• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Tyrannosaurus rex vs Spinosaurus

As i say the arm seems to be too short to properly protect its neck and its likely not strong enough to push back T rex charging at it at full speed.

Not my point, my point is even weaker animal can break very hard material with easy too.
 
Yeah, but Rexy still has strength, bite force, and maybe even size considering Spino has been downsized to 6-7 tons while Sue still remains at 8-9 tons. (I know how your fight against Cerato went >3)
 
Kazanshin said:
Yeah, but Rexy still has strength, bite force, and maybe even size considering Spino has been downsized to 6-7 tons while Sue still remains at 8-9 tons. (I know how your fight against Cerato went >3)
When was Spino downsized? I'm pretty sure it's still significantly heavier than T.Rex.
 
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
T. Rex's only advantage is bite force.
It's actually also taken down creatures in it's own weight class like Triceratops unlike Spinosaurus who was a fish eater. Tyrannosaurus Rex should take this due to the Spinosaurus just not being made for this type of combat although it's claws are a problem.
 
Pygmy Hippo 2 said:
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
T. Rex's only advantage is bite force.
It's actually also taken down creatures in it's own weight class like Triceratops unlike Spinosaurus who was a fish eater. Tyrannosaurus Rex should take this due to the Spinosaurus just not being made for this type of combat although it's claws are a problem.
the only way T-rex can take down a full-grown and healthy Triceratops is teamwork and ambush combine,otherwise it just some sick/old and weak individual
 
Pygmy Hippo 2 said:
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
T. Rex's only advantage is bite force.
It's actually also taken down creatures in it's own weight class like Triceratops unlike Spinosaurus who was a fish eater. Tyrannosaurus Rex should take this due to the Spinosaurus just not being made for this type of combat although it's claws are a problem.
T. Rex isn't beating a healthy and big Triceratops.
 
It's still better than eating fish for a living and bite force is a huge advantage to have when the Spino's best option is to claw the Rex to death.
 
Pygmy Hippo 2 said:
It's still better than eating fish for a living and bite force is a huge advantage to have when the Spino's best option is to claw the Rex to death.
I've argued that Spino vs Rex isn't a good fight since you cannot have one in their habitat or peak without putting the other at a disadvantage. Spino is weak on land, T.Rex likely couldn't do much in water.

Like comparing a bull shark to a Lion.
 
Pygmy Hippo 2 said:
A bull shark would just die on land though. A Saltwater Crocodile would be a better example.
Except a saltie may have the benefit of short bursts of speed even on land. Spinosaurus likely didn't have anything like that. But yeah probably better example.
 
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
Strength? No.
Size? The 6-7 tonne value is unpublished, therefore invalid.
No. As meaningful as Cerato's "o". (please don't ask me who Cerato is)

Invalid? No. For further instructions, please read the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, volume 14.
 
ThyBadger said:
Pygmy Hippo 2 said:
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
T. Rex's only advantage is bite force.
It's actually also taken down creatures in it's own weight class like Triceratops unlike Spinosaurus who was a fish eater. Tyrannosaurus Rex should take this due to the Spinosaurus just not being made for this type of combat although it's claws are a problem.
T. Rex isn't beating a healthy and big Triceratops.
Why wouldn't it? Modern predators nearly never struggle against prey their size and can sometimes take down prey far bigger than themselves, such as wolves taking down muskoxen and igers taking down elephants.
 
No. As meaningful as Cerato's "o". (please don't ask me who Cerato is)

Invalid? No. For further instructions, please read the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, volume 14.

Not published in peer-reviewed sources. Ibrahim et al never mentioned it.

And I know who's Cerato.
 
So you are now using some online, non-peer reviewed estimate, lol.

20 tonnes was not deemed inaccurate, I think you confused it with 18.5-tonne T. Rex.
 
T-rex is still smarter, and likely faster. Spino has short legs relative to it's body size. It also has a stronger bite and better vision. Some of the highest Spinosaurus weight estamites are higher than the lowest T-rex estimates and vice versa. We don't really know who's bigger. And even if Spino was bigger, it's only by 2 tons. And I highly doubt Spino was 20 tons but I don't know enough about dinosaurs. On land the Spino is killed.
 
Smarter? Lol no, there is no studiesvdone on Spino's intelligent.

Faster? No, again Spino's speed is unknown.

Better vision? No studies were done on Spino again.

T. Rex's only advantage is bite force.
 
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
Smarter? Lol no, there is no studiesvdone on Spino's intelligent.
Faster? No, again Spino's speed is unknown.

Better vision? No studies were done on Spino again.

T. Rex's only advantage is bite force.
Well Spino's eyes are facing sideways and iirc T-rex's eyes face forward so T-rex has better vision. As of intelligence, iirc t-rex hunted in packs and it's skull is bigger also it hunted Triceratops which had huge horns, horns so huge, they can impale something by walking at it. Spino walked on all fours and it's legs were short, T-rex had longer legs, sure the T-rex can break it's legs by running but I'm pretty sure this logic can apply to other dinosaurs. Even if speed was equal as well as intelligence and vision and T-rex's only advantage was bite force, Spino's only advantage is it's claws which wouldn't hurt a T-rex, and size is debatable.
 
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
IIRC All dinos' eyes face sideways.
Big skull =/= Smarter

Speed, no proof.

Claws? Debatable.
The T-rex has bigger eyes iirc and it's skull actually faces forward, idk how but it does. And it has binocular vision, Idk how. Speed doesn't really play a role, but T-rex is like 15 mph, Spino is like 11 mph, it has short limbs which are meant for swimming not chasing. Also the T-rex was probably smarter, it hunted triceratops and what not, Spino hunted fish which are pretty dumb. And iirc the T-rex came millions of years after the spino and it's brain is big. Spino's claws were for killing fish not a dinosaur it's size. Size is debatable as well. T-rex might be more agile since Spino is better and swimming than fighting on land. All the T-rex needs to do is bite the sail once. T-rex can break bones with it's bite, Spino's arms are made of bones, put 2 and 2 together.
 
iHyper Anon said:
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
IIRC All dinos' eyes face sideways.
Big skull =/= Smarter

Speed, no proof.

Claws? Debatable.
The T-rex has bigger eyes iirc and it's skull actually faces forward, idk how but it does. And it has binocular vision, Idk how. Speed doesn't really play a role, but T-rex is like 15 mph, Spino is like 11 mph, it has short limbs which are meant for swimming not chasing. Also the T-rex was probably smarter, it hunted triceratops and what not, Spino hunted fish which are pretty dumb. And iirc the T-rex came millions of years after the spino and it's brain is big. Spino's claws were for killing fish not a dinosaur it's size. Size is debatable as well. T-rex might be more agile since Spino is better and swimming than fighting on land. All the T-rex needs to do is bite the sail once. T-rex can break bones with it's bite, Spino's arms are made of bones, put 2 and 2 together.
well,Spino could probably killed Carchardontosaurus with their claws
 
Chu Minh Duy said:
iHyper Anon said:
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
IIRC All dinos' eyes face sideways.
Big skull =/= Smarter

Speed, no proof.

Claws? Debatable.
The T-rex has bigger eyes iirc and it's skull actually faces forward, idk how but it does. And it has binocular vision, Idk how. Speed doesn't really play a role, but T-rex is like 15 mph, Spino is like 11 mph, it has short limbs which are meant for swimming not chasing. Also the T-rex was probably smarter, it hunted triceratops and what not, Spino hunted fish which are pretty dumb. And iirc the T-rex came millions of years after the spino and it's brain is big. Spino's claws were for killing fish not a dinosaur it's size. Size is debatable as well. T-rex might be more agile since Spino is better and swimming than fighting on land. All the T-rex needs to do is bite the sail once. T-rex can break bones with it's bite, Spino's arms are made of bones, put 2 and 2 together.
well,Spino could probably killed Carchardontosaurus with their claws
According to you, they attack dinosaurs by making them bleed to death and not crushing them with their bite.
 
Chu Minh Duy said:
iHyper Anon said:
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
IIRC All dinos' eyes face sideways.
Big skull =/= Smarter

Speed, no proof.

Claws? Debatable.
The T-rex has bigger eyes iirc and it's skull actually faces forward, idk how but it does. And it has binocular vision, Idk how. Speed doesn't really play a role, but T-rex is like 15 mph, Spino is like 11 mph, it has short limbs which are meant for swimming not chasing. Also the T-rex was probably smarter, it hunted triceratops and what not, Spino hunted fish which are pretty dumb. And iirc the T-rex came millions of years after the spino and it's brain is big. Spino's claws were for killing fish not a dinosaur it's size. Size is debatable as well. T-rex might be more agile since Spino is better and swimming than fighting on land. All the T-rex needs to do is bite the sail once. T-rex can break bones with it's bite, Spino's arms are made of bones, put 2 and 2 together.
well,Spino could probably killed Carchardontosaurus with their claws
I prefer Spino to T.Rex and Carcharo by miles, but Spinosaurus likely had no way of using it's offense to any useful margin in the case of a Charcarodontosaurus - Spino was simply not built for fighting other large predators. Whether or not it was even capable for Spino to use claws for combat on land is not on good grounds ATM.
 
So, to address to all points:

Strength: Spino was a piscivore that didn't need any strengh to hunt. It's natural logic that an apex predator like Rex would be physically stronger.

Size: Multiple newer estimates have put the spinosaurus at weights ower than you 20 tons and theey're globally accepted virtually everywhere.

Speed: Again, semi aquatic piscivore vs land carnivore.

Intelligence: Semi-aquatic solitary piscivore vs apex pack hunter land carnivore.

Claws: Nope: https://pre00.deviantart.net/b254/t...skeletal__msnm_v_4047__by_franoys-dbokpwj.png


Explain to me how he would cause damage with those claws.

And finally, for the nail in the coffin, about T. Rex intelligence:


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x57t2qc

Sorry for the japanese, but Rex apparently had organized pack hunting behavior with each member having different roles according to their size and age.
 
Kazanshin said:
So, to address to all points:
Strength: Spino was a piscivore that didn't need any strengh to hunt. It's natural logic that an apex predator like Rex would be physically stronger.

Size: Multiple newer estimates have put the spinosaurus at weights ower than you 20 tons and theey're globally accepted virtually everywhere.

Speed: Again, semi aquatic piscivore vs land carnivore.

Intelligence: Semi-aquatic solitary piscivore vs apex pack hunter land carnivore.

Claws: Nope: https://pre00.deviantart.net/b254/t...skeletal__msnm_v_4047__by_franoys-dbokpwj.png


Explain to me how he would cause damage with those claws.

And finally, for the nail in the coffin, about T. Rex intelligence:


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x57t2qc

Sorry for the japanese, but Rex apparently had organized pack hunting behavior with each member having different roles according to their size and age.
I'm pretty sure "pack hunting T.Rex" isn't really a thing anymore? I thought the general consensus was that T.Rex was likely highly territorial and aggressive, kind of defeating the whole pack hunting thing. Not saying you're wrong. We cannot say with certainty it was true or false but i thought it was put aside because evidence swayed the opinions in another direction - and also, how do you know that "rex" shown in the video wasn't a Tarbosaurus or another asian tyrannosaur?
 
ThyBadger said:
Kazanshin said:
So, to address to all points:
Strength: Spino was a piscivore that didn't need any strengh to hunt. It's natural logic that an apex predator like Rex would be physically stronger.

Size: Multiple newer estimates have put the spinosaurus at weights ower than you 20 tons and theey're globally accepted virtually everywhere.

Speed: Again, semi aquatic piscivore vs land carnivore.

Intelligence: Semi-aquatic solitary piscivore vs apex pack hunter land carnivore.

Claws: Nope: https://pre00.deviantart.net/b254/t...skeletal__msnm_v_4047__by_franoys-dbokpwj.png


Explain to me how he would cause damage with those claws.

And finally, for the nail in the coffin, about T. Rex intelligence:


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x57t2qc

Sorry for the japanese, but Rex apparently had organized pack hunting behavior with each member having different roles according to their size and age.
I'm pretty sure "pack hunting T.Rex" isn't really a thing anymore? I thought the general consensus was that T.Rex was likely highly territorial and aggressive, kind of defeating the whole pack hunting thing. Not saying you're wrong. We cannot say with certainty it was true or false but i thought it was put aside because evidence swayed the opinions in another direction - and also, how do you know that "rex" shown in the video wasn't a Tarbosaurus or another asian tyrannosaur?
A lot of animals are aggressive to each other but still hunt in packs, like wolves
 
Size: Debatable

Sperd: You can't say anything until we get a value for Spino.

Intelligence: Doesn't prove anything.

Claws: I already said debatable.
 
Hyper Anon said:
ThyBadger said:
Kazanshin said:
So, to address to all points:
Strength: Spino was a piscivore that didn't need any strengh to hunt. It's natural logic that an apex predator like Rex would be physically stronger.

Size: Multiple newer estimates have put the spinosaurus at weights ower than you 20 tons and theey're globally accepted virtually everywhere.

Speed: Again, semi aquatic piscivore vs land carnivore.

Intelligence: Semi-aquatic solitary piscivore vs apex pack hunter land carnivore.

Claws: Nope: https://pre00.deviantart.net/b254/t...skeletal__msnm_v_4047__by_franoys-dbokpwj.png


Explain to me how he would cause damage with those claws.

And finally, for the nail in the coffin, about T. Rex intelligence:


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x57t2qc

Sorry for the japanese, but Rex apparently had organized pack hunting behavior with each member having different roles according to their size and age.
I'm pretty sure "pack hunting T.Rex" isn't really a thing anymore? I thought the general consensus was that T.Rex was likely highly territorial and aggressive, kind of defeating the whole pack hunting thing. Not saying you're wrong. We cannot say with certainty it was true or false but i thought it was put aside because evidence swayed the opinions in another direction - and also, how do you know that "rex" shown in the video wasn't a Tarbosaurus or another asian tyrannosaur?
A lot of animals are aggressive to each other but still hunt in packs, like wolves
Well yeah, but they are kind of designed and meant to do that. But tigers for instance are not. I also cannot think of many dinosaurs that lived in Rex's day and lived along side it that would justify pack hunting - and even if you say Triceratops - great, but how big would a Rex pack be? And how long could that sustain them based on their pack size and their kill size? TBH, i would see cannibalism being frequent in that scenario.
 
ThyBadger said:
Hyper Anon said:
ThyBadger said:
Kazanshin said:
So, to address to all points:
Strength: Spino was a piscivore that didn't need any strengh to hunt. It's natural logic that an apex predator like Rex would be physically stronger.

Size: Multiple newer estimates have put the spinosaurus at weights ower than you 20 tons and theey're globally accepted virtually everywhere.

Speed: Again, semi aquatic piscivore vs land carnivore.

Intelligence: Semi-aquatic solitary piscivore vs apex pack hunter land carnivore.

Claws: Nope: https://pre00.deviantart.net/b254/t...skeletal__msnm_v_4047__by_franoys-dbokpwj.png


Explain to me how he would cause damage with those claws.

And finally, for the nail in the coffin, about T. Rex intelligence:


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x57t2qc

Sorry for the japanese, but Rex apparently had organized pack hunting behavior with each member having different roles according to their size and age.
I'm pretty sure "pack hunting T.Rex" isn't really a thing anymore? I thought the general consensus was that T.Rex was likely highly territorial and aggressive, kind of defeating the whole pack hunting thing. Not saying you're wrong. We cannot say with certainty it was true or false but i thought it was put aside because evidence swayed the opinions in another direction - and also, how do you know that "rex" shown in the video wasn't a Tarbosaurus or another asian tyrannosaur?
A lot of animals are aggressive to each other but still hunt in packs, like wolves
Well yeah, but they are kind of designed and meant to do that. But tigers for instance are not. I also cannot think of many dinosaurs that lived in Rex's day and lived along side it that would justify pack hunting - and even if you say Triceratops - great, but how big would a Rex pack be? And how long could that sustain them based on their pack size and their kill size? TBH, i would see cannibalism being frequent in that scenario.
I'm not a paleotologist but maybe in pairs or families? Dinosaur flesh has a lot of calories so they could feed a huge pack of T-rexes. Maybe some T-rexes were cannibalistic depending on the individual. Some hunted in packs to make hunting easier, some were just pros.
 
Back
Top