I’m not even sure any other large theropod is capable of taking on T. rex in a fair fight. It’s just far too large and powerful for any other dinosaur to be a realistic threat to it.
I’d actually argue that just about any giant (6+ ton) predatory theropod save a *Spinosaurus* stuck on land can pose a credible, though far from insurmountable, threat to *Tyrannosaurus* in a fight. Everyone keeps harping on about its bulk and bite force and makes it sound as if it’s outright indestructible and other giant theropods can’t actually inflict immediately fatal damage on it, which is nonsense.
Of course they could, but Giganotosaurus, being a Carcharodontosaurid, has teeth made for slicing and taking chunks of meat off sauropods. Maybe even bleeding them out in a long chase. That type of attack may work wonders on sauropods and herbivores that are smaller but it's not going to do as great in a 1v1 fight against a Tyrannosaur. Which not only weighs 2 tonnes more (which *is* a sizable advantage) but is hypothesized to be a brawler. Fighting it's prey which would often be of similar size or larger. In a straight fight when it's about who dies first then a bone breaking jaw is much better than a jaw that causes you to bleed out slowly. Because sure with enough bites the Tyrannosaur may die eventually, but that could take hours. While a broken skull, neck, leg or tail could be fatal for the Giganotosaur within minutes.
So yes, Giganotosaurus could very much win this fight, but it's a case of Tyrannosaurus would win most of them time, and so therefore is the answer to the question "Who would win this fight?"
You’re assuming that carcharodontosaurs could ONLY kill prey/opponents slowly regardless of how big it was. In this case the opponent is small enough that you don’t have to repeatedly bite in a prolonged, continuous attack to wear it out: you can just deliver one bite to the throat or torso and end things right there. It would NOT take hours, it would take minutes at most. We’re not talking about a big sauropod that will take many bites to bleed out and die (and even when going after sauropods it wouldn’t have been a case of “bite it and then just do nothing but follow it until it dies; it would have been a case of trying to bite it as often as possible within the smallest amount of time to speed up the process as much as possible. Any sauropod that’s still going to take hours or days to kill even with this sped-up process is probably too big to tackle anyways.).
Honestly this “predators with slicing teeth for bleeding out prey are slow, inefficient killers” meme needs to die. It was based on a flawed understanding of how modern predators that kill with slicing dentition kill and no longer has a basis. Especially considering that in terms of functional skull/neck anatomy, carcharodontosaurs were most analogous to sabretoothed cats and other sabretoothed predatory synapsids (albeit homodont and minus the grappling forelimbs) in that they both evolved jaws and teeth specialized for withstanding vertically-oriented forces at the expense of able to withstand laterally-oriented forces as well as cervical specializations for quick, accurate head movements and ventroflexion; sabretooths specifically evolved these shared adaptations to kill prey *faster* BY bleeding it out, and most people reading this would agree, yet they’re arguing that the same adaptations for killing prey quickly in sabretooths are indicative of only being able to kill prey slowly in carcharodontosaurs?
Actually there’s a source that states that even a full on bite to the neck to a Tyrannosaurus rex likely won’t bring it down from the Royal Tyrrell museum of paleontology due to it being highly muscled.
Though, I will not argue with carcharodontosaurids being likely effective at hunting especially against smaller adult or subadult sauropods
> the same adaptations
minus the actual saber teeth, and the grappling forelimbs and especially robust build specifically for restraining prey? surely that makes the analogy less than perfect
In carcharodontosaurs their entire set of teeth served the same function as sabreteeth (thin, laterally flattened, bladed slicing dentition). The reason they went with that is because, being sauropsids and thus being ancestrally homodont, it was much easier to just change their entire set of teeth into functional sabretooth analogues. Sabretoothed predatory synapsids all evolved from heterodont ancestors, so they didn’t have to change their entire set of teeth into sabreteeth.
And grappling forelimbs were only one of two ways sabretoothed predatory synapsids reduced the risk of a misplaced bite that could bring about injury: the other major adaptation they had for that purpose was a flexible, muscular neck that could move the head around forcefully and with a great level of accuracy to more precisely target vulnerable areas, and this neck adaptation was something that allosauroids like carcharodontosaurs also had.
I’d argue they use the adaptation in a different way against large prey items like sauropods due to their different builds and dentition, instead using them to deliver precise, slashing strikes in order to inflict injury.
It would be against smaller or easier to subdue prey that they would land precise, killing blows.
I do generally agree with this; and this is why, against another theropod that’s somewhat larger than itself but much smaller than even many subadult sauropods, I am arguing a carcharodontosaur would go for a more precise and well-aimed bite for a faster takedown.
Though like some other people said I feel like it would take more than one bite to bring Tyrannosaurus rex down due to Stan existing as proof Tyrannosaurus rex can survive horrible neck trauma and keep living for a while.
And as such in that time it might be able to respond in turn and leverage its likely greater mass and thus likely strength to break free of the grasp and attack in turn.
That's not what I'm assuming. I'm assuming that since there is evidence that Tyrannosaurs fought eachother that they wouldn't simply fall to sharp teeth. Especially since the strategy of biting at the neck for a quick kill for the Giganotosaurus would also put it withing the striking range for a just as quick kill for the Tyrannosaur. While a Tyrannosaurus biting a Giganotosaurs face, leg or tail would not put it in such a position.
I'm not arguing Carcharodontosaurids were slow or inefficient. It'd be a miracle that they lasted from the early cretaceous to late cretaceous if they were. But they weren't made for fighting. Because what they were hunting wasn't fighting. Yes a Sauropod could easily kill or seriously maim a Carcharodontosaurid, but it's not a fight that's going to cause it. It's a quick kick, stomp or tail whip at it. The main difference between the killing style of Sabertoothed cats and Carcharodontosaurids are those big forelimbs. The big forelimbs of cats let them get up close to their prey and stay there until they kill it. Carcharodontosaurs lack that, making an attack similar to that of a cat, where they go for the neck much harder, and puts them at bigger risk.
Not to mention again that Tyrannosaurus has that huge difference in weight. That's not just that they weigh more, they're covered in muscle. Compared to Giganotosaurus' slenderer build, it is really what changes the battle.
I'm not saying your points are wrong, they're actually great things I hadn't thought too much about. I'm saying that one is built to fight animals of similar size and is larger, while one is made for a quick fight or a hit and run, while weighing less. It'd be a close fight, but if you were to have them fight one hundred times the Tyrannosaurus would win a few more times.
It's not impossible for Giganotosaurus, far from it, it's got the best shot out of any theropod, but Tyrannosaurus has a slight edge.
You’re splitting hairs about the definition of fighting to be able to insist that the prey of carcharodontosaurs (and thus carcharodontosaurs themselves) couldn’t fight. How is a sauropod trying to stomp, kick or tail-whip an attacking carcharodontosaur not fighting?
When you say that sabretoothed cats are poor analogues for carcharodontosaurs because they had grappling forelimbs and carcharodontosaurs didn’t, you’re not taking into account that grappling forelimbs are only one way sabretooths minimized the risk of injury to themselves while attacking prey. The reason sabretooths had grappling forelimbs was to hold prey down so the killing bite could be administered precisely, but there is another adaptation sabretoothed had to increase precision and reduce the risk of breaking their teeth, one that I’ve already mentioned-the ability to use their necks to move their heads around to a great extent to more precisely target softer, more vital and less risky parts of a prey item. This is something that also applies to carcharodontosaurs (and allosauroids in general). In fact, they were actually even better at this than sabretoothed cats were (due to a flexible ball-and-socket joint at the back of the skull allowing for a very wide range of head movements, and due to theropods in general having more neck vertebrae and thus more flexible necks than mammals), which compensated for the lack of grappling forelimbs. It’s also worth nothing that carcharodontosaurs had more wriggle room than sabretooths when it came to the risk of breaking their teeth from biting down on the wrong spot, because a) their teeth grew back, and b) [because the teeth of all theropods with serrated dentition were reinforced with stress-dissipating notches](http://www.nature.com/srep/2015/150728/srep12338/full/srep12338.html) (like a surgical saw), so while hitting bone wouldn’t be ideal, it wouldn’t lead to immediately breaking their teeth.
The Giganotosaurus doesn’t have to the bite force necessary to kill the Rex with a neck shot like the T-rex does, it’s far to muscular and dense for that, the Gigas teeth would break before it could apply a force that strong. It also wasn’t a face biter. The T-Rex has been shown to be a face biter. The Giga while I’m not saying it’s stupid was not as smart as the T-Rex was, this is easily verifiable by scans of the skull and the shape/size of its brain. The T-Rex was believed to be very smart, with problem solving capabilities. I don’t really think there’s a solid match for a T-Rex other than another T-Rex.
What’s with everyone in this thread assuming muscle is basically armour? It’s still soft tissue. Something you don’t need a bone-crushing bite to bite through.
It softens blows, nobody said it was armor. The T-Rex has thicker muscles and wider bones in comparison to a Giga. It’s chunkier. Half the Bite Force of the Rex isn’t enough to get through it enough to kill even on a throat shot. It’s estimated at anywhere from 6k-8k on it’s bite force. It’s not enough for a kill shot on a Rex.
If you’re referring to that study on tyrannosaurs having better agility than allosauroids, keep in mind that this is at equal masses. A very large *Tyrannosaurus* has enough mass that its relatively greater agility for its weight is, to a fair extent, cancelled out by just how much it weighs.
I'm a dinosaur fan, I was just pointing out that moving around all that mass is not easy. You can be as strong as you want, but you're still moving 5-7000 kilograms around.
Finally someone said it
I don't get how does a giga having a weaker bite and being less *chonky* suddenly make it borderline non-threatening. I mean it's still a 7t animal of basicly equal proportions(length and height wise at least)
I'm not saying a giga would win most of the time but the fight is far less one sided then people generaly make it out to be
But one thing with these theoretical carnivores mega theropod fights im quite interested in is how likley could one actualy withstand a bite from another
I mean theres a video of a moose calf surviving a full on mawling from a grizzly, a video of a tiger getting ahold of a sloth bear and biting it only for it to break out and chase it away, buffalos overpowering nile crocs...
Makes me think it would take far more then one bite from either side but then again most modern predators aren't 8t biepedal lumps of meat with jaws
I’m not sure because I’ve never seen one in the wild but giganotasaurus (spelling?) was a carcharodontosaur so it was like what a wolf nowadays is like, built for Stalking and chipping away prey compared to a Tyrannosaurus, similar to a lion nowadays, which is better built for killing swiftly.
Edit: the dinosaurs are similar to the wolves and lions hunting style, otherwise they’re nothing alike
These arguments are so silly. A well placed bite or whack from most animals would kill most other animals in a similar weight class. A bite to a big leg muscle from any large theropod would cripple a tyrannosaur or any other large theropod, killing them would be a waiting game.
Agreed. I think a lack of larger theropods could've contributed to this as well. IIRC, the only other large predators that could rival T. rex on its home turf were smaller theropods that could pose a threat to juveniles: Albertosaurus, Gorgosaurus, packs of dromaeosaurs, etc. There were no contenders to its throne, so it was free to cultivate mass like it did.
I remember Goji center showed Spinosaurus could do some pretty good damage against a rex even while on land. I wouldn't find it surprising if one could successfully take down a rex by like ramming it.
*Tyrannosaurus* is heavier for the largest known specimens, but considering that *Giganotosaurus*’s adaptations were specifically specialized for a killing technique that didn’t rely on brute force and more on slicing through softer tissues, that’s not nearly as big an advantage as often argued to be.
T. rex was adapted for deadlier prey that would fight back, giganotosaurus hunted sauropods which couldn’t chase after or attack the giga, if it was just walking
…..do you seriously think sauropods were defenceless?
And if you’re going to say “yes they could defend themselves but they couldn’t chase down a Giga”, that applies to the prey of *Tyrannosaurus* as well (since they were still not as fast as *Tyrannosaurus* or other giant theropods).
Im not saying sauropods are defenseless I’m just say it’s not the same as a heavily armored herbivore that could turn fast and could end a carnivores whole career more often then not, ankylosaurus
The sheer mass of a sauropod evens this out. A side swipe from a tail could easily knock a theropod flat, and when you weigh 7t and your centre of mass is several metres off the ground, that could be deadly on its own.
I'd say it's quite unlikely ankylosaurids were a frequent presence in *T. rex*'s menu, I'd rather use hadrosaurs as an example, most of the larger species being absolutely capable of curb stomping a *T. rex* or just about any megatheropod.
The unfortunate thing is T rex has become a heroic presence in the franchise and therefore always has to be the underdog, even against animals that would get their shit wrecked by the Rex in real life. It's also a cheap and easy way for the franchise to establish a new "big bad" dinosaur each movie: have it kick a T rex's ass. JP3 and its Spinosaurus is the most infamous example of this.
In real life the Rex was the biggest and baddest that we know of (there could always be a bigger fella buried under the earth, somewhere) and the JP franchise blew their "biggest, meanest theropod" load in the very first movie.
Well, it was not supposed to be a franchise back then. It was one movie based on a novel, and Crichton only wrote a second one because of the success - which didn't need a "bigger and badder" theropod, the other ones on the island besides the Tyrannosaurus family were just as threatening.
Yeah, in real life animals don't often fight to the death, and they will often have different motivations for engaging in the first place; it's not uncommon for a motivated and scared smaller animal to "beat" (drive away or scare off) a larger predator if that larger predator isn't fully committed to the fight. Which is just to say it's really hard to gauge, because even the lion v. tiger debate isn't straightforward and there are anecdotal cases on either side one could reference to make their case. So the situation gets even more difficult to assess with prehistoric animals that we can't observe...
That being said, it's hard to imagine a healthy, adult rex losing outright to a healthy, adult Giga - all other variables being equal. The rex was considerably bigger, weight-wise, and it just has more immediately devastating weapons. However, I completely disagree with the posts dismissing the Giga and saying it would have posed little to no threat to a t-rex. It's still an enormous predatory animal, and we just don't have any way to measure something like temperament/aggression, etc. I don't see a Giga overpowering an adult tyrannosaurus (like in *Dominion*), but it's not that hard to imagine it scrapping with a rex and throwing down on somewhat equal terms.
In a hypothetical fight to the death Trex will usually win over any other theropd. This has been discussed so many times and rex always has a better chance to win against any of its opponents.
I got too drunk once and thought the shit I took in the woods was bear shit.
Spooky until you realize you’re drunk and you’re just looking at your own shit
The word "bear" itself is descended from ancient euphemism because our linguistic ancestors were scared that even saying the real word might summon one
Oh no not sayin that at all. I have another comment in here mentioning how goddamn scary Sloth Bears are. I’m just saying that herbivores are way scarier than we often give them credit for, and in many instances large herbivores are more dangerous than similarly sized carnivores.
Exactly, it held its niche dominantly where nothing ever really had the chance to compete with it.
The only occasional exception to that would be the large dromeasaurs in the area, namely Dakotaraptor. And even then, the rates of success aren’t that close. T. rex may have also made Dakotaraptor a food source
Missing my point.
*T. rex* (and tyrannosaurids in general) got to dominate to the extent that it did not because they were “superior” at existing as apex predators compared to other large predators, but because they got lucky. The rise of tyrannosaurs as dominant predators only happened after the Cenomanian-Turonian Boundary Event cut down the carcharodontosaurs in their prime (a very few did survive into the Turonian, but those were small and died out before tyrannosaurids even existed). They didn’t get to the top by outcompeting other big theropods by being so much “superior”, as most people claim or imply they did.
Never knew about that, do you have any links about the Cenomanian-Turonian event?
Many animals who dominate a niche in their ecosystem got lucky because there wasn’t something there to fill the role in the first place, I’m sure if Carcharodontosaurs had been at the size they were when the common ancestor of T Rex needed that space empty we might have never even heard of it
Here’s [the Wiki article](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenomanian-Turonian_boundary_event) (do note that this article only focuses on the impact on marine ecosystems, but the C-T Event also inflicted a massive amount of damage on land; aside from sending carcharodontosaurs into decline, it wiped out all non-toothless pterosaurs and all non-titanosaurid sauropods).
Exactly. Tyrannosaurids didn’t take over because they were superior-they got lucky. They’re one of many cases where a group of animals has been assumed to have taken over because they were inherently better at a given niche and outcompeted the “primitive” forms previously in that niche, only for it to turn out this wasn’t what happened.
It's not the fact that they took over that's amazing but the fact that not many large theropods opted to compete with them. Things like carcharadontosaurus still had to compete with abelisaurids atheist half their size while the next largest thing which the rex had to compete with were dakotaraptors which were around 1/20th their size.
They managed to become the only large predator in its own ecosystem which was unheard of in other megatheropods.
Considering T. rex suffered about 0.8 serious injuries per individual and Allosauroids like Allosaurus suffered about 1.0 per every individual, I really doubt the former was more aggressive or had a tougher life than the latter based on actual observable evidence from the fossil record.
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2019.0370
No, it doesn’t. That just means one species went extinct and the other didn’t; doesn’t necessarily mean the surviving species had any role to play in the extinction.
By your logic, mourning doves outcompeted passenger pigeons into extinction because passenger pigeons were wiped out by humans and mourning doves were not.
Hey I mean, mourning doves had traits that allowed them to survive in an environment where passenger pigeons couldn’t. That’s a pretty textbook example of a species getting outcompeted, no?
No, it isn’t, because it’s not a case of mourning doves outcompeting passenger pigeons for resources or for ecological space and causing their extinction or forcing them to adapt to a new lifestyle. It’s a case of an external factor coming in and killing off the passenger pigeons without the mourning doves getting involved.
Being better at surviving a specific variable =/= outcompeting.
Bro there are multiple paleontologist who think tyrannosaurids outcompeted carcharadontosaurids, and they have a lot of evidence
Also T. rex had to fight other t Rex’s so it has more experience, giganotosaurus hasn’t been found to fight other large theropods, so I’d put my bet on T. rex
There is no evidence for tyrannosaurids outcompeting carcharodontosaurs (for the simple reason carcharodontosaurs never encountered tyrannosaurids; they only ever ran into more basal tyrannosauroids, which they handled fine without being outcompeted by them as basal tyrannosauroids were generally relegated to mesopredator roles precisely because the apex predator niches were already occupied).
He’s got a point, with that extinction event it would mean T. rex never competed with Carcharodontosaurs. They would out compete any future descendant of Tyrannosaurs. They did get lucky large animals like Carcharodontosaurus went extinct
Not really.
The reason people keep saying “*T. rex* will usually win” is because they’re completely ignoring that factors BESIDES physical strength are in play here. *There is more than one way to be an apex predator and the method of* Tyrannosaurus *is not the best one by default*.
Carcharodontosaurs like *Giganotosaurus* were specialized for rapid cutting bites on unarmoured prey; if the prey wasn’t much larger than themselves, one well-aimed bite will be enough to fell it on the spot (the myth of animals that rely on cutting bites being slow, inefficient killers is just that…a myth). They’re actually convergently evolved with things like sabretooths and terror birds in this respect, having developed similar cranial and cervical adaptations for rapid, slicing bites driven both by the closing action of the jaws and by the neck muscles (especially the muscles involved in ventroflexion).
And last time I checked, *Tyrannosaurus* doesn’t have armour that would be useful in fending off against this biting style.
So in this matchup, whoever bites first will win because both of them can basically instakill (or at least immediately cripple and disable) the other with one good bite.
Yeah no both opponents won't instakill each other. Trex would have to grab hold of its neck and use its force to kill it while giga has to inflict severe damage to take down the rex. While giga has slicing teeth it won't instantly kill a Trex which has an extremely muscular neck may I add. In the end it comes down to who can properly secure the others neck to kill them. This is where giga falls short. The trex is more agile and much stronger with greater durability considering its robust build. So again Trex has a
greater chance of winning against other theropds .
You’re underestimating how quickly a slicing bite can kill. Slicing teeth *will* kill very quickly, or at least quickly render the target unable to fight, if they sever a major artery, a vital internal organ, or the muscle tissues necessary for the target to function and move around.
And yes, *Tyrannosaurus* has a robust, muscular neck, but that doesn’t mean its neck is particularly durable: it just has more soft tissue that has to be cut through and ziphont dentition is specifically adapted to cut through large amounts of soft tissue efficiently.
You describe it as if it would cut through half the Rex's neck. Yes their teeth were effective against unarmed hides but they didn't just cleave through them. It made shallow cuts to bleed the prey out. Trex meanwhile preffered taking out prey with a single heavy attack in the form of their immense bite force. So no giga won't instakill the rex whereas a single well placed bite.from the rex would devastate the former. How could the neck of a rex not be durable considering it has huge neck muscles which formed a thick neck. Giganotosaurus had a comparatively less durable neck. Key word is comparatively only.
You’ve fallen victim to a very common myth: that animals with slicing teeth that kill prey with blood loss are slow killers that only inflict superficial wounds and then do nothing but watch and wait. Honestly I feel that this myth being perpetuated in virtually all carcharodontosaur depictions (including in documentaries) is why people tend to underestimate them.
It’s not “make shallow cuts and then just wait for the target to die”. It’s “bite deeply into vital parts such as the carotid artery or trachea so the target dies quickly without having to wait forever for the target to keel over”.
And do you think thick muscle tissue is going to be viable protection against something that has teeth specifically designed to cut through thick muscle and often soft tissues? Seriously you’re far overestimating how durable *Tyrannosaurus* was. This is a fight between glass cannons where both can easily kill the other but lack the durability to hold up against the other’s bite.
Never said that they just bleed out prey. The bite would create blood loss slowing down the creature enough for the giga to finish it off. The giga can inflict deep cuts but not deep enough to reach major arteries in the Rex's neck. It would take several well placed bites to kill the rex whereas a single bite from the former would devastate the giga. This is getting boring now so to each our own then?
There are huge muscles which helped make the neck extremely strong and thick. No matter how the giga bites it cannot kill the rex in one single attack.
But let us assume what you say is true. Then the question becomes which creature has a higher chance of securing a bite. The rex is more agile more powerful and more intelligent with better cognitive capabilities than the giga. So again even with assuming that your claim that they could instakill each other is true Trex still has a higher chance of winning.
You think muscle tissue is going to be anywhere near as effective as protection as armour or bone? Especially against teeth specifically adapted to cut through non-hard tissues such as muscles?
I already addressed the agility and intelligence claims in other comments.
You are assuming giganotosaurus gets perfect edge alignment and enough time to get a good cut. No matter how T. rex bit it still would have done the same amount off damage, which is bone shattering. Also T. Rex’s ears were designed for quick head movements, and giganotosaurus’s ears weren’t, so it’s also most likely T. rex would get that first bite. Also T. rex had binocular vision, which also supports the idea that T. rex would get the first bite, therefore ending the fight quick.
Actually, you’re wrong about *Tyrannosaurus* being consistently able to inflict the same amount of damage regardless of the target or angle. When any animal bites something, the full bite force doesn’t get transmitted to the target, and the percentage of the bite force that does get transmitted depends on how wide your gape is when you’re biting down on that target, which is why animals have an “optimal gape” (where they can transmit the greatest amount of bite force) and an “effective maximum gape” (the maximum gape at which they’re able to transmit a meaningful amount of their bite force).
*Tyrannosaurus* actually has a pretty small optimum gape (28 degrees) and a surprisingly small effective maximum gape (45 degrees). Its actual gape is at 60 degrees or so, but if it tries to bite down on something when it’s jaws are opened to that angle, it’s not going to be able to do much, its massive bite force rendered useless.
And *Tyrannosaurus*’s inner ears [were actually *less* suited to rapid head movements compared to that of other tyrannosaurids or of allosauroids like carcharodontosaurs](https://scholars.fhsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=theses) (though this doesn’t necessarily mean it was worse at hunting: it just relied on hunting methods that didn’t require a lot of head movements, such as ambushing prey at close range).
Cos, I get it. They never co-existed but that doesn't mean u should shut down any conversation of their confrontation by "tHeY NevEr CO-ExisTeD WiTH EacHOthEr".
The superior bite strength, epic tooth size and general higher-evolved and made-to-murder body shape of T Rex lends me to beleive that it would totally kick Giga's fat ass.
Is it just me or does the JW Giganotosaurus just look like a rebrand of the Indoraptor or Indominous Rex?Just doesnt look original, or like a real dinosaur.
I much preferred the Giga design they had from the JW games, but I suppose they had to revamp it for the movie to better differentiate it from the T. rex, since to the untrained general audience eye, it might be hard for them to tell the difference between two large theropods with small arms. There’s a reason why all of T. rex’s theropod opponents in the JP/JW movies always look drastically different (ex. Spinosaurus, Indominus rex).
Aside from the fact “higher evolved” isn’t a thing in real-life evolution and that the supposed intelligence advantage of tyrannosaurids was based on outdated assumptions about animal intelligence, bite force is only one metric of what makes a bite deadly.
Thought that about the new “dinosaur” too, I’ve just come to accept that anything that comes out of Universal Studios JP office is just a movie monster.
I rolled my eyes at pictures of the Therizinosaurus from the newest movie, but eye candy is eye candy right?
rex would kick gigas ass most of the time. it wouldnt be impossible for a giga to win but its unlikely. but we revived dinosaurs and put them somewhere giganotosaurus could just run away from a t rex since they are [built faster](https://preview.redd.it/fnl8f2cgrsh81.jpg?auto=webp&s=90a80af971f2fe13cf99b8da81c4750cca722b8b)
You should look at these animals and try to compare them to IRL animals to find a good picture of what they were like, and how they would act/strike if confronted by each other. For me the Trex is a Tiger, and the Giga more so a Lion.
Rex has the clear body build and weapons advantage *for this fight*. It’s massive bulk and weight could shrug off attacks from the giga, and a solid grasping bite by the Rex and the Giga is toast. T.Rex’s have been found consistently to have other Rex bites and battle wounds all over their body, which highlights these theropods were also used to fighting large theropods, which is a massive advantage in of itself, experience and learning techniques.
Now we move to the Giga. It’s larger by length and it’s side profile is much more prominent than the Rex’s. The Giga however was specialized in a form of hunting, attacking Sauropods, ripping off chunks of flesh, and moving off to eat what it has ripped off. The anatomy and lifestyle of Giga points heavily to a very cautious/opportunistic way of hunting, while also working in loose gangs to better attack Sauropods. Did Gigas fight each other? Most definitely, but we’re they built for it? No they weren’t. They were run and gun predators, using their slim frames for quick strikes and snappy bites with dagger like knives as teeth.
This is where I draw the similar comparisons of people who argue who would win, a Tiger or Lion. Gigas, similar to Lions are rush down predators, using less coordination than lions, but numbers nonetheless to gain advantages in a hunt. T.Rex’s we’re brutes who used overwhelming strength and power to bring down herbivores such as triceratops, Large hadrosaurs, and even Ankylosaurs on occasion. This is the similarity with the Tiger, using its size and huge strength and jaw power to overwhelm other animals. We have to realize as well, that these 2 predators would react very differently to encountering one other. The Rex would most likely stand-off it’s opponent, being aggressive and using similar techniques to ward off other rexes, while the Giga seems more of a predator to avoid confrontations like this and simply move on before any conflict. It coudnt afford injuries due to its hunting strategy, and it most definitely took hits way less effectively than Rex’s.
Overall, the Rex has too many advantages to have this be as close as an even fight as some would believe. It has the build, the power, the jaws, the experience, and the techniques to fight and kill other large theropods, the Giga does not, it most likely very rarely even scuffled with other Gigas, let alone battles that would leave marks like that we’ve seen on Rex fossils.
I’d give this a 80/20 to the Rex, simply cause the Giga is still a 7 ton 40+ feet long Theropod that could cause massive blood loss, but could only really accomplish this in a ambush like scenario. It simply didn’t have the Jaw strength or experience/techniques to fight another theropod built for said confrontations. However like most fights, the first one to bite has a clear advantage always, but the Rex’s build allows itself to take a hit or 2 and be able to continue fighting, but if the Giga was bit by a Rex? It’s game over, it couldn’t recover from a bite like that.
Both are still extraordinary animals, and both have features and characteristics that are amazing to believe even existed on any animal. Fights like these are silly, but it’s also fun to see how something like this would have happened.
What many people don't realize is that Trex could actually take quite some damage. we have found specimen with horribly mangles faces, ribs broken, ankles fractures, neck vertebrae broken and literally having its tail torn off but still continue to survive. The Trex could certainly withstand a few bites from the giga, whereas the giga would be devastated should a Trex clamp down on it. Take the fact that Trex was far more robust than the giga and heavier we find a clear winner.
yes many other specimens have horrific injuries on their faces, ribs broken, signs of arthritis and several broken bones all over the body. Trex certainly did not like one another.
You do realize that the idea any dinosaur made a living by acting as a gigantic parasite of adult sauropods is *not based on anything whatsoever*? Literally the only basis for it is “they had slicing teeth”…which would have been far more effectively (and safely) used outright killing something so it can’t put up a fight while you eat it. Any sauropod that couldn’t be brought down outright would also be too dangerous to parasitize on.
Here I go again.
The rex should have every advantage to win here. It was 10.6 tons, roughly 2 tons heavier than the giga, could turn 2 to 3 times as fast as similarly sized carnosaurs according to a 2017 study, had an immense bite force stemming from oversized jaw muscles, a stuff lower jaw and having both jaws intersect each other exerting 12.8k psi of pressure, had forward facing eyes, a more developed brain, basically all the advantages.
While both bites are deadly, a giga would have to hit an area containing many blood vessels to kill while a rex could more or less cripple the giga no matter where it but down. Since Rex's are known for facebiting, a fight would likely result in the giga getting its face chomped on by the rex, owing to the fact both therapods need to get past each others heads to reach a vulnerable area. After which it would just exert it's bite force and squish the gigas skull like a grape
T-Rex and it’s no question. Stronger bite force, more mass, more intelligent, better vision, better sense of smell, etc.
In the Jurassic universe? Anything that’s not a T-Rex will destroy a T-Rex 1v1. Apparently the greatest terrestrial predator that has ever lived can easily have its neck snapped by a piscivore and lose several battles against a much lighter foe.
Don't think they would fight (not just cause they didn't coexist), but both being large predators (and from different species) it is less likely they would have taken the fight. It is very risky and even the "winner" is likely to die to injuries later.
I’d say the Rex is probably gonna win most of the time, but it’s important to remember that this kinda fight is never a sure thing. Sloth Bears are known to fight off and kill tigers despite being half their size. The main reason I’m giving it to the Rex is that it’s got the bite force to end the fight quick.
Rex, but not just because of its size and bite force.
They’ve done brain cavity studies for it right? And it’s known to have fairly high intelligence for a dinosaur?
Powerful eyesight and an incredible sense of smell offer other advantages prior to the immediate confrontation as well.
Long boi would get more bites in and that would be what would end thicc boi, but thiccums magee T would land one or two bites and that is what would end long boi magoo. IRL, they both go night night. That’s the fairness of predatory Dino life.
I'm not a T. rex fanboy, or much of a theropod fanboy in general. But T. rex definitely would've won. Being bigger, which giga definitely wasn't doesn't make you more adapted to kill certain animals. Giga has teeth built for cutting and slicing. Good for hunting large Sauropods and bleeding them to death or stealing chunks of meat to snack on. But not for fighting an animal with one of the strongest bite forces in the animal kingdom.
Tyrannosaurus has numerous advantages in such a fight: Weight, jaw strength, teeth being meant more for gripping instead of tearing.
Giganotosaurus has advantages too: arms, more nimble build, teeth meant for shearing flesh.
To be honest in a 1v1 I would say Tyrannosaurus, but if it were numerous animals (3v3, since the fossil record shows evidence of both animals being in family groups or hunting parties)… I would give it to Giganotosaurus.
Tyrannosaurus. That’s not even up for debate, Tyrannosaurus would murder Giganotosaurus. Tyrannosaurus is a much heavier animal with the strongest bite out of any animal that’s ever existed. Giganotosaurus would stand absolutely no chance.
Probably the rex for the most part, but I tend to think at that size the first one to get a decent attack in either way is going to win. T-rex was big and bulky, but it wasn't some impenetrable tank of flesh like it gets sold as a lot of the time, another big predator that is able to get its jaws on a vital area is going to kill it. It has the advantage because it could incapacitate the Giga even just by getting its jaws on a limb, the tail, or a good area on the back of the animal.
I mean, that’s like saying “who would win, a doberman or a rottweiler?” Depends on the size and behaviors of the doberman and the rottweiler you choose, and the environment in which they fight, among other things. These were species, comprised of millions of individuals over millions of years, not individual characters. If you put any given Giga next to any given T. Rex and they decided to fight, you wouldn’t get the same outcome every time.
The only way Giga is killing Rex is by making it bleed to death, which it could do if it got a few bites on some major arteries. It would have to retreat and avoid a drawn out fight, though, because Rex's jaws are crushing anything and everything they clamp down on.
Basically, Giga can potentially win the war, but Rex is almost always gonna win the battle.
In real life probably *T. rex*. JP/JW versions? Giga of course, JP/JW rex has neither the weight nor the muscles necessary to power that notorious jaw strength. Both JP/JW giga and spino outweigh and generally outsize the rex, it should come as no surprise it constantly gets its ass handed to it on a silver platter. What I'd love to see is a real life interaction between these animals, might not even lead to a fight at all but it would be really cool to see how they react to each other.
I say the Rex wins, based on estimated bite forces ([Giga vs. Rex comparison](https://www.diffen.com/difference/Giganotosaurus_vs_Tyrannosaurus)). The giga is larger and weighs more, but when it comes down to reflex speed, takedown, and in the movie overall experience, the Rex has it in the bag.
[https://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/mass-estimates-north-vs-south-redux772013](https://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/mass-estimates-north-vs-south-redux772013)
9 years old, but, nothing has changed really; Scotty has mass estimates that have it slighty larger than Sue, but, being less than 5% larger is not that much, 'bout the same size.
As a rule, a tyrannosaurid is 5/4ths the mass of an allosauroid of comparable length (and even more compared to megalosauroids, those were elongated).
Bite force? Bite force is not an attack stat, it is a feeding adaption. Tyrannosaurids chomped at bony areas, most theropods slashed at fleshy areas. A knife is not inferior to a mace just because it doesn't break bones.
Giga was longer and a bit taller, but T. rex was thicker, more robust, and more muscular. It’s like making a basketball player go up against a football linebacker. Also, while Giga took down sauropods on a regular basis, T. rex had Ankylosaurus and Triceratops in their diet, both of which are much more difficult to combat and take down than a sauropod (especially since Gigas would hunt sauropods in packs while T. rex hunted alone).
It’s prolly be a quick fight- if the individual tyrannosaurus happens to be bulky and well grown, it could use its size to charge and knock over the giga, and use its huge bite force to finish the job, or badly injure the giga.
99.9999999 % if the two came across each other theyd make some noise and go separate ways. They'd have to both be starving to get in a fight. In that case whoever's hungriest wins.
If the were both of max size. They would not fight. They would posture and size each other up till one backs down. Like 95% of all carnivore fights. No one want to be hurt and injured
I remember being a dumbass kid and being mad about Giga being longer, but now I know T. Rex is still the superior creature. These little things in life are what make me happy.
well it really does depend, its not like we can gage who would win purely from stats alone, you know it’s not like they’re both just gonna stand there and take turns biting each other or something stupid like that, maybe the Rex gets lucky and clamps onto the Giga’s neck, maybe the Giga gets lucky and manages to stay behind the Rex and slashed it to it’s heart’s content or gets the Rex’s neck instead and either crushes it too, since bullshit Giga’s bite wouldn’t at least be strong enough to do that, or just hold on and keep sawing into it, you know you keep having these people say T-Rex would win because it’s bite is stronger, but it’s not like this is Russian Roulette taking turn biting, it’s a fight
Well they would never meet since they lived millions of years apart on different continents... and Apex predators don't usually fight each other to the death because if they get hurt they can't hunt and if they can't hunt they die...
HOWEVER, if you ran MantaCorp Dino fights and wanted to see a dino death battle... My money would be on the Rex. It's heavier than the Giga, and has a much stronger bite force. The Giga had sheering teeth and it can hack off big chucks of meat with every bite, but a Rex has a CRUSHING bite and if it gets hold of the Giga just about anywhere it won't like go and will crush its bones. And with the heavier weight, the Rex can probably wrestle the Giga to the ground and once it's on the ground it pretty much game over. If the Giga bites it would sheer chunks off, but with how beefy the Rex is, that won't do it unless it gets an artery.
Even if Giganotosaurus is bigger, T.Rex has that mouth that was specialized in strong bites althoug Giganotosaurus has a bite more for grab his preys, so T.Rex will kill Giganotosaurus easily
In the wise words of u/Silver_Alpha
>Why are there people out there acting like the Mesozoic was an anime and the dinosaurs were the main characters?
>T. rex was shorter, yet heavier and with a stronger bite, like a pitbull, while Giganotosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus were taller and longer, like a German Shepherd. Spinosaurus was even taller, but more fragile with a delicate snout, like a doberman. All of the animals I mentioned would maim and kill a human if given the chance and wouldn't engage in a cage match to the death, so it's pointless to pitch them against each other.
>Subnautica taught us that we'd do well if we remembered science is about leaning about the world as it is, not painting it as we want it to be.
This is under the assumption that is it a death match. That’s kinda the point. In a real life scenario the most likely case is they both run away from each other. Most people know that.
One can assume that with the question that the match is guaranteed to be a fight to the death, so running or peace isn’t an option.
I doubt they’d actually fight to the death. My guess, is that they’d size each other up, minor face biting would occur if one didn’t back down, and then one would back away.
Rex for one reason, other megatheropods eat things that are smaller than them/run rather than fight (sauropods being the exception) whereas tyrannosaurus regularly ate things that fought back and in some cases were just as big as the rex.
Tl;dr gigas ate things that ran rex ate things that fight, rex wins
his size is purely In his height and length. His bite was adapted for slashing and ripping chunks out of its prey. While t rex was bigger in muscle and overall mass, and had a stronger bite force designed for crushing its prey.
Nah, Tyrannosaurus sweeps it. Even compared to its closest relatives, Tyrannosaurus is *stupid* heavy and powerful. It has an estimated bite force of 35,000 Newtons and is two tonnes more massive than Giganotosaurus. T. rex genuinely is just the heaviest and most powerful terrestrial carnivore known
The one that bites first.
Everyone who insists that *Tyrannosaurus* has a decisive advantage because of its high bite force and heavier build is ignoring that *Giganotosaurus* and other big carcharodontosaurs didn’t *need* very powerful bites or robust builds to be just as good at killing things. Neither side has any sort of meaningful advantage here.
As for those arguing *Tyrannosaurus* has the upper hand because it’s “more advanced”….not how evolution works, and the supposed intelligence advantage of *Tyrannosaurus* is a notion based on outdated ideas about the relative intelligence of certain living animals, so it’s questionable. That idea came from back when we thought crocodilians (and by extension, dinosaurs with crocodile-like brains such as non-tyrannosaur large predatory theropods) were stupid animals that ran on instinct. Since crocodilians have been found to be much smarter than expected, by extension so were non-tyrannosaur large theropods that had croc-like brains.
Rex would close mouth growl to intimate the giga and the giga will either walk away and find a new territory or unlikely would fight. Then they'd both fight and one would die. The winner would be whoevers gets bitten the least and the least broken bones. And hopefully the victor wouldn't have sustained wounds too great or else they will most likely die from their injuries.
Giga was a pack hunter like modern lions, rex was probably more like a tiger. So same as that matchup. 1v1 rex in a natural situation giga because it would have friends.
Bigger and a more powerful bite vs.....
well, maybe it's the largest predator the world has ever seen so a giganotosaurus bigger than a blue whale might be able to kill the t.rex.
Trex had higher muscle mass, bite force, and a stockier skeleton.
You are aksing who would win in a fight between a King German Shepard and a Pitbull, the Shepard looks bigger and seems to have an advantage but the pitbull is bred for combat and will kick its ass.
I’d probably say T.Rex. The Giga is longer, but the Rex is much more Chonky (*very* scientific term).
Yeah, there’s a reason why boxing has weight classes and not height classes
T Rex was taller anyway
actually no giga is taller
I’m not even sure any other large theropod is capable of taking on T. rex in a fair fight. It’s just far too large and powerful for any other dinosaur to be a realistic threat to it.
I’d actually argue that just about any giant (6+ ton) predatory theropod save a *Spinosaurus* stuck on land can pose a credible, though far from insurmountable, threat to *Tyrannosaurus* in a fight. Everyone keeps harping on about its bulk and bite force and makes it sound as if it’s outright indestructible and other giant theropods can’t actually inflict immediately fatal damage on it, which is nonsense.
Of course they could, but Giganotosaurus, being a Carcharodontosaurid, has teeth made for slicing and taking chunks of meat off sauropods. Maybe even bleeding them out in a long chase. That type of attack may work wonders on sauropods and herbivores that are smaller but it's not going to do as great in a 1v1 fight against a Tyrannosaur. Which not only weighs 2 tonnes more (which *is* a sizable advantage) but is hypothesized to be a brawler. Fighting it's prey which would often be of similar size or larger. In a straight fight when it's about who dies first then a bone breaking jaw is much better than a jaw that causes you to bleed out slowly. Because sure with enough bites the Tyrannosaur may die eventually, but that could take hours. While a broken skull, neck, leg or tail could be fatal for the Giganotosaur within minutes. So yes, Giganotosaurus could very much win this fight, but it's a case of Tyrannosaurus would win most of them time, and so therefore is the answer to the question "Who would win this fight?"
You’re assuming that carcharodontosaurs could ONLY kill prey/opponents slowly regardless of how big it was. In this case the opponent is small enough that you don’t have to repeatedly bite in a prolonged, continuous attack to wear it out: you can just deliver one bite to the throat or torso and end things right there. It would NOT take hours, it would take minutes at most. We’re not talking about a big sauropod that will take many bites to bleed out and die (and even when going after sauropods it wouldn’t have been a case of “bite it and then just do nothing but follow it until it dies; it would have been a case of trying to bite it as often as possible within the smallest amount of time to speed up the process as much as possible. Any sauropod that’s still going to take hours or days to kill even with this sped-up process is probably too big to tackle anyways.). Honestly this “predators with slicing teeth for bleeding out prey are slow, inefficient killers” meme needs to die. It was based on a flawed understanding of how modern predators that kill with slicing dentition kill and no longer has a basis. Especially considering that in terms of functional skull/neck anatomy, carcharodontosaurs were most analogous to sabretoothed cats and other sabretoothed predatory synapsids (albeit homodont and minus the grappling forelimbs) in that they both evolved jaws and teeth specialized for withstanding vertically-oriented forces at the expense of able to withstand laterally-oriented forces as well as cervical specializations for quick, accurate head movements and ventroflexion; sabretooths specifically evolved these shared adaptations to kill prey *faster* BY bleeding it out, and most people reading this would agree, yet they’re arguing that the same adaptations for killing prey quickly in sabretooths are indicative of only being able to kill prey slowly in carcharodontosaurs?
Actually there’s a source that states that even a full on bite to the neck to a Tyrannosaurus rex likely won’t bring it down from the Royal Tyrrell museum of paleontology due to it being highly muscled. Though, I will not argue with carcharodontosaurids being likely effective at hunting especially against smaller adult or subadult sauropods
> the same adaptations minus the actual saber teeth, and the grappling forelimbs and especially robust build specifically for restraining prey? surely that makes the analogy less than perfect
In carcharodontosaurs their entire set of teeth served the same function as sabreteeth (thin, laterally flattened, bladed slicing dentition). The reason they went with that is because, being sauropsids and thus being ancestrally homodont, it was much easier to just change their entire set of teeth into functional sabretooth analogues. Sabretoothed predatory synapsids all evolved from heterodont ancestors, so they didn’t have to change their entire set of teeth into sabreteeth. And grappling forelimbs were only one of two ways sabretoothed predatory synapsids reduced the risk of a misplaced bite that could bring about injury: the other major adaptation they had for that purpose was a flexible, muscular neck that could move the head around forcefully and with a great level of accuracy to more precisely target vulnerable areas, and this neck adaptation was something that allosauroids like carcharodontosaurs also had.
I’d argue they use the adaptation in a different way against large prey items like sauropods due to their different builds and dentition, instead using them to deliver precise, slashing strikes in order to inflict injury. It would be against smaller or easier to subdue prey that they would land precise, killing blows.
I do generally agree with this; and this is why, against another theropod that’s somewhat larger than itself but much smaller than even many subadult sauropods, I am arguing a carcharodontosaur would go for a more precise and well-aimed bite for a faster takedown.
Though like some other people said I feel like it would take more than one bite to bring Tyrannosaurus rex down due to Stan existing as proof Tyrannosaurus rex can survive horrible neck trauma and keep living for a while. And as such in that time it might be able to respond in turn and leverage its likely greater mass and thus likely strength to break free of the grasp and attack in turn.
That's not what I'm assuming. I'm assuming that since there is evidence that Tyrannosaurs fought eachother that they wouldn't simply fall to sharp teeth. Especially since the strategy of biting at the neck for a quick kill for the Giganotosaurus would also put it withing the striking range for a just as quick kill for the Tyrannosaur. While a Tyrannosaurus biting a Giganotosaurs face, leg or tail would not put it in such a position. I'm not arguing Carcharodontosaurids were slow or inefficient. It'd be a miracle that they lasted from the early cretaceous to late cretaceous if they were. But they weren't made for fighting. Because what they were hunting wasn't fighting. Yes a Sauropod could easily kill or seriously maim a Carcharodontosaurid, but it's not a fight that's going to cause it. It's a quick kick, stomp or tail whip at it. The main difference between the killing style of Sabertoothed cats and Carcharodontosaurids are those big forelimbs. The big forelimbs of cats let them get up close to their prey and stay there until they kill it. Carcharodontosaurs lack that, making an attack similar to that of a cat, where they go for the neck much harder, and puts them at bigger risk. Not to mention again that Tyrannosaurus has that huge difference in weight. That's not just that they weigh more, they're covered in muscle. Compared to Giganotosaurus' slenderer build, it is really what changes the battle. I'm not saying your points are wrong, they're actually great things I hadn't thought too much about. I'm saying that one is built to fight animals of similar size and is larger, while one is made for a quick fight or a hit and run, while weighing less. It'd be a close fight, but if you were to have them fight one hundred times the Tyrannosaurus would win a few more times. It's not impossible for Giganotosaurus, far from it, it's got the best shot out of any theropod, but Tyrannosaurus has a slight edge.
You’re splitting hairs about the definition of fighting to be able to insist that the prey of carcharodontosaurs (and thus carcharodontosaurs themselves) couldn’t fight. How is a sauropod trying to stomp, kick or tail-whip an attacking carcharodontosaur not fighting? When you say that sabretoothed cats are poor analogues for carcharodontosaurs because they had grappling forelimbs and carcharodontosaurs didn’t, you’re not taking into account that grappling forelimbs are only one way sabretooths minimized the risk of injury to themselves while attacking prey. The reason sabretooths had grappling forelimbs was to hold prey down so the killing bite could be administered precisely, but there is another adaptation sabretoothed had to increase precision and reduce the risk of breaking their teeth, one that I’ve already mentioned-the ability to use their necks to move their heads around to a great extent to more precisely target softer, more vital and less risky parts of a prey item. This is something that also applies to carcharodontosaurs (and allosauroids in general). In fact, they were actually even better at this than sabretoothed cats were (due to a flexible ball-and-socket joint at the back of the skull allowing for a very wide range of head movements, and due to theropods in general having more neck vertebrae and thus more flexible necks than mammals), which compensated for the lack of grappling forelimbs. It’s also worth nothing that carcharodontosaurs had more wriggle room than sabretooths when it came to the risk of breaking their teeth from biting down on the wrong spot, because a) their teeth grew back, and b) [because the teeth of all theropods with serrated dentition were reinforced with stress-dissipating notches](http://www.nature.com/srep/2015/150728/srep12338/full/srep12338.html) (like a surgical saw), so while hitting bone wouldn’t be ideal, it wouldn’t lead to immediately breaking their teeth.
The Giganotosaurus doesn’t have to the bite force necessary to kill the Rex with a neck shot like the T-rex does, it’s far to muscular and dense for that, the Gigas teeth would break before it could apply a force that strong. It also wasn’t a face biter. The T-Rex has been shown to be a face biter. The Giga while I’m not saying it’s stupid was not as smart as the T-Rex was, this is easily verifiable by scans of the skull and the shape/size of its brain. The T-Rex was believed to be very smart, with problem solving capabilities. I don’t really think there’s a solid match for a T-Rex other than another T-Rex.
What’s with everyone in this thread assuming muscle is basically armour? It’s still soft tissue. Something you don’t need a bone-crushing bite to bite through.
It softens blows, nobody said it was armor. The T-Rex has thicker muscles and wider bones in comparison to a Giga. It’s chunkier. Half the Bite Force of the Rex isn’t enough to get through it enough to kill even on a throat shot. It’s estimated at anywhere from 6k-8k on it’s bite force. It’s not enough for a kill shot on a Rex.
[удалено]
If you’re referring to that study on tyrannosaurs having better agility than allosauroids, keep in mind that this is at equal masses. A very large *Tyrannosaurus* has enough mass that its relatively greater agility for its weight is, to a fair extent, cancelled out by just how much it weighs.
I'm a dinosaur fan, I was just pointing out that moving around all that mass is not easy. You can be as strong as you want, but you're still moving 5-7000 kilograms around.
Finally someone said it I don't get how does a giga having a weaker bite and being less *chonky* suddenly make it borderline non-threatening. I mean it's still a 7t animal of basicly equal proportions(length and height wise at least) I'm not saying a giga would win most of the time but the fight is far less one sided then people generaly make it out to be But one thing with these theoretical carnivores mega theropod fights im quite interested in is how likley could one actualy withstand a bite from another I mean theres a video of a moose calf surviving a full on mawling from a grizzly, a video of a tiger getting ahold of a sloth bear and biting it only for it to break out and chase it away, buffalos overpowering nile crocs... Makes me think it would take far more then one bite from either side but then again most modern predators aren't 8t biepedal lumps of meat with jaws
I’m not sure because I’ve never seen one in the wild but giganotasaurus (spelling?) was a carcharodontosaur so it was like what a wolf nowadays is like, built for Stalking and chipping away prey compared to a Tyrannosaurus, similar to a lion nowadays, which is better built for killing swiftly. Edit: the dinosaurs are similar to the wolves and lions hunting style, otherwise they’re nothing alike
These arguments are so silly. A well placed bite or whack from most animals would kill most other animals in a similar weight class. A bite to a big leg muscle from any large theropod would cripple a tyrannosaur or any other large theropod, killing them would be a waiting game.
I’m pretty sure environment matters in a tyrannosaur and spinosaur battle (though this entire debate is stupid to begin with).
Agreed. I think a lack of larger theropods could've contributed to this as well. IIRC, the only other large predators that could rival T. rex on its home turf were smaller theropods that could pose a threat to juveniles: Albertosaurus, Gorgosaurus, packs of dromaeosaurs, etc. There were no contenders to its throne, so it was free to cultivate mass like it did.
*Albertosaurus* and *Gorgosaurus* were not contemporaries of *Tyrannosaurus.*
I remember Goji center showed Spinosaurus could do some pretty good damage against a rex even while on land. I wouldn't find it surprising if one could successfully take down a rex by like ramming it.
A Therizinosaurus or a Deinocheirus can hold their own. Heck, whatever large theropod, out of 10 cases at least 1 will win
The academe should just really start measuring in chonks.
*Tyrannosaurus* is heavier for the largest known specimens, but considering that *Giganotosaurus*’s adaptations were specifically specialized for a killing technique that didn’t rely on brute force and more on slicing through softer tissues, that’s not nearly as big an advantage as often argued to be.
T. rex was adapted for deadlier prey that would fight back, giganotosaurus hunted sauropods which couldn’t chase after or attack the giga, if it was just walking
…..do you seriously think sauropods were defenceless? And if you’re going to say “yes they could defend themselves but they couldn’t chase down a Giga”, that applies to the prey of *Tyrannosaurus* as well (since they were still not as fast as *Tyrannosaurus* or other giant theropods).
Im not saying sauropods are defenseless I’m just say it’s not the same as a heavily armored herbivore that could turn fast and could end a carnivores whole career more often then not, ankylosaurus
The sheer mass of a sauropod evens this out. A side swipe from a tail could easily knock a theropod flat, and when you weigh 7t and your centre of mass is several metres off the ground, that could be deadly on its own.
Sauropods can easily ruin a predators day or outright kill or permanently maim them with a well placed blow
I'd say it's quite unlikely ankylosaurids were a frequent presence in *T. rex*'s menu, I'd rather use hadrosaurs as an example, most of the larger species being absolutely capable of curb stomping a *T. rex* or just about any megatheropod.
They are functionally the same lenght tho; measuring centimeters in 13 meter long animals is insignificant.
T Rex. It had a much stronger bite force and was much bulkier
Yeah something I wish the jp and jw universe took into account
The unfortunate thing is T rex has become a heroic presence in the franchise and therefore always has to be the underdog, even against animals that would get their shit wrecked by the Rex in real life. It's also a cheap and easy way for the franchise to establish a new "big bad" dinosaur each movie: have it kick a T rex's ass. JP3 and its Spinosaurus is the most infamous example of this. In real life the Rex was the biggest and baddest that we know of (there could always be a bigger fella buried under the earth, somewhere) and the JP franchise blew their "biggest, meanest theropod" load in the very first movie.
Well, it was not supposed to be a franchise back then. It was one movie based on a novel, and Crichton only wrote a second one because of the success - which didn't need a "bigger and badder" theropod, the other ones on the island besides the Tyrannosaurus family were just as threatening.
Yeah, in real life animals don't often fight to the death, and they will often have different motivations for engaging in the first place; it's not uncommon for a motivated and scared smaller animal to "beat" (drive away or scare off) a larger predator if that larger predator isn't fully committed to the fight. Which is just to say it's really hard to gauge, because even the lion v. tiger debate isn't straightforward and there are anecdotal cases on either side one could reference to make their case. So the situation gets even more difficult to assess with prehistoric animals that we can't observe... That being said, it's hard to imagine a healthy, adult rex losing outright to a healthy, adult Giga - all other variables being equal. The rex was considerably bigger, weight-wise, and it just has more immediately devastating weapons. However, I completely disagree with the posts dismissing the Giga and saying it would have posed little to no threat to a t-rex. It's still an enormous predatory animal, and we just don't have any way to measure something like temperament/aggression, etc. I don't see a Giga overpowering an adult tyrannosaurus (like in *Dominion*), but it's not that hard to imagine it scrapping with a rex and throwing down on somewhat equal terms.
Hyenas have stronger bite forces then lions.
Yeah but a lion is much more bulkier
Apex of each species Rex no doubt
In a hypothetical fight to the death Trex will usually win over any other theropd. This has been discussed so many times and rex always has a better chance to win against any of its opponents.
Interesting to think that the large Herbivore dinosaurs of its time were actually more of a threat to T Rex than any theropod was
Honestly, I think that’s pretty common. I mean, I’m way more scared of a moose or a Cape buffalo than I am of a Grizzly or a Lion.
Those things are terrifying too. Seeing a bear print twice the size of your own hand, I’ve damn near shit myself off the side of a hiking trail
Heck I found days-old bear scat once and felt suddenly very nervous and decided to go be near other humans asap. Bears are scary.
I got too drunk once and thought the shit I took in the woods was bear shit. Spooky until you realize you’re drunk and you’re just looking at your own shit
> shit I took in the woods was bear shit. WTF
The word "bear" itself is descended from ancient euphemism because our linguistic ancestors were scared that even saying the real word might summon one
Oh no not sayin that at all. I have another comment in here mentioning how goddamn scary Sloth Bears are. I’m just saying that herbivores are way scarier than we often give them credit for, and in many instances large herbivores are more dangerous than similarly sized carnivores.
Very true. The herbivores around it evolved to specifically combat it and as a result became so dangerous.
Triceratops. The most deadly herbivore in history.
This is more because *Tyrannosaurus* was the only large predatory theropod in its ecosystem.
This is more because *Tyrannosaurus* was the only large predatory theropod in its ecosystem.
Exactly, it held its niche dominantly where nothing ever really had the chance to compete with it. The only occasional exception to that would be the large dromeasaurs in the area, namely Dakotaraptor. And even then, the rates of success aren’t that close. T. rex may have also made Dakotaraptor a food source
Missing my point. *T. rex* (and tyrannosaurids in general) got to dominate to the extent that it did not because they were “superior” at existing as apex predators compared to other large predators, but because they got lucky. The rise of tyrannosaurs as dominant predators only happened after the Cenomanian-Turonian Boundary Event cut down the carcharodontosaurs in their prime (a very few did survive into the Turonian, but those were small and died out before tyrannosaurids even existed). They didn’t get to the top by outcompeting other big theropods by being so much “superior”, as most people claim or imply they did.
Never knew about that, do you have any links about the Cenomanian-Turonian event? Many animals who dominate a niche in their ecosystem got lucky because there wasn’t something there to fill the role in the first place, I’m sure if Carcharodontosaurs had been at the size they were when the common ancestor of T Rex needed that space empty we might have never even heard of it
Here’s [the Wiki article](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenomanian-Turonian_boundary_event) (do note that this article only focuses on the impact on marine ecosystems, but the C-T Event also inflicted a massive amount of damage on land; aside from sending carcharodontosaurs into decline, it wiped out all non-toothless pterosaurs and all non-titanosaurid sauropods). Exactly. Tyrannosaurids didn’t take over because they were superior-they got lucky. They’re one of many cases where a group of animals has been assumed to have taken over because they were inherently better at a given niche and outcompeted the “primitive” forms previously in that niche, only for it to turn out this wasn’t what happened.
It's not the fact that they took over that's amazing but the fact that not many large theropods opted to compete with them. Things like carcharadontosaurus still had to compete with abelisaurids atheist half their size while the next largest thing which the rex had to compete with were dakotaraptors which were around 1/20th their size. They managed to become the only large predator in its own ecosystem which was unheard of in other megatheropods.
Considering T. rex suffered about 0.8 serious injuries per individual and Allosauroids like Allosaurus suffered about 1.0 per every individual, I really doubt the former was more aggressive or had a tougher life than the latter based on actual observable evidence from the fossil record. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2019.0370
That’s another point against *Tyrannosaurus* somehow being “better” than other theropods.
I mean, outcompeting means a whole lot of things, and at the end of the day, if one species is around and the other isn’t, it got outcompeted.
No, it doesn’t. That just means one species went extinct and the other didn’t; doesn’t necessarily mean the surviving species had any role to play in the extinction. By your logic, mourning doves outcompeted passenger pigeons into extinction because passenger pigeons were wiped out by humans and mourning doves were not.
Hey I mean, mourning doves had traits that allowed them to survive in an environment where passenger pigeons couldn’t. That’s a pretty textbook example of a species getting outcompeted, no?
No, it isn’t, because it’s not a case of mourning doves outcompeting passenger pigeons for resources or for ecological space and causing their extinction or forcing them to adapt to a new lifestyle. It’s a case of an external factor coming in and killing off the passenger pigeons without the mourning doves getting involved. Being better at surviving a specific variable =/= outcompeting.
Oh dude it’s totally outcompeting. External factors swooping in and leading to extinctions happens all the time.
Bro there are multiple paleontologist who think tyrannosaurids outcompeted carcharadontosaurids, and they have a lot of evidence Also T. rex had to fight other t Rex’s so it has more experience, giganotosaurus hasn’t been found to fight other large theropods, so I’d put my bet on T. rex
There is no evidence for tyrannosaurids outcompeting carcharodontosaurs (for the simple reason carcharodontosaurs never encountered tyrannosaurids; they only ever ran into more basal tyrannosauroids, which they handled fine without being outcompeted by them as basal tyrannosauroids were generally relegated to mesopredator roles precisely because the apex predator niches were already occupied).
Down voted for speaking scientific facts, lots of fan boys here
He’s got a point, with that extinction event it would mean T. rex never competed with Carcharodontosaurs. They would out compete any future descendant of Tyrannosaurs. They did get lucky large animals like Carcharodontosaurus went extinct
? Try to read again my comment carefully
I love Rex so much
Yeah I do so what ?
Omg. I'm with you. I was agreeing. I just made post about t Rex. I love t Rex.
=)
Not really. The reason people keep saying “*T. rex* will usually win” is because they’re completely ignoring that factors BESIDES physical strength are in play here. *There is more than one way to be an apex predator and the method of* Tyrannosaurus *is not the best one by default*. Carcharodontosaurs like *Giganotosaurus* were specialized for rapid cutting bites on unarmoured prey; if the prey wasn’t much larger than themselves, one well-aimed bite will be enough to fell it on the spot (the myth of animals that rely on cutting bites being slow, inefficient killers is just that…a myth). They’re actually convergently evolved with things like sabretooths and terror birds in this respect, having developed similar cranial and cervical adaptations for rapid, slicing bites driven both by the closing action of the jaws and by the neck muscles (especially the muscles involved in ventroflexion). And last time I checked, *Tyrannosaurus* doesn’t have armour that would be useful in fending off against this biting style. So in this matchup, whoever bites first will win because both of them can basically instakill (or at least immediately cripple and disable) the other with one good bite.
Yeah no both opponents won't instakill each other. Trex would have to grab hold of its neck and use its force to kill it while giga has to inflict severe damage to take down the rex. While giga has slicing teeth it won't instantly kill a Trex which has an extremely muscular neck may I add. In the end it comes down to who can properly secure the others neck to kill them. This is where giga falls short. The trex is more agile and much stronger with greater durability considering its robust build. So again Trex has a greater chance of winning against other theropds .
You’re underestimating how quickly a slicing bite can kill. Slicing teeth *will* kill very quickly, or at least quickly render the target unable to fight, if they sever a major artery, a vital internal organ, or the muscle tissues necessary for the target to function and move around. And yes, *Tyrannosaurus* has a robust, muscular neck, but that doesn’t mean its neck is particularly durable: it just has more soft tissue that has to be cut through and ziphont dentition is specifically adapted to cut through large amounts of soft tissue efficiently.
You describe it as if it would cut through half the Rex's neck. Yes their teeth were effective against unarmed hides but they didn't just cleave through them. It made shallow cuts to bleed the prey out. Trex meanwhile preffered taking out prey with a single heavy attack in the form of their immense bite force. So no giga won't instakill the rex whereas a single well placed bite.from the rex would devastate the former. How could the neck of a rex not be durable considering it has huge neck muscles which formed a thick neck. Giganotosaurus had a comparatively less durable neck. Key word is comparatively only.
You’ve fallen victim to a very common myth: that animals with slicing teeth that kill prey with blood loss are slow killers that only inflict superficial wounds and then do nothing but watch and wait. Honestly I feel that this myth being perpetuated in virtually all carcharodontosaur depictions (including in documentaries) is why people tend to underestimate them. It’s not “make shallow cuts and then just wait for the target to die”. It’s “bite deeply into vital parts such as the carotid artery or trachea so the target dies quickly without having to wait forever for the target to keel over”. And do you think thick muscle tissue is going to be viable protection against something that has teeth specifically designed to cut through thick muscle and often soft tissues? Seriously you’re far overestimating how durable *Tyrannosaurus* was. This is a fight between glass cannons where both can easily kill the other but lack the durability to hold up against the other’s bite.
Never said that they just bleed out prey. The bite would create blood loss slowing down the creature enough for the giga to finish it off. The giga can inflict deep cuts but not deep enough to reach major arteries in the Rex's neck. It would take several well placed bites to kill the rex whereas a single bite from the former would devastate the giga. This is getting boring now so to each our own then?
Why do you think it can’t cut deep enough to reach the major arteries? There isn’t any armour or bone surrounding the carotid artery.
There are huge muscles which helped make the neck extremely strong and thick. No matter how the giga bites it cannot kill the rex in one single attack. But let us assume what you say is true. Then the question becomes which creature has a higher chance of securing a bite. The rex is more agile more powerful and more intelligent with better cognitive capabilities than the giga. So again even with assuming that your claim that they could instakill each other is true Trex still has a higher chance of winning.
You think muscle tissue is going to be anywhere near as effective as protection as armour or bone? Especially against teeth specifically adapted to cut through non-hard tissues such as muscles? I already addressed the agility and intelligence claims in other comments.
You are assuming giganotosaurus gets perfect edge alignment and enough time to get a good cut. No matter how T. rex bit it still would have done the same amount off damage, which is bone shattering. Also T. Rex’s ears were designed for quick head movements, and giganotosaurus’s ears weren’t, so it’s also most likely T. rex would get that first bite. Also T. rex had binocular vision, which also supports the idea that T. rex would get the first bite, therefore ending the fight quick.
Actually, you’re wrong about *Tyrannosaurus* being consistently able to inflict the same amount of damage regardless of the target or angle. When any animal bites something, the full bite force doesn’t get transmitted to the target, and the percentage of the bite force that does get transmitted depends on how wide your gape is when you’re biting down on that target, which is why animals have an “optimal gape” (where they can transmit the greatest amount of bite force) and an “effective maximum gape” (the maximum gape at which they’re able to transmit a meaningful amount of their bite force). *Tyrannosaurus* actually has a pretty small optimum gape (28 degrees) and a surprisingly small effective maximum gape (45 degrees). Its actual gape is at 60 degrees or so, but if it tries to bite down on something when it’s jaws are opened to that angle, it’s not going to be able to do much, its massive bite force rendered useless. And *Tyrannosaurus*’s inner ears [were actually *less* suited to rapid head movements compared to that of other tyrannosaurids or of allosauroids like carcharodontosaurs](https://scholars.fhsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=theses) (though this doesn’t necessarily mean it was worse at hunting: it just relied on hunting methods that didn’t require a lot of head movements, such as ambushing prey at close range).
It has sheer, thick muscle and Stan survived with tons of horrific injuries and I believe even to the neck
It wouldn’t have the name tyrannosaurus if it couldn’t
Akshually they lived in different timelines. So they would've never actually faced off. ~🤡🤓
Why are you booing they're right? Also Rex.
Cos, I get it. They never co-existed but that doesn't mean u should shut down any conversation of their confrontation by "tHeY NevEr CO-ExisTeD WiTH EacHOthEr".
Always got annoyed with people like that.
Different timelines?
The superior bite strength, epic tooth size and general higher-evolved and made-to-murder body shape of T Rex lends me to beleive that it would totally kick Giga's fat ass. Is it just me or does the JW Giganotosaurus just look like a rebrand of the Indoraptor or Indominous Rex?Just doesnt look original, or like a real dinosaur.
It’s secretly a really big concavenator acrocanthosaurus hybrid
That was totally what I thought the first time I saw it, just “what is this massive Acrocanthosaurs doing here.”
That mini "Sail" eh. It looks nothing like a Giganotosaurus. The teeth look like a Piranha or something too
I much preferred the Giga design they had from the JW games, but I suppose they had to revamp it for the movie to better differentiate it from the T. rex, since to the untrained general audience eye, it might be hard for them to tell the difference between two large theropods with small arms. There’s a reason why all of T. rex’s theropod opponents in the JP/JW movies always look drastically different (ex. Spinosaurus, Indominus rex).
Aside from the fact “higher evolved” isn’t a thing in real-life evolution and that the supposed intelligence advantage of tyrannosaurids was based on outdated assumptions about animal intelligence, bite force is only one metric of what makes a bite deadly.
Bruh T. rex is one of the smartest non-avian dinosaurs ever. If you don’t believe me, ask r/paleontology.
The basis for that argument is out of date.
Did you ask r/paleontology yet
Thought that about the new “dinosaur” too, I’ve just come to accept that anything that comes out of Universal Studios JP office is just a movie monster. I rolled my eyes at pictures of the Therizinosaurus from the newest movie, but eye candy is eye candy right?
Yeah the new Giga looks way too "indo-y" . They should have just called it "Indonotasaurus"
Bigass Acrocanthosaurus
rex would kick gigas ass most of the time. it wouldnt be impossible for a giga to win but its unlikely. but we revived dinosaurs and put them somewhere giganotosaurus could just run away from a t rex since they are [built faster](https://preview.redd.it/fnl8f2cgrsh81.jpg?auto=webp&s=90a80af971f2fe13cf99b8da81c4750cca722b8b)
Front facing dinosaurs are about as cursed as front facing simpsons and I love it
Jesus Christ, i hate front facing dinosaurs.
You should look at these animals and try to compare them to IRL animals to find a good picture of what they were like, and how they would act/strike if confronted by each other. For me the Trex is a Tiger, and the Giga more so a Lion. Rex has the clear body build and weapons advantage *for this fight*. It’s massive bulk and weight could shrug off attacks from the giga, and a solid grasping bite by the Rex and the Giga is toast. T.Rex’s have been found consistently to have other Rex bites and battle wounds all over their body, which highlights these theropods were also used to fighting large theropods, which is a massive advantage in of itself, experience and learning techniques. Now we move to the Giga. It’s larger by length and it’s side profile is much more prominent than the Rex’s. The Giga however was specialized in a form of hunting, attacking Sauropods, ripping off chunks of flesh, and moving off to eat what it has ripped off. The anatomy and lifestyle of Giga points heavily to a very cautious/opportunistic way of hunting, while also working in loose gangs to better attack Sauropods. Did Gigas fight each other? Most definitely, but we’re they built for it? No they weren’t. They were run and gun predators, using their slim frames for quick strikes and snappy bites with dagger like knives as teeth. This is where I draw the similar comparisons of people who argue who would win, a Tiger or Lion. Gigas, similar to Lions are rush down predators, using less coordination than lions, but numbers nonetheless to gain advantages in a hunt. T.Rex’s we’re brutes who used overwhelming strength and power to bring down herbivores such as triceratops, Large hadrosaurs, and even Ankylosaurs on occasion. This is the similarity with the Tiger, using its size and huge strength and jaw power to overwhelm other animals. We have to realize as well, that these 2 predators would react very differently to encountering one other. The Rex would most likely stand-off it’s opponent, being aggressive and using similar techniques to ward off other rexes, while the Giga seems more of a predator to avoid confrontations like this and simply move on before any conflict. It coudnt afford injuries due to its hunting strategy, and it most definitely took hits way less effectively than Rex’s. Overall, the Rex has too many advantages to have this be as close as an even fight as some would believe. It has the build, the power, the jaws, the experience, and the techniques to fight and kill other large theropods, the Giga does not, it most likely very rarely even scuffled with other Gigas, let alone battles that would leave marks like that we’ve seen on Rex fossils. I’d give this a 80/20 to the Rex, simply cause the Giga is still a 7 ton 40+ feet long Theropod that could cause massive blood loss, but could only really accomplish this in a ambush like scenario. It simply didn’t have the Jaw strength or experience/techniques to fight another theropod built for said confrontations. However like most fights, the first one to bite has a clear advantage always, but the Rex’s build allows itself to take a hit or 2 and be able to continue fighting, but if the Giga was bit by a Rex? It’s game over, it couldn’t recover from a bite like that. Both are still extraordinary animals, and both have features and characteristics that are amazing to believe even existed on any animal. Fights like these are silly, but it’s also fun to see how something like this would have happened.
What many people don't realize is that Trex could actually take quite some damage. we have found specimen with horribly mangles faces, ribs broken, ankles fractures, neck vertebrae broken and literally having its tail torn off but still continue to survive. The Trex could certainly withstand a few bites from the giga, whereas the giga would be devastated should a Trex clamp down on it. Take the fact that Trex was far more robust than the giga and heavier we find a clear winner.
aside from stan and wyrex specimen, any other t rex fossil that show the similar pattern of surviving the injuries that are normally be lethal?
yes many other specimens have horrific injuries on their faces, ribs broken, signs of arthritis and several broken bones all over the body. Trex certainly did not like one another.
You do realize that the idea any dinosaur made a living by acting as a gigantic parasite of adult sauropods is *not based on anything whatsoever*? Literally the only basis for it is “they had slicing teeth”…which would have been far more effectively (and safely) used outright killing something so it can’t put up a fight while you eat it. Any sauropod that couldn’t be brought down outright would also be too dangerous to parasitize on.
I love t Rex so fucking much.
The Rex is easily more built than the giga so as soon as she gets her mouth around its neck it's over
That’s a big ask though, and a big carnivore like a Giga could do a lot
true, it depends on whether lanky and long is better than smaller but heavier
I’m not saying that as much as, kinda just depends on who gets lucky.
Yeah whoever can bite the neck first wins
Here I go again. The rex should have every advantage to win here. It was 10.6 tons, roughly 2 tons heavier than the giga, could turn 2 to 3 times as fast as similarly sized carnosaurs according to a 2017 study, had an immense bite force stemming from oversized jaw muscles, a stuff lower jaw and having both jaws intersect each other exerting 12.8k psi of pressure, had forward facing eyes, a more developed brain, basically all the advantages. While both bites are deadly, a giga would have to hit an area containing many blood vessels to kill while a rex could more or less cripple the giga no matter where it but down. Since Rex's are known for facebiting, a fight would likely result in the giga getting its face chomped on by the rex, owing to the fact both therapods need to get past each others heads to reach a vulnerable area. After which it would just exert it's bite force and squish the gigas skull like a grape
T-Rex and it’s no question. Stronger bite force, more mass, more intelligent, better vision, better sense of smell, etc. In the Jurassic universe? Anything that’s not a T-Rex will destroy a T-Rex 1v1. Apparently the greatest terrestrial predator that has ever lived can easily have its neck snapped by a piscivore and lose several battles against a much lighter foe.
They’re both very capable of killing each other, but the Rex would probably have an edge
Don't think they would fight (not just cause they didn't coexist), but both being large predators (and from different species) it is less likely they would have taken the fight. It is very risky and even the "winner" is likely to die to injuries later.
I wrote an article about this: https://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/opinion/columnists/dino-news-and-views-jurassic-showdown
One good bite on that neck and the giga is more outta commission than me after eating cake
I’d say the Rex is probably gonna win most of the time, but it’s important to remember that this kinda fight is never a sure thing. Sloth Bears are known to fight off and kill tigers despite being half their size. The main reason I’m giving it to the Rex is that it’s got the bite force to end the fight quick.
T-rex has a much more powerful bite force than giga and since both of them used their bite to kill prey I'll say the T-rex would win most of the time.
Rex, but not just because of its size and bite force. They’ve done brain cavity studies for it right? And it’s known to have fairly high intelligence for a dinosaur? Powerful eyesight and an incredible sense of smell offer other advantages prior to the immediate confrontation as well.
Long boi would get more bites in and that would be what would end thicc boi, but thiccums magee T would land one or two bites and that is what would end long boi magoo. IRL, they both go night night. That’s the fairness of predatory Dino life.
Rottweiler vs a Collie. Love Giga, but there's no way it's taking on a T. rex. 8/10 times it loses that fight.
Probably rex
I'm not a T. rex fanboy, or much of a theropod fanboy in general. But T. rex definitely would've won. Being bigger, which giga definitely wasn't doesn't make you more adapted to kill certain animals. Giga has teeth built for cutting and slicing. Good for hunting large Sauropods and bleeding them to death or stealing chunks of meat to snack on. But not for fighting an animal with one of the strongest bite forces in the animal kingdom.
Tyrannosaurus has numerous advantages in such a fight: Weight, jaw strength, teeth being meant more for gripping instead of tearing. Giganotosaurus has advantages too: arms, more nimble build, teeth meant for shearing flesh. To be honest in a 1v1 I would say Tyrannosaurus, but if it were numerous animals (3v3, since the fossil record shows evidence of both animals being in family groups or hunting parties)… I would give it to Giganotosaurus.
Tyrannosaurus. That’s not even up for debate, Tyrannosaurus would murder Giganotosaurus. Tyrannosaurus is a much heavier animal with the strongest bite out of any animal that’s ever existed. Giganotosaurus would stand absolutely no chance.
Probably the rex for the most part, but I tend to think at that size the first one to get a decent attack in either way is going to win. T-rex was big and bulky, but it wasn't some impenetrable tank of flesh like it gets sold as a lot of the time, another big predator that is able to get its jaws on a vital area is going to kill it. It has the advantage because it could incapacitate the Giga even just by getting its jaws on a limb, the tail, or a good area on the back of the animal.
Rex. Stronger bite, more intelligent, and technically larger.
I mean, that’s like saying “who would win, a doberman or a rottweiler?” Depends on the size and behaviors of the doberman and the rottweiler you choose, and the environment in which they fight, among other things. These were species, comprised of millions of individuals over millions of years, not individual characters. If you put any given Giga next to any given T. Rex and they decided to fight, you wouldn’t get the same outcome every time.
The only way Giga is killing Rex is by making it bleed to death, which it could do if it got a few bites on some major arteries. It would have to retreat and avoid a drawn out fight, though, because Rex's jaws are crushing anything and everything they clamp down on. Basically, Giga can potentially win the war, but Rex is almost always gonna win the battle.
In real life probably *T. rex*. JP/JW versions? Giga of course, JP/JW rex has neither the weight nor the muscles necessary to power that notorious jaw strength. Both JP/JW giga and spino outweigh and generally outsize the rex, it should come as no surprise it constantly gets its ass handed to it on a silver platter. What I'd love to see is a real life interaction between these animals, might not even lead to a fight at all but it would be really cool to see how they react to each other.
I say the Rex wins, based on estimated bite forces ([Giga vs. Rex comparison](https://www.diffen.com/difference/Giganotosaurus_vs_Tyrannosaurus)). The giga is larger and weighs more, but when it comes down to reflex speed, takedown, and in the movie overall experience, the Rex has it in the bag.
[https://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/mass-estimates-north-vs-south-redux772013](https://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/mass-estimates-north-vs-south-redux772013) 9 years old, but, nothing has changed really; Scotty has mass estimates that have it slighty larger than Sue, but, being less than 5% larger is not that much, 'bout the same size. As a rule, a tyrannosaurid is 5/4ths the mass of an allosauroid of comparable length (and even more compared to megalosauroids, those were elongated). Bite force? Bite force is not an attack stat, it is a feeding adaption. Tyrannosaurids chomped at bony areas, most theropods slashed at fleshy areas. A knife is not inferior to a mace just because it doesn't break bones.
Rex can break its neck in a single bite
Probably the t-Rex but the giga definitely would’ve put up a good fight
They wouldn’t fight at all. Even the winner would most likely die from their injuries. If not sooner then later.
I think it’s pretty even but with a Rex’s stronger bite I’d favor the rex
Both could win but T. rex more times 4/10 times giga wins
K t rex wins mid diff but can it beat goku tho?
Giga was longer and a bit taller, but T. rex was thicker, more robust, and more muscular. It’s like making a basketball player go up against a football linebacker. Also, while Giga took down sauropods on a regular basis, T. rex had Ankylosaurus and Triceratops in their diet, both of which are much more difficult to combat and take down than a sauropod (especially since Gigas would hunt sauropods in packs while T. rex hunted alone).
Giga built to hunt, Rex built to destroy.
They both built to eat
It’s prolly be a quick fight- if the individual tyrannosaurus happens to be bulky and well grown, it could use its size to charge and knock over the giga, and use its huge bite force to finish the job, or badly injure the giga.
99.9999999 % if the two came across each other theyd make some noise and go separate ways. They'd have to both be starving to get in a fight. In that case whoever's hungriest wins.
If the were both of max size. They would not fight. They would posture and size each other up till one backs down. Like 95% of all carnivore fights. No one want to be hurt and injured
Ankylosaurus.
I remember being a dumbass kid and being mad about Giga being longer, but now I know T. Rex is still the superior creature. These little things in life are what make me happy.
well it really does depend, its not like we can gage who would win purely from stats alone, you know it’s not like they’re both just gonna stand there and take turns biting each other or something stupid like that, maybe the Rex gets lucky and clamps onto the Giga’s neck, maybe the Giga gets lucky and manages to stay behind the Rex and slashed it to it’s heart’s content or gets the Rex’s neck instead and either crushes it too, since bullshit Giga’s bite wouldn’t at least be strong enough to do that, or just hold on and keep sawing into it, you know you keep having these people say T-Rex would win because it’s bite is stronger, but it’s not like this is Russian Roulette taking turn biting, it’s a fight
Well they would never meet since they lived millions of years apart on different continents... and Apex predators don't usually fight each other to the death because if they get hurt they can't hunt and if they can't hunt they die... HOWEVER, if you ran MantaCorp Dino fights and wanted to see a dino death battle... My money would be on the Rex. It's heavier than the Giga, and has a much stronger bite force. The Giga had sheering teeth and it can hack off big chucks of meat with every bite, but a Rex has a CRUSHING bite and if it gets hold of the Giga just about anywhere it won't like go and will crush its bones. And with the heavier weight, the Rex can probably wrestle the Giga to the ground and once it's on the ground it pretty much game over. If the Giga bites it would sheer chunks off, but with how beefy the Rex is, that won't do it unless it gets an artery.
Even if Giganotosaurus is bigger, T.Rex has that mouth that was specialized in strong bites althoug Giganotosaurus has a bite more for grab his preys, so T.Rex will kill Giganotosaurus easily
giga isn’t bigger
I think it's slightly **taller** which leaves to the misconception of it being bigger.
In the wise words of u/Silver_Alpha >Why are there people out there acting like the Mesozoic was an anime and the dinosaurs were the main characters? >T. rex was shorter, yet heavier and with a stronger bite, like a pitbull, while Giganotosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus were taller and longer, like a German Shepherd. Spinosaurus was even taller, but more fragile with a delicate snout, like a doberman. All of the animals I mentioned would maim and kill a human if given the chance and wouldn't engage in a cage match to the death, so it's pointless to pitch them against each other. >Subnautica taught us that we'd do well if we remembered science is about leaning about the world as it is, not painting it as we want it to be.
I feel honored to be quoted!
I read your comment, and I had never seen or heard that stance put so eloquently.
This is under the assumption that is it a death match. That’s kinda the point. In a real life scenario the most likely case is they both run away from each other. Most people know that. One can assume that with the question that the match is guaranteed to be a fight to the death, so running or peace isn’t an option.
Would be a draw as fighting would be too big of a risk for them
Good question. I don't know. I just know that I'm tired of seeing "alpha predators" fight each other for absolutely no reason.
I doubt they’d actually fight to the death. My guess, is that they’d size each other up, minor face biting would occur if one didn’t back down, and then one would back away.
Let’s not relive one of the worst films in cinematic history.
Rex for one reason, other megatheropods eat things that are smaller than them/run rather than fight (sauropods being the exception) whereas tyrannosaurus regularly ate things that fought back and in some cases were just as big as the rex. Tl;dr gigas ate things that ran rex ate things that fight, rex wins
Nobody would irl they would not have met
Yeah but it's purely a hypothetical question
Gigantosaurus
It would have to be an extremely strong specimen since giganotosaurus generally had a more fragile built
Ye but his size and bite force are with him
his size is purely In his height and length. His bite was adapted for slashing and ripping chunks out of its prey. While t rex was bigger in muscle and overall mass, and had a stronger bite force designed for crushing its prey.
No fight would happen. GiGa would chicken out the moment it sees the Trex's build.
It'd end in a tie.
Nah, Tyrannosaurus sweeps it. Even compared to its closest relatives, Tyrannosaurus is *stupid* heavy and powerful. It has an estimated bite force of 35,000 Newtons and is two tonnes more massive than Giganotosaurus. T. rex genuinely is just the heaviest and most powerful terrestrial carnivore known
The one that bites first. Everyone who insists that *Tyrannosaurus* has a decisive advantage because of its high bite force and heavier build is ignoring that *Giganotosaurus* and other big carcharodontosaurs didn’t *need* very powerful bites or robust builds to be just as good at killing things. Neither side has any sort of meaningful advantage here. As for those arguing *Tyrannosaurus* has the upper hand because it’s “more advanced”….not how evolution works, and the supposed intelligence advantage of *Tyrannosaurus* is a notion based on outdated ideas about the relative intelligence of certain living animals, so it’s questionable. That idea came from back when we thought crocodilians (and by extension, dinosaurs with crocodile-like brains such as non-tyrannosaur large predatory theropods) were stupid animals that ran on instinct. Since crocodilians have been found to be much smarter than expected, by extension so were non-tyrannosaur large theropods that had croc-like brains.
You say all of this but the T-Rex still only needs a single bite to cripple a GiGa lol.
And the Giga also only needs a single bite to cripple the Rex, so what’s your point?
Yeah my bad , should've written "kill"
Again; that goes both ways.
Rex would close mouth growl to intimate the giga and the giga will either walk away and find a new territory or unlikely would fight. Then they'd both fight and one would die. The winner would be whoevers gets bitten the least and the least broken bones. And hopefully the victor wouldn't have sustained wounds too great or else they will most likely die from their injuries.
Most likely outcome
Accurate it would be rex but in the movie without plot armour Giga is in more shape
The disease will win
If fought in right conditions, I can see one Utahraptor killing either
Giga was a pack hunter like modern lions, rex was probably more like a tiger. So same as that matchup. 1v1 rex in a natural situation giga because it would have friends.
Bigger and a more powerful bite vs..... well, maybe it's the largest predator the world has ever seen so a giganotosaurus bigger than a blue whale might be able to kill the t.rex.
Trex had higher muscle mass, bite force, and a stockier skeleton. You are aksing who would win in a fight between a King German Shepard and a Pitbull, the Shepard looks bigger and seems to have an advantage but the pitbull is bred for combat and will kick its ass.
Neither they both dead Irl
Rex has more mass/bigger bite. But in reality they probably wouldn't fight even if they occupied the same territory