|
|
Post by arethousleepy on Jul 17, 2019 17:23:27 GMT 5
Size chart from DPF  arethousleepy This match is more of a classic than Allosaurus fragilis vs Albertosaurus you requested on Carnivora, and it's not viewed as a mismatch With this size comparison, I'd probably lean towards the Allosaurus just because of that visual size difference but I know weights and actual sizes are different things. If Daspletosaurus at least weighed 2.2 tonnes with Allosaurus weighing 2 tonnes, I'd favor the tyrannosaurid. At parity weights, maybe Allosaurus but at length parity and with the supposedly aforementioned weights for Daspletosaurus, the tyrannosaurid should win. Allosaurus also has those claws that it can use but Daspletosaurus is overall more bulkier and stockier and should be able to overpower Allosaurus if its big enough. 2.8 tonnes though? Daspletosaurus stomps unless Allosaurus has larger more reliable weight estimates. |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jul 17, 2019 17:25:40 GMT 5
Size chart from DPF arethousleepy This match is more of a classic than Allosaurus fragilis vs Albertosaurus you requested on Carnivora, and it's not viewed as a mismatch With this size comparison, I'd probably lean towards the Allosaurus just because of that visual size difference but I know weights and actual sizes are different things. If Daspletosaurus at least weighed 2.2 tonnes with Allosaurus weighing 2 tonnes, I'd favor the tyrannosaurid. At parity weights, maybe Allosaurus but at length parity and with the supposedly aforementioned weights for Daspletosaurus, the tyrannosaurid should win. Allosaurus also has those claws that it can use but Daspletosaurus is overall more bulkier and stockier and should be able to overpower Allosaurus if its big enough. 2.8 tonnes though? Daspletosaurus stomps unless Allosaurus has larger more reliable weight estimates. Well it's 2 tons vs 2.8 tons, so I think I'd favor Daspletosaurus 65/35. Outliers are the large 'Epanterias' specimen (12 meters?) and Pete 3 the 11 meter Daspletosaurus. Also, the skeletal used there probably was not the best. I posted a better one on the last page. |
|
|
|
Post by arethousleepy on Aug 17, 2019 20:49:46 GMT 5
With this size comparison, I'd probably lean towards the Allosaurus just because of that visual size difference but I know weights and actual sizes are different things. If Daspletosaurus at least weighed 2.2 tonnes with Allosaurus weighing 2 tonnes, I'd favor the tyrannosaurid. At parity weights, maybe Allosaurus but at length parity and with the supposedly aforementioned weights for Daspletosaurus, the tyrannosaurid should win. Allosaurus also has those claws that it can use but Daspletosaurus is overall more bulkier and stockier and should be able to overpower Allosaurus if its big enough. 2.8 tonnes though? Daspletosaurus stomps unless Allosaurus has larger more reliable weight estimates. Well it's 2 tons vs 2.8 tons, so I think I'd favor Daspletosaurus 65/35. Outliers are the large 'Epanterias' specimen (12 meters?) and Pete 3 the 11 meter Daspletosaurus. Also, the skeletal used there probably was not the best. I posted a better one on the last page. I don't think we should use Epanterias for weight estimates, unless we're that desperate. After all, wasn't it a separate species? And besides, this is Allosaurus. We should just stick with the 2 tonne estimate. In which case, Daspletosaurus stomps. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 17, 2019 21:36:50 GMT 5
Well it's 2 tons vs 2.8 tons, so I think I'd favor Daspletosaurus 65/35. Outliers are the large 'Epanterias' specimen (12 meters?) and Pete 3 the 11 meter Daspletosaurus. Also, the skeletal used there probably was not the best. I posted a better one on the last page. I don't think we should use Epanterias for weight estimates, unless we're that desperate. After all, wasn't it a separate species? And besides, this is Allosaurus. We should just stick with the 2 tonne estimate. In which case, Daspletosaurus stomps. There are no diagnostic characters that warrant separating E. amplexus from A. fragilis although we cannot really differentiate it from other Allosaurus species either. |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Aug 18, 2019 9:00:07 GMT 5
Well it's 2 tons vs 2.8 tons, so I think I'd favor Daspletosaurus 65/35. Outliers are the large 'Epanterias' specimen (12 meters?) and Pete 3 the 11 meter Daspletosaurus. Also, the skeletal used there probably was not the best. I posted a better one on the last page. 1: I don't think we should use Epanterias for weight estimates, unless we're that desperate. After all, wasn't it a separate species? 2: And besides, this is Allosaurus. We should just stick with the 2 tonne estimate. In which case, Daspletosaurus stomps. 1: It's in quotation marks for a reason. It's most likely Allosaurus, like theropod said. 2: Stomps? How? At parity, Allosaurus fragilis wins 55/45 for an equally deadly bite but more useful arms too. At average, Daspletosaurus 65/35 due to size advantage |
|
|
|
Post by poseidon on Jul 24, 2021 20:46:40 GMT 5
I'd favor albertosaurus over allosaurus because its larger, more robust and has a stronger bite force, and daspleto is basically a larger Alberto, so yeah, I think its clear who wins here
|
|
