|
Post by Hatzegopteryx on Feb 16, 2014 0:19:18 GMT
Carnotaurus sastrei
Ekrixinatosaurus novasi
Ekrixinatosaurus vs Carnotaurus
|
|
|
Post by themechabaryonyx789 on Feb 16, 2014 0:31:59 GMT
As far as I know these dinosaurs are similar sizes and have similar overall anatomical features. However Ekrixinatosaurus' skull is more impressive so I am inclined to favour it here:
|
|
|
Post by Allosaurus on Feb 16, 2014 0:57:49 GMT
ekrixinatosaurus wins, it has a bigger head and a deadlier bite.
|
|
|
Post by Hatzegopteryx on Feb 16, 2014 1:12:20 GMT
Ekrixinatosaurus novasi has a longer skull in axial length and it is more robust, although both have very similar dentary, angular and surangular structures. One fact is that both are short-armed, so they don't have any good weaponry other than their own biteforces. Scaling them isometrically to axial length parity, Carnotaurus sastrei is larger in mass, which means it is more robust. Having a more compact body gives it less rotational inertia, so it won't get easily outflanked, and that's a good advantage.
|
|
|
Post by thesporerex on Feb 16, 2014 19:58:48 GMT
I would say Ekrixinatosaurus has the advantage, because of its head but though its close.
|
|
|
Post by Hatzegopteryx on Feb 16, 2014 21:07:56 GMT
What advantage does its head give to it? Biteforce maybe, but as far as I know, we don't have evidence of ramming behaviour on E. novasi (although we do for its foe).
|
|
|
Post by themechabaryonyx789 on Feb 16, 2014 21:17:39 GMT
What advantage does its head give to it? Biteforce maybe, but as far as I know, we don't have evidence of ramming behaviour on E. novasi (although we do for its foe). I can't imagine ramming being more efficient than biting in theropod confrontations like this.
|
|
|
Post by thesporerex on Feb 17, 2014 19:26:40 GMT
What advantage does its head give to it? Biteforce maybe, but as far as I know, we don't have evidence of ramming behaviour on E. novasi (although we do for its foe). The skull is far longer and more robust probably giving it a edge in bite force and its teeth even though we have no complete ones and only roots look far more robust and larger. Its general build looks better as well.
|
|
|
Post by Hatzegopteryx on Feb 17, 2014 19:31:04 GMT
What advantage does its head give to it? Biteforce maybe, but as far as I know, we don't have evidence of ramming behaviour on E. novasi (although we do for its foe). I can't imagine ramming being more efficient than biting in theropod confrontations like this. Not ramming in itself, but the fact the skull is more durable since it is designed to suffer impact. thesporerex: Having a larger biting area means that you will need more force to apply a higher PSI force, while a smaller biting area will mean less effort for that same PSI force.
|
|
|
Post by thesporerex on Feb 18, 2014 10:43:19 GMT
I can't imagine ramming being more efficient than biting in theropod confrontations like this. Not ramming in itself, but the fact the skull is more durable since it is designed to suffer impact. thesporerex: Having a larger biting area means that you will need more force to apply a higher PSI force, while a smaller biting area will mean less effort for that same PSI force. Even so having a skull to short and stumpy doesn't help. Not only that Carnotaurus's skull is very narrow while Ekrixinatosaurus is far wider and the teeth are not thin and small. There is a reason why T. rex doesn't have a stumpy skull and small thin teeth.
|
|
|
Post by Hatzegopteryx on Feb 18, 2014 16:04:23 GMT
It applies more PSI force with more ease, that is almost a fact. Also, Tyrannosaurus rex has a far more muscular jaw and neck as well, to compensate the larger area.
|
|
|
Post by analea on Jun 15, 2023 5:12:47 GMT
|
|