|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Mar 26, 2014 0:17:44 GMT 5
How could it? I've never seen anything suggesting that "rauisuchian" forelimbs are combat oriented.
I made up my mind, Panthera tigris wins 55% of the time.
Btw, this reptile is no dinosaur.
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Mar 26, 2014 1:21:40 GMT 5
I don't think the forelimbs are a lot shorter and more gracile than the hindlimbs without a reason. We know why bipeds develop such features. This could be interesting to some people: The paratype skeleton, which is relatively complete, would have been c. 3.5–4 m in length, and the holotype would have been closer to 5–6 m.
Analysis of the postcranial skeleton of Postosuchus suggests that it may have been an obligate biped (based in part on limb proportions, which are similar to some theropod dinosaurs, the size of the manus (30% of the size of the pes) and the highly reduced nature of the digits and vertebral measurements)sp.lyellcollection.org/content/early/2013/02/13/SP379.7.abstractI have included the estimate for the holotype to show that it could have had a massive size advantage here. P.S. I don't believe that Postosuchus was an obligate biped, I was just pointing out that the paper claimed that it would have had the capabilities of being so. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Mar 26, 2014 1:25:01 GMT 5
I don't think the forelimbs are a lot shorter and more gracile than the hindlimbs without a reason. We know why bipeds develop such features. This could be interesting to some people: The paratype skeleton, which is relatively complete, would have been c. 3.5–4 m in length, and the holotype would have been closer to 5–6 m.
Analysis of the postcranial skeleton of Postosuchus suggests that it may have been an obligate biped (based in part on limb proportions, which are similar to some theropod dinosaurs, the size of the manus (30% of the size of the pes) and the highly reduced nature of the digits and vertebral measurements)sp.lyellcollection.org/content/early/2013/02/13/SP379.7.abstractI have included the estimate for the holotype to show that it could have had a massive size advantage here. P.S. I don't believe that Postosuchus was an obligate biped, I was just pointing out that the paper claimed that it would have had the capabilities of being so. But do they always aim for combat in the forelimbs when bipedalness becomes the case? |
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Mar 26, 2014 1:26:35 GMT 5
I can't think of another reason, it is not going to run faster like that (which anyway won't help a lot, since it was likely large and heavy), nor it could pick up things.
|
|
Carcharodon
Junior Member
Allosauroidea Enthusiast
Posts: 211
|
Post by Carcharodon on Mar 26, 2014 1:42:39 GMT 5
The postosuchus holotype reached 5-6 m?!?
At that size it would pretty much dominate this fight.
|
|
pckts
Junior Member
Posts: 158 
|
Post by pckts on Mar 26, 2014 2:05:31 GMT 5
A tiger will be to much for that animal. Both are the same size "allegedly" but the tiger will have far better weaponry as well as having a much more powerful frame. That dinosaur seems to have much of its mass in the tail, head and neck region while a tigers mass is strictly in the neck, chest, limbs and body. The most important thing is the tiger being a mammal and being able to maintain a consistent body temp and better stamina.
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Mar 26, 2014 2:11:48 GMT 5
1. What's with everyone always assuming a cat has superior weaponry? Multiple weapons does not always equal superior. A postosuchus bite would wreck a tigers limb and anywhere else. It doesn't need claws.
2. Postosuchus is not a dinosaur
3. More powerful frame?..... what?
|
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 27, 2014 3:58:57 GMT 5
1. What's with everyone always assuming a cat has superior weaponry? Multiple weapons does not always equal superior. A postosuchus bite would wreck a tigers limb and anywhere else. It doesn't need claws. Tigers are both very durable and very agile. For one, the postosuchus would have difficulties landing a good bite on the feline; and even if it did, I would not be surprised if the tiger kept going. One bite will not be enough. Likewise, while I don't necessarily assume that the tiger has better weaponry here, the tiger's biggest strength is that it is so versatile. Tigers can grapple like bears (and much better than any theropod), their claws can deliver a fair share of damage, and they have a devastating bite (not quite as formidable as the posto, but still quite deadly). The tiger is also significantly more agile than the postosuchus, it has better reflexes, and is very aggressive. Tigers are also very durable and have reasonable stamina. What makes felines so supreme at parity face-offs is because they are formidable in literally every single important aspect. Weaponry, power, fighting ability, endurance, you name it. Big cats are the total package, and that's why they are almost always favored at parity (whether you like it or not). |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 27, 2014 4:00:34 GMT 5
The postosuchus holotype reached 5-6 m?!? At that size it would pretty much dominate this fight.  The postosuchus you see in this picture is probably 5 meters in length. However, the problem is that half of its length is tail. Hence, even a 5 meter postosuchus is really not much bigger than a Bengal tiger. |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Mar 27, 2014 4:27:33 GMT 5
1. What's with everyone always assuming a cat has superior weaponry? Multiple weapons does not always equal superior. A postosuchus bite would wreck a tigers limb and anywhere else. It doesn't need claws. Tigers are both very durable and very agile. For one, the postosuchus would have difficulties landing a good bite on the feline; and even if it did, I would not be surprised if the tiger kept going. One bite will not be enough. Likewise, while I don't necessarily assume that the tiger has better weaponry here, the tiger's biggest strength is that it is so versatile. Tigers can grapple like bears (and much better than any theropod), their claws can deliver a fair share of damage, and they have a devastating bite (not quite as formidable as the posto, but still quite deadly). The tiger is also significantly more agile than the postosuchus, it has better reflexes, and is very aggressive. Tigers are also very durable and have reasonable stamina. What makes felines so supreme at parity face-offs is because they are formidable in literally every single important aspect. Weaponry, power, fighting ability, endurance, you name it. Big cats are the total package, and that's why they are almost always favored at parity (whether you like it or not). Lol ok 1. Postosuchus is extinct. How can you say the cats more aggressive? And i doubt a mammal is more durable than a reptile. Nor is a tiger as physically powerful as a posto. 2. Grapple better than any theropod? Dromaeosaurs beg to differ. 3. A lot of animals are a complete package. Some don't even need to be complete to wreck a tiger. 4. If I like it or not? Don't get me roped into your little bias for or against cats drama. I don't care if people favor a tiger as long as it isn't just a BS argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 27, 2014 5:06:56 GMT 5
I never stated that a tiger was more aggressive or more durable than a theropod, relatively speaking, I was merely stating that tigers are very durable and aggressive in their own right.
Generally speaking, Quadrupeds > Bipeds. Stability and balance matters.
However, even so, I don't want to turn this into a drom vs feline debate. This is feline vs postosuchus, and the feline is the superior grappler at parity. That's not even up for debate. Felines are up there with bears in grappling ability, and postosuchus simply aren't.
LOL, I'd love to see a single animal which could "wreck" a tiger at parity.
|
|
|
|
Post by mechafire on Mar 27, 2014 5:26:41 GMT 5
Generally speaking, Quadrupeds > Bipeds. Stability and balance matters. However, even so, I don't want to turn this into a drom vs feline debate. This is feline vs postosuchus, and the feline is the superior grappler at parity. That's not even up for debate. Felines are up there with bears in grappling ability, and postosuchus simply aren't. How are dromaeosaurs better at grappling? Their arms are shorter and less heavily muscled, and a lot thinner and they don't have the same kind of upper body strength. By the way, the bear's more stable rigid build and greater arm and shoulder strength imo gives it greater grappling power than cats. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Mar 27, 2014 5:36:20 GMT 5
Generally speaking, Quadrupeds > Bipeds. Stability and balance matters. However, even so, I don't want to turn this into a drom vs feline debate. This is feline vs postosuchus, and the feline is the superior grappler at parity. That's not even up for debate. Felines are up there with bears in grappling ability, and postosuchus simply aren't. How are dromaeosaurs better at grappling? Their arms are shorter and less heavily muscled, and a lot thinner and they don't have the same kind of upper body strength. By the way, the bear's more stable rigid build and greater arm and shoulder strength imo gives it greater grappling power than cats. Pound for pound, there is very little to no evidence which suggests that bears actually have larger biceps or shoulders than felines at parity. A grizzly bear has very similar bicep girth and chest girth to a tiger or lion of equal weight. The grizzly bear averages roughly 193 kg, has an average chest girth of 130.5 cm. An African lions, which averaged 187 kg, has a chest girth average of 125.9 cm. The difference was 4.6 cm, or 1.8 inches (and keep in mind, the bear is 6 kg heavier on average). An interior grizzly bear has an average bicep of 28 inches. Bengal tigers, which weigh roughly equal to mountain grizzlies, normally have biceps from 27.5-29.0 inches. Again, very little to split the two. My educated guess would be that a 500 lb tiger or lion is roughly equal in strength to a 500 lb grizzly, slightly less flexible, but with better reflexes. There's not much to choose between the two animals. But again, I digress. |
|
|
|
Post by malikc6 on Mar 27, 2014 5:49:35 GMT 5
They are surely inferior to that of the tiger, but what makes you think that Postosuchus can't use it's forelimbs in a battle? They probably can but I think it would be pretty ineffective. |
|
blaze
Paleo-artist 
Posts: 766
|
Post by blaze on Mar 27, 2014 6:01:25 GMT 5
The scale chart in voidmaster's post is accurate for the holotype of Postosuchus, the details of the head of that reconstruction are not accurate but the size of the head (roughly 55cm) and the size of the legs, arms and the proportions of the body correspond with the measurements and reconstruction in Weinbaum (2013).
btw Postosuchus is very likely a biped, the humerus+radius are not as long as the femur.
|
|
