Spinosaurus vs Sarcosuchus

[Kiryu2012]

Spinosaurus vs Sarcosuchus

Both are adults at maximum size.

 

[Kiryu2012]

Bump.

 

[Dusty_Raider]

what is the ap diference?

 

[Kiryu2012]

Bump.

 

[Dusty_Raider]

I vote Spino since it's height would help keep it's sail and neck away from the sarco. It's longer arms and claws could help it take hold of or at least keep away the sarco as well. I'm fairly certian the spino could gut the sarco if it got a hit on it's underbelly.

 

[Kiryu2012]

Bump.

 

[Kiryu2012]

Bump.

 

[Armorchompy]

Spino fra

 

[GoldFiend]

Lol what is this? Sarcosuchus with literally no difficulty. You do understand that one can one shot the other while the other can at best scratch it, right? The 40 foot long armored reptile would barely flinch at its pathetic bite force or almost unusable claws. Yeah, even Spiny's renown claws (which have gone through massive nerfs over the years) are not gonna be of any use. Those things are definitely not fit for a battle like this. They're like an inch off the ground and using it this aggressively would put a toll on its balance. But sure, if Sarco was nice enough, it could let Spiny land a hit in or two before snapping its neck/any other body part with a single attack. That way it could have both a fun meal and little flesh wounds that might become cool looking scars.

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

Spino is said to have been able to kill gator and heavily armored fish with its claws, so I don't see why that wouldn't be the case here.

 

[GoldFiend]

LOL WHAT?! You're comparing a 40 foot long crocodile to fish and aligators that don't go beyond even 20? Not only was Sarco larger than Spino via weight, its bite force at least rivaled the mighty Rex's. Also, why do you people think the fight would just be Sarco standing under Spiny? Yeah, sure, Gentleman Sarco would allow that because it feels bad Spiny's claws can't reach it. Even if you put magic into those claws and give them planet level AP, it would still be a hilariously one-sided battle since its range was far too small. The only thing Spiny could attack with would be its jaws connected to its nice long meaty neck. God, I feel so bad. How could you people be so cruel? Spiny doesn't deserve such a horrible fate. At least give it an opponent where it could go down with a fight. This is just a hunter and its prey.

Edit: actually, I doubt Spiny can even stand over Sarco. That's just how little its body is over the ground.

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

Uh...spino is more of a four legged animal now, so sarc will not be out of range. Besides this fight takes place on land, meaning both start a distance from each other and have BHL speed. "You're comparing a 40 foot long crocodile to fish and alligators that don't go beyond 20" yes cause they have similar armor and skin. Not size, I am talking about that spino has the penetration ability required to heavily harm sarc. Also spino at full length is estimated to be 51 feet. Full grown spino can weigh 46,000 lbs compared to the sarc which is 18,000 lbs. Spino is bigger and stronger, with a better on land attack and has dealt with similar creatures before, though smaller. Sarc has never had to deal with something like spino.

 

[GoldFiend]

Comparing sarcosuchus to those fish because they have similar armor and skin and that size is irrelevant is like implying a 1 inch thick steel wall is as easy to penetrate as a 10 inch thick steel wall. Size matters a ton in that regard. Spiny had stumpy legs, making it very short. The most accurate depiction is a crossbreed between Jurassic Park 3 and the 2014 reconstruction (though it leans a bit towards the latter). Hell, vsbattles itself agrees. Also, it's 2019 and people still think spinosaurus weighed over 20 tons? God, that's sad. What's next? Tyrannosaurus Rex weighed 6 tons? Megalodon was 100 feet long? The largest specimen of spinosaurus was 15.2 meters long and going by this https://www.deviantart.com/franoys/journal/A-mathematical-analysis-on-Spinosaurus-mass-635495737, was about 7 tons. Not 23 tons, which was only associated with 59 foot claims (that are of course false and baseless). I mean, 51 feet and 23 tons would make it like the most obese dinosaur in existence.

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

I am just going by what came up first when I looked it up. I was assuming it was correct but ok.

"Spiny had stumpy legs, making it very short. The most accurate depiction is a crossbreed between Jurassic Park 3 and the 2014 reconstruction (though it leans a bit towards the latter). Hell, vsbattles itself agrees." Yeah I basically already said, and agreed with this.

"Comparing sarcosuchus to those fish because they have similar armor and skin and that size is irrelevant is like implying a 1 inch thick steel wall is as easy to penetrate as a 10 inch thick steel wall." I said it was irrelevant in terms of the armor. Sarc isn't wearing something like metal planking, and as I have said, spino's claws were designed to rip through thick armor.

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

"Spinosaurus (meaning "spine lizard") is a genus of theropod dinosaur that lived in what now is North Africa, during the upper Albian to upper Turonian stages of the Cretaceous period, about 112 to 93.5 million years ago. This genus was known first from Egyptian remains discovered in 1912 and described by German paleontologist Ernst Stromer in 1915. The original remains were destroyed in World War II, but additional material has come to light in the early 21st century. It is unclear whether one or two species are represented in the fossils reported in the scientific literature. The best known species is S. aegyptiacus from Egypt, although a potential second species, S. maroccanus, has been recovered from Morocco. Spinosaurus was among the largest of all known carnivorous dinosaurs, nearly as large as or even larger than Tyrannosaurus, Giganotosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus. Estimates published in 2005, 2007, and 2008 suggested that it was between 12.6―18 metres (41―59 ft) in length and 7 to 20.9 tonnes (7.7 to 23.0 short tons) in weight. New estimates published in 2014 and 2018 based on a more complete specimen, supported the earlier research, finding that Spinosaurus could reach lengths of 15―15.6 m (49―51 ft). The latest estimates suggest a weight of 6.4―7.2 tonnes (7.1―7.9 short tons). The skull of Spinosaurus was long and narrow, similar to that of a modern crocodilian. Spinosaurus is known to have eaten fish, and most scientists believe that it hunted both terrestrial and aquatic prey; evidence suggests that it lived both on land and in water as a modern crocodilian does. The distinctive spines of Spinosaurus, which were long extensions of the vertebrae, grew to at least 1.65 meters (5.4 ft) long and were likely to have had skin connecting them, forming a sail-like structure, although some authors have suggested that the spines were covered in fat and formed a hump. Multiple functions have been put forward for this structure, including thermoregulation and display." You are right about the weight, not length though.

 

[GoldFiend]

I'm sorry, did my steel wall example not make it clear that I'm not talking about material but rather size? Either that or you believe I think 10 inches of steel is a different material from 1 inch of steel. More of the same thing = harder to get rid of. That's simply common sense. Sarcosuchus had MUCH thicker armor than any of the creatures spinosaurus hunted via sheer size. Anyway, you should get the point by now. Sarcosuchus was larger, had massively greater AP while spinosaurus simply had too many weaknesses such as its posture and long neck. And like I said before, I still think it would be a horrible match even if spino's claws were planet level.

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

What I am saying is it isn't to much thicker though. Just because you are bigger doesn't automatically equal thicker armor. Sheer size =/= armor. Sarc is heavier, not larger. What is sarc's ap compared to spino's then? You say it is higher, what are the numbers? Also, though your last comment is just a joke, I don't understand why you are saying spino's claws are useless in this fight. Also spino is better adapted for land combat than sarc, giving spino a major advantage due to the fight taking place in central park due to SBA.

 

[Armorchompy]

I forgot to consider armor, Sarco probably wins this then.

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

The fight take place on land, spino's claws are meant to pierce armor, and he is larger.

 

[GoldFiend]

Are you serious? Size is determined by weight. There are at least 5 animals longer than the blue whale and yet it's still considered the largest animal. God, the stuff you say is so Elementary. No, the more logical conclusion is that a larger animal has thicker armor. Whats the point of armor if its too thin for your size? Don't make illogical assumptions just because "it's possible". The bite force of spiny is 2 tons while sarco's is 9. Its claws would be useless in this situation due their tiny reach and posture. Also, I'm done looking past that. Why do you even think spinosaurus was better at land combat? Another thing, why do keep acting as if spiny used its claws for everything instead of its jaws?

 

[GoldFiend]

I forgot to consider armor, Sarco probably wins this then.

Just. Let. Spino. Wank. Die. Already. How many nerfs can this thing get before people realize it's a trash-tier theropod? Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if people said "but muh claws" if science proves that it literally had no arms. Considering how one of you legit looked at the thing and said to yourself "yeah, those things are usable in combat", you guys aren't far off from that.

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

Just. Let. Spino. Wank. Die. Already. How many nerfs can this thing get before people realize it's a trash-tier theropod? Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if people said "but muh claws" if science proves that it literally had no arms. Considering how one of you legit looked at the thing and said to yourself "yeah, those things are usable in combat", you guys aren't far off from that.

The dude just agreed with you

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

Are you serious? Size is determined by weight. There are at least 5 animals longer than the blue whale and yet it's still considered the largest animal. God, the stuff you say is so Elementary. No, the more logical conclusion is that a larger animal has thicker armor. Whats the point of armor if its too thin for your size? Don't make illogical assumptions just because "it's possible". The bite force of spiny is 2 tons while sarco's is 9. Its claws would be useless in this situation due their tiny reach and posture. Also, I'm done looking past that. Why do you even think spinosaurus was better at land combat? Another thing, why do keep acting as if spiny used its claws for everything instead of its jaws?

The animal is one ton more than spino. We have established that. I am just saying sarc's bight attacks aren't meant for land combat, they are meant for ambush. One bite after bursting out of the water to drag an unsuspecting dino into the water. On land it's legs are stubbier than spino's and range is limited. "No, the more logical conclusion is that a larger animal has thicker armor. What's the point of armor if its too thin for your size? Don't make illogical assumptions just because "it's possible"." Says a man making assumptions. The animals don't follow that. Just cause skin is comparable to other crocs doesn't in anyway make it thin or two thin. It was thick enough for the enemies sarco would come across. Not one specifically designed to kill armored pray. Also as a theropod, spino can stand rear up on its back legs allowing claws to be accessible, which are even able to be used on the ground. And the reason I am suggesting it will use its claws (not for everything) is due to it's bite. It isn't made to attack something like sarco, claws are kinda its best bet. And why it was better on land than sarco is because it likely spent more time there. That is pretty obvious.

 

[GoldFiend]

The fact that that guy overestimates spinosaurus to the point that he glosses over sarco's massive bite force and implies spino would win if he didn't consider the armor is the problem. Also, your assumption is merely illogical. If you think about it, you can make an assumption about anything no matter how silly. The person doing that would look illogical and the person trying to counter them (me) would not. If you want to talk about speed on land, Sarco was likely the winner. Modern crocodiles are around as fast as regular bipedal theropods that are obviously faster than Spiny. Sarcosuchus should be comparable to its descendants. I'll be safe though and just say they were equal in speed. As for range, the deadly portion of spinosaurus comes after its more vital body part. Sarco's power lies at the front. If it were to use its claws in the fashion you mentioned, it would be in an awkward position that hinders its mobility and reveals its stomach area. Though it's likely that sarco would get a nasty wound in that context, one bite is enough to say game. As for land experience, there is no evidence it would of spent more time on there.

 

[Armorchompy]

I voted Crocodile tho