#1 Posted by PerfectNazo (163 posts) - - Show Bio

Jurassic Park 3.

According to certain...Sources. The T-Rex that fought the Spino wasn't full grown.

So, who would win between a full grown T-Rex, and a full-grown Spinosaurus?

#2 Posted by XImpossibruX (5252 posts) - - Show Bio

T-Rex

#3 Posted by ChaosBlazer (3930 posts) - - Show Bio

T-Rex.

Jurassic Park 3 was very inaccurate.

Spinosaurus' mainly ate fish and had a thin, elongated jaw, with thin, hollow, sharp teeth, and a weak bite force.

T-Rex on the other hand has a much more robustly built jaw, larger, thicker teeth, and a bite force of 35,000 to 57,000 Newtons with its back teeth, or around 4 times as much as an alligator today.

One bite and the Spinosaurus will die.

#4 Edited by SpidermanWins (3963 posts) - - Show Bio

Great now I need to copy and paste from the thread I made on why this is almost spite

#5 Posted by PerfectNazo (163 posts) - - Show Bio

It appears I may have underestimated the T-Rex...

#6 Edited by SpidermanWins (3963 posts) - - Show Bio

Ah, Here we are:

First off, Spinosaurus's bones were lightweight and its sail was connected to its spine (weak point). Its teeth were sharp but hollow. It was meant to eat fish. The T-Rex in the movie should have finished him off once he got his jaws on him, with the strongest bite force psi of any terrestrial animal ever (BS). Also, T-Rex has been shown to sustain injuries to the BRAIN CASE while alive, so a hollow toothed, lightweight dinosaur with a weaker bite force would do nothing to him. T-Rex also had the best senses quite possible ever so a random encounter is almost impossible, he would be stalking them. His foot pads can sense vibrations from miles away for heaven's sake!

#7 Posted by XImpossibruX (5252 posts) - - Show Bio

@SpidermanWins said:

Ah, Here we are:

First off, Spinosaurus's bones were lightweight and its sail was connected to its spine (weak point). Its teeth were sharp but hollow. It was meant to eat fish. The T-Rex in the movie should have finished him off once he got his jaws on him, with the strongest bite force psi of any terrestrial animal ever (BS). Also, T-Rex has been shown to sustain injuries to the BRAIN CASE while alive, so a hollow toothed, lightweight dinosaur with a weaker bite force would do nothing to him. T-Rex also had the best senses quite possible ever so a random encounter is almost impossible, he would be stalking them. His foot pads can sense vibrations from miles away for heaven's sake!

well done well done!

You get a dollar, a coconut and Swiss cheese.

T-Rex wins.

#8 Posted by SpidermanWins (3963 posts) - - Show Bio

@XImpossibruX said:

@SpidermanWins said:

Ah, Here we are:

First off, Spinosaurus's bones were lightweight and its sail was connected to its spine (weak point). Its teeth were sharp but hollow. It was meant to eat fish. The T-Rex in the movie should have finished him off once he got his jaws on him, with the strongest bite force psi of any terrestrial animal ever (BS). Also, T-Rex has been shown to sustain injuries to the BRAIN CASE while alive, so a hollow toothed, lightweight dinosaur with a weaker bite force would do nothing to him. T-Rex also had the best senses quite possible ever so a random encounter is almost impossible, he would be stalking them. His foot pads can sense vibrations from miles away for heaven's sake!

well done well done!

You get a dollar, a coconut and Swiss cheese.

T-Rex wins.

=D

Agreed

#9 Posted by GhostRider2 (3577 posts) - - Show Bio

T-rex any day.

#10 Posted by Killemall (18607 posts) - - Show Bio

@XImpossibruX said:

well done well done!

You get a dollar, a coconut and Swiss cheese.

T-Rex wins.

a dollar, a coconut and a swiss cheese, looks like a very odd combination :p

#11 Posted by venomoushatred1001 (12273 posts) - - Show Bio

@XImpossibruX said:

T-Rex

#12 Posted by Deranged Midget (17965 posts) - - Show Bio

@ChaosBlazer said:

T-Rex.

Jurassic Park 3 was very inaccurate.

Spinosaurus' mainly ate fish and had a thin, elongated jaw, with thin, hollow, sharp teeth, and a weak bite force.

T-Rex on the other hand has a much more robustly built jaw, larger, thicker teeth, and a bite force of 35,000 to 57,000 Newtons with its back teeth, or around 4 times as much as an alligator today.

One bite and the Spinosaurus will die.

Exactly. Tyrannosaurus wasn't the biggest carnivore, but was indeed the most deadly and the smartest.

But in Jurassic Park 3's case, they thought bigger would be better and in turn, looked utterly ridiculous.

Moderator
#13 Edited by ShootingNova (19005 posts) - - Show Bio

The Spinosaurus was more powerful, but more fragile and had inferior biting force. The T-Rex devoured much larger and dangerous prey and had far, far more powerful bites. And it was certainly more robust. The Spinosaurus won't last very long against a being that outclasses it in all physical categories except for size etc.

#14 Posted by SpideyPresence (1906 posts) - - Show Bio

@ShootingNova said:

The Spinosaurus was more powerful, but more fragile and had inferior biting force. The T-Rex devoured much larger and dangerous prey and had far, far more powerful bites. And it was certainly more robust. The Spinosaurus won't last very long against a being that outclasses it in all physical categories except for size etc.

This

#15 Edited by Kingshark (172 posts) - - Show Bio

Spinosaurus wins. T-Rex is overrated.

1.) Spinosaurus was 3 times the size of Tyrannosaurus. 21 tons against 7 tons.

2.) Spinosaurus had long arms that aloud it to wrestle much better than a Tyrannosaurus.

3.) It's bite might not have been as strong, but still more than capable of killing a Tyrannosaurus.

#16 Posted by ShootingNova (19005 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kingshark said:

Spinosaurus wins. T-Rex is overrated.

1.) Spinosaurus was 3 times the size of Tyrannosaurus. 21 tons against 7 tons.

2.) Spinosaurus had long arms that aloud it to wrestle much better than a Tyrannosaurus.

3.) It's bite might not have been as strong, but still more than capable of killing a Tyrannosaurus.

Umm....... no.

#17 Posted by GhostRider2 (3577 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kingshark said:

Spinosaurus wins. T-Rex is overrated.

1.) Spinosaurus was 3 times the size of Tyrannosaurus. 21 tons against 7 tons.

2.) Spinosaurus had long arms that aloud it to wrestle much better than a Tyrannosaurus.

3.) It's bite might not have been as strong, but still more than capable of killing a Tyrannosaurus.

No.

#18 Edited by Kingshark (172 posts) - - Show Bio

Fine, I guess not.

I always saw T Rex vs Spinosaurus as an up-scaled version of Siberian Tiger vs Polar Bear.

#19 Posted by terry2012 (5913 posts) - - Show Bio

T-Rex wins. I should post the video from the other thread explaining the Spinosarurs on how fragile he was, and one major fact tells it all.

Online
#20 Posted by venomoushatred1001 (12273 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kingshark said:

Spinosaurus wins. T-Rex is overrated.

1.) Spinosaurus was 3 times the size of Tyrannosaurus. 21 tons against 7 tons.

2.) Spinosaurus had long arms that aloud it to wrestle much better than a Tyrannosaurus.

3.) It's bite might not have been as strong, but still more than capable of killing a Tyrannosaurus.

1. Wrong

2. Wrong.

3. And wrong.

#21 Edited by Thirteen13 (415 posts) - - Show Bio
@ChaosBlazer said:

T-Rex.

Jurassic Park 3 was very inaccurate.

Spinosaurus' mainly ate fish and had a thin, elongated jaw, with thin, hollow, sharp teeth, and a weak bite force.

T-Rex on the other hand has a much more robustly built jaw, larger, thicker teeth, and a bite force of 35,000 to 57,000 Newtons with its back teeth, or around 4 times as much as an alligator today.

One bite and the Spinosaurus will die.

This, IIRCC, pound for pound T-Rex's are meant to be stronger and sturdier built with a much more lethal bite force whereas Spinosaurus had a weaker bite because it mainly hunted fish-like creatures and the occasional small dinosaur.
#22 Edited by Kingshark (172 posts) - - Show Bio

Why is Tyrannosaurus rated so highly anyway? Experts suggest it may have not been scaly like a Crocodile, but have had feathers like a bird. This means the Spinosaurus, which was scaly, was likely far more durable.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/04/04/yutyrannus-a-giant-tyrannosaur-with-feathers/#more-6682

Finally, there is good evidence that large Tyrannosaurus had feathers! This is outside of the true Tyrannosaurs, being more closely related to creatures such as Guanlong, but sheer size alone makes it a good bet that T-Rex had feathers.
#23 Posted by BiteMe-Fanboy (8086 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kingshark said:

Why is Tyrannosaurus rated so highly anyway? Experts suggest it may have not been scaly like a Crocodile, but have had feathers like a bird. This means the Spinosaurus, which was scaly, was likely far more durable.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/04/04/yutyrannus-a-giant-tyrannosaur-with-feathers/#more-6682

Finally, there is good evidence that large Tyrannosaurus had feathers! This is outside of the true Tyrannosaurs, being more closely related to creatures such as Guanlong, but sheer size alone makes it a good bet that T-Rex had feathers.

I don't care what discoveries scientists have made, I will never accept that dinosaurs had feathers. NEVER... =/..

#24 Posted by jeanroygrant (20191 posts) - - Show Bio

@venomoushatred1001 said:

@XImpossibruX said:

T-Rex

#25 Posted by PowerHerc (85335 posts) - - Show Bio

T-Rex.

#26 Posted by Pokergeist (22351 posts) - - Show Bio

Wow I just watch that clip like 5 hours ago and this Thread was Bumped. LOL. T-Rex wins.

How odd

#27 Posted by Kingshark (172 posts) - - Show Bio

@venomoushatred1001 said:

@Kingshark said:

Spinosaurus wins. T-Rex is overrated.

1.) Spinosaurus was 3 times the size of Tyrannosaurus. 21 tons against 7 tons.

2.) Spinosaurus had long arms that aloud it to wrestle much better than a Tyrannosaurus.

3.) It's bite might not have been as strong, but still more than capable of killing a Tyrannosaurus.

1. Wrong

2. Wrong.

3. And wrong.

Fantastic reply. Full of content. I'm so proud of you!

#28 Posted by The Stegman (25989 posts) - - Show Bio

The Tyrant Lizard wins.

Online
#29 Posted by ChaosBlazer (3930 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kingshark said:

Spinosaurus wins. T-Rex is overrated.

1.) Spinosaurus was 3 times the size of Tyrannosaurus. 21 tons against 7 tons.

2.) Spinosaurus had long arms that aloud it to wrestle much better than a Tyrannosaurus.

3.) It's bite might not have been as strong, but still more than capable of killing a Tyrannosaurus.

1. Actually, there are no full skeletons of Spinosaurus that we have today to prove this. The only skeleton was destroyed in WWII, and all of our size estimates are based on a scientist's measurements and drawings, so t can be very inaccurate. Spinosaurus' may have been longer, taller, and possibly heavier than T Rex, but this is debateable. T-Rex was around 40 feet long, Spinosaurus may have reached 50 but this is all estimation again. I highly doubt there is substantial proof that Spinosaurus weighed 21 tons, that is crazy heavy.

2. Dinosaurs don't wrestle. The most damaging thing either can do is either headbutt the other or bite the other. T-Rex had a thick, robust neck and thick, heavy jaw that allowed it to chomp down and exert massive force, the most of any land animal today, crushing through bone and ripping tissue easily. Once T Rex gets a good handle on Spino with its jaw, Spinosaurus will die.

3. That's the whole point. It's bite was not nearly as powerful as a T Rex's. Some estimates make T-Rex's bite 10 times more powerful than a Spinosaurus, and even more than that. Spinosaurus won't be able to hurt T Rex very easily because of its weak bite, while T Rex's extremely powerful bite means that all T Rex has to do is bite down once and the Spino will probably die. One bite to the neck will crush the windpipe and lacerate the jugular and any other large veins, a large bite to the midsection or back will leave a gaping hole and cause the Spino to die of blood loss, even a bite to the tail will kill, as Spino will lose its balance on fall down, where Rex can eat it.

T Rex wins this, it was designed for killing large, heavily armored, defensive, and dangerous prey (Triceratops, Ankylodon, etc)

Spinosaurus was designed to eat fish.

#30 Posted by ChaosBlazer (3930 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kingshark said:

Why is Tyrannosaurus rated so highly anyway? Experts suggest it may have not been scaly like a Crocodile, but have had feathers like a bird. This means the Spinosaurus, which was scaly, was likely far more durable.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/04/04/yutyrannus-a-giant-tyrannosaur-with-feathers/#more-6682

Finally, there is good evidence that large Tyrannosaurus had feathers! This is outside of the true Tyrannosaurs, being more closely related to creatures such as Guanlong, but sheer size alone makes it a good bet that T-Rex had feathers.

what does that prove?

It may have had feathers, but T Rex skin has been discovered and it has been scaly. So it wasn't any less durable, just had a coat of feathers on top.

Besides, T Rex's teeth and bite force will go through Spinosaurus scaly skin much more easily than Spino's weak, hollow teeth will go through feathered scales.

#31 Posted by weaponx (1566 posts) - - Show Bio

@ChaosBlazer said:

@Kingshark said:

what does that prove?

It may have had feathers, but T Rex skin has been discovered and it has been scaly. So it wasn't any less durable, just had a coat of feathers on top.

Besides, T Rex's teeth and bite force will go through Spinosaurus scaly skin much more easily than Spino's weak, hollow teeth will go through feathered scales.

#32 Edited by Kingshark (172 posts) - - Show Bio

There's no such thing as feathers growing on top of scales. That's scientifically impossible.

Scales certainly make an animal more durable; which is harder to kill, an alligator or a parakeet? I know it's an over exaggeration, but you get the point.

But I have to say the rumor of Tyrannosaurus having feathers is just a rumor created by some scientists, not all agree.

However, some people have made some very good points on this thread. I admit that the T-Rex was clearly the more robust and powerful build of the two. It's jaws seem much more powerful, while the Spinosaurus seems to have slender jaws designed to catch fish. Nonetheless, even the fish in the Jurassic era were no pushovers, the aquatic animals Spinosaurus likely preyed on were likely well armed fish, and sharks.

OK. I'm starting to change my mind to T-Rex now...

#33 Posted by Supermansito (197 posts) - - Show Bio

@XImpossibruX said:

T-Rex

#34 Posted by venomoushatred1001 (12273 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kingshark said:

Fantastic reply. Full of content. I'm so proud of you!

Well, I try :)

#35 Posted by terry2012 (5913 posts) - - Show Bio

Here is this other post I was talking about:

The only two that can probably take a T-Rex is Arcrocanthosaurus and Giganotosaurus. Spinosaurus had one major flaw and it was it back. The way a T-Rex battle is no way a Spionsaurus to engage a battle with a T-Rex. As it is explain in this video below should put to rest that a Spinosaurus can take a T-Rex

Just Fast Forward to the 39:00 minute mark and it tell you all you need to know. Spinosaurus does not have a chance against a T-Rex.

Here is this other post I was talking about:

Online
#36 Posted by MasterKungFu (2299 posts) - - Show Bio

Monsters Resurrected is quite inaccurate in many ways, so many things wrong same with JP3. They hyped spinosaurus too much while weakening the other predators e.g sarcosuchus, carcharodonotosaurus etc.

The same Thomas R. Holtz Jr kept ranting on about how awesome spinosaurus was, assuming that spinosaurus was capable of doing things it wasn't proven to be able to do, making spino invincible.

The aim of this documentary I believe to gain more spino fans using false facts. I'm no dino expert but it does take a genius to know fact from fiction.

Spinosaurus I believe is overestimated to be too big. 60 feet? Every other carnosaur has been reduced to around 40 feet.

Even if spino was really this large, at sauropod size it was too big to be able to run fast therefore catching a Rugops shouldn't have happened let alone wanting to chase it in the first place.

Spino claws are so hyped. No way does it kill a sarcosuchus or a carcharodonotosaurus in one swipe. No other predator was shown to put up a fight, spino won too easily.

IMO T-rex would beat spino handily. If both were out to kill the other spino claws, teeth & size won't guarantee its win. T-rex jaws was more than enough to handle spino.

Online
#37 Posted by Simon_the_digger (3378 posts) - - Show Bio

Spinosaurus aegyptiacus IMO.

#38 Posted by BEYONDERGOD (1641 posts) - - Show Bio

Trex

Plus spinosaurs was in the time of gigantosaurs rex a bigger version it toook on spinosaurs like toys

#39 Posted by Apocalypse3 (1871 posts) - - Show Bio

Spino

#40 Edited by Apocalypse3 (1871 posts) - - Show Bio

Spino

#41 Posted by BEYONDERGOD (1641 posts) - - Show Bio

@Kingshark said:

Why is Tyrannosaurus rated so highly anyway? Experts suggest it may have not been scaly like a Crocodile, but have had feathers like a bird. This means the Spinosaurus, which was scaly, was likely far more durable.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/04/04/yutyrannus-a-giant-tyrannosaur-with-feathers/#more-6682

Finally, there is good evidence that large Tyrannosaurus had feathers! This is outside of the true Tyrannosaurs, being more closely related to creatures such as Guanlong, but sheer size alone makes it a good bet that T-Rex had feathers.

I don't care what discoveries scientists have made, I will never accept that dinosaurs had feathers. NEVER... =/..

Agreed!

#42 Posted by UnderdogSupporter (51 posts) - - Show Bio

Spinosaurus

#43 Posted by NimaMindTricks (1623 posts) - - Show Bio

The Spinosaurus in JP 3 had prep time. Wasn't an accurate fight.

#44 Posted by GraniteSoldier (8889 posts) - - Show Bio

T-Rex. Discovery or Nat Geo or some such channel did a thing about this around the time the movie came out.

#45 Posted by theendgame (445 posts) - - Show Bio

Spinosaurus stomps a push up contest, boxing match, jump rope, pull up competition, the backstroke, and rock/paper/scissors.

Not even close.