Godzillasaurus
Invertebrate
Reptile (both extant and extinct) and kaiju enthusiast
Posts: 314
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Oct 30, 2013 20:17:21 GMT -5
@jankins, ankylosaurus was a very heavily armored herbivore, yes, but that does not make it immune to predation. Tyrannosaurus was one of the most powerful theropods to have ever lived, with a bite rounding 12,000 pounds of force. Will the herbivore's osteoderms provide decent defense? Yes. But can the tyrannosaurus still win if it doesn't get its legs destroyed by the ankylosaurus? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by rhino on Oct 31, 2013 14:45:44 GMT -5
I don't see how a t.rex would avoid the ankylosaurus tail though.
|
|
Godzillasaurus
Invertebrate
Reptile (both extant and extinct) and kaiju enthusiast
Posts: 314
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Oct 31, 2013 17:37:47 GMT -5
I don't see how a t.rex would avoid the ankylosaurus tail though. One hit from the ankylosaur's tail won't necessarily be fatal to the tyrannosaurus, but a well-placed bite to the herbivore's head could potentially be deadly enough. Although I must add, ankylosaurus was one of the most well-adapted animals for living with large tyrannosaurids, as evidenced by their heavy osteoderms and armored heads (which, as already stated, can still be greatly damaged from a decent bite).
|
|
|
Post by Dinopithecus on Oct 31, 2013 18:18:01 GMT -5
Ankylosaurus actually likely only reached 7m and possibly 2t in weight. However, there was a size comparison between the two (which at least probably on my device, can't be seen anymore), and Ankylosaurus was still in the perfect position to strike at T.rex's legs.
If there is a situation where an animal is in the PERFECT position to deal a single, fatal blow to a vital area of another animal, then the former animal would actually win, depending on how large the weight discrepancy is. Tyrannosaurus is 3x bigger, but again, it was in the prime position to strike at the legs with the tail club and in relative terms (compared to something like Spinosaurus vs. Ankylosaurus), it's not that big of a weight discrepancy (though huge in absolute terms). Therefore, Ankylosaurus would win at least probably 51% of the time.
|
|
Godzillasaurus
Invertebrate
Reptile (both extant and extinct) and kaiju enthusiast
Posts: 314
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Oct 31, 2013 18:35:17 GMT -5
Ankylosaurus was likely somewhere in between 2t and 5t; it was a very heavy animal.
|
|
|
Post by Dinopithecus on Oct 31, 2013 18:39:55 GMT -5
If it was 5t, it had to have been roughly 9m in length, which I think according to the person who made the size comparison I mentioned, is a stretch.
|
|
Godzillasaurus
Invertebrate
Reptile (both extant and extinct) and kaiju enthusiast
Posts: 314
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Nov 1, 2013 15:42:48 GMT -5
If it was 5t, it had to have been roughly 9m in length, which I think according to the person who made the size comparison I mentioned, is a stretch. It doesn't have to be 5 tons. It can be smaller than that. I feel people might be underestimating its weight a bit, given its thick armor. Using absolutes isn't necessarily the most accurate way of expressing things.
|
|
|
Post by Carcharadontosaurus on Nov 3, 2013 18:40:49 GMT -5
Tyrannosaurus wins, it is much larger as it could stomp on the ankylosaurus's head, and its bone crushing bite force is imo probably sufficient enough to crunch through the armor.
|
|
|
Post by Abiel on Jun 23, 2017 10:15:02 GMT -5
Since a Anklyosaurus is heavier and has armor on its belly an Anklyosaurus would win easily
|
|