. For all we know, UCMP 137538 may actually be a non-Tyrannosaurus tyrannosauroid. Even IF it was a Tyrannosaurus or a very similar genus, you should still stay away from those 14+ meter calculations. Tyrannosaurus specimens can show quite a lot of variation. BHI 3033(~10.9 meters, probably around 6 tonnes?), has toe bones that come close in size to that of FMNH PR2081. Not to mention that with pathogeny, digit bones can vary greatly even within individuals. It is entirely possible that UCMP 137538 may actually be smaller than FMNH PR2081(~12.3 meters, ~8 tonnes)."

So UCMP may not have actually been a tyrannosaur as you may have seen in the above snippet the only reason the assignment to Tyrannosaurus is based on is size and location, and all that is known is a toe bone therefore it is not safe to assume that it belonged to a 14 m (46 feet) long T. rex.

• 8/17/2018
Spinosaurus: 18m Long (60ft) Had a bite force around the same as a nile croc, meaning it had a VERY strong jaw, even though this bite was feeble for a size longer than a bus, but it coud drown anything except for large sauropods. A punch could deliver a hefty thwack, enough to rip off a car door. It stood 5m (16ft) tall at the head, and had strong but surpisingly short back legs. It could swim very fast, and could run at tops of 30km/h. Hunted fish, 8m long SAWFISH, Ouranosaurs, juvenile Paralatitans, and Rugopd
Tyrannosaurus: 10-12m long (38ft) VERY strong bite, and could crush bone, with the exception of a strong spine like our friend the crocoduck. 4.8m tall (14ft). Hunted Edmontosaurus, but was most likely a scavenger. Had to hunt sickly, young or elderly and weak dinosaurs as most of it’s prey could easily kill it. Sauropods would crush it and murder it. This bastard was a cannibal, baby killer, and might’ve mated with it’s CHILDREN. Spinosaurus would win a good 65% of the time, and hands down near water. And NOBODY mention knuckle walker.
Write a reply...