SameerPrehistorica's avatar

Giganotosaurus Size

141 Favourites
57 Comments
12K Views
Giganotosaurus was one of the largest meat-eating dinosaurs.It is either equal or slightly bigger than T.Rex and slightly smaller than Spinosaurus. Giganotosaurus measured about 43 feet long and weighed 7 - 8 tonnes.
IMAGE DETAILS
Image size
921x438px 186.76 KB
Published:
© 2013 - 2020 SameerPrehistorica
Comments49
anonymous's avatar
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Sudamerica's avatar

If spinosaurus was a biped, then giganotosaurus would be the second largest.

Toostig's avatar
What estimate actually put it above T.rex? I'm curious.

As Hartman put Giganotosaurus at ~8,2 tonnes(for Mucpv-95), and estimated T.rex to be ~8,4 tonnes(for Seu).
But thats still smaller then T.rex... And thats for the biggest specimen for both species. When we take thier smaller ones (which would set a better example of average), lets say Stan against MUCPv-Ch1, T.rex still rises above Giganotosaurus at about 0,8 tonnes...!?
And to be totally accurate, the "to believed largest giganotosaurus specimen"(Mucpv-95) is actually kinda invalid... We don't how big this specimen was and probably never will. For all we know it was just as big as MUCPv-Ch1. Franoys estimated it to be ~7,3 tonnes but thats pure "speculation", just like Hartman's estimation.
The only reliable specimen we have of Giganotosaurus is Mucpv-Ch1. Which was ~6,8 tonnes revealed by Franoys GDI, and ~6,9 tonnes according to Snively's and Hartman's calculations(revealed in thier quite recent study about the agility of tyrannosaurids)

And again not to forget about a quite recent paper including Snively and Hartman which put T.rex(Seu) at a whopping ~9.130 kg(~9,1 tonnes)
And Franoys GDI which revealed a mass of ~8.828 kg(~8,8 tonnes) for Seu.
this makes T.rex quite a bit more massive then Giganotosaurus. And with quite i mean a couple of tonnes...

Conclusion: We have no fossil evidence to proof Giganotosaurus was bigger then T.rex. The oppesite actually...
Same goes for Carcharadontosaurus and very likely spinosaurus aswell.
I heavily suggest checking out Franoys also on DA.

Sorry for my mild passive aggresive tone in this comment.
mark0731's avatar
"What estimate actually put it above T.rex?"

Old (90' and 2000's) estimates.
Toostig's avatar
Yes, and I believe this was submitted in the 2020's :)
MrKrookodile's avatar
spiderqueen62's avatar
if I could choose an animal to ride like a horse into battle, it would be this one.
grisador's avatar
Possiblity the most efficent hunter ever; it hunted generally in packs & it dare to attack damn sauropods !
Shaochilong66's avatar
There is no evidence for it regularly hunting in packs.
grisador's avatar
Actually there is; There's definitely no evidence against it thought.

Most close evidence is; the mapusaurus which is a very close relative of giganatosaurus; hunted in groups.
Shaochilong66's avatar
Theres argument against the individuals found being a pack.
grisador's avatar
What ? Pack behaviore has evidence now ? :o
SameerPrehistorica's avatar
Several large carnivores do that, only to youngsters and sub adults.
grisador's avatar
So a family group is more likely than social cooperative hunting individuals; interesting :nod:
Calibersoul2012's avatar
1) Giganotosaurus was actually 40ft to possibly 43ft at most.

There are only two supposed specimens.

The first giganotosaurus is a primary specimen supposedly 70% complete, classified as MUCPv-Ch1. It was hypothesized to be larger, but it is now officially known to be about 40ft in length.

The supposed secondary specimen for giganotosaurus is MUCPv-95. But it is entirely based on a crudely preserved piece of mandible theoretically to a giganotosaurus that might have been 40-43ft (at most a foot longer than T. rex specimen Sue). However, it is highly fragmented and cannot nor should be relied on for serious numbers; always take with a heavy dosage of salt.


In short:
There is no evidence of any giganotosaurus specimens beyond 40 to possibly 43ft in the entire field of paleontology.

______________

2) You drew the legs proportionately too long. Giganotosaurus actually had a much shorter leg ratio in reality.
img15.deviantart.net/38be/i/20… 
img10.deviantart.net/1070/i/20… 
img.over-blog-kiwi.com/0/93/55… 
torontoist.com/wp-content/uplo… 
img03.deviantart.net/42d2/i/20… 
photosfromtheloonybin.files.wo… 
Here is even giganotosaurus with a multitude of hefty averaged sized men directly under it due to constructing it
3.bp.blogspot.com/_svQEafg96Ug… 
Notice how the giganotosaurus is actually raised higher off the ground due to the metal frame... It is artificially made to look slightly taller than what it really was.


Giganotosarus was a relatively short animal, due to its short leg ratio. we know this because its femur and tibia were found. Though the femur was slightly longer than that of tyrannosaurus, it was also much thinner; meaning a much lighter animal as well. The tibia on the other hand much shorter than that of T. rex specimen Sue.
Metatarsals are always left out. However, carnosaurs are very well known to have short frumpy metatarsals
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia… 
www.sciencekids.co.nz/images/p… 
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia… 
Your giganotosaurus metatarsals resemble more like those of coelurosaurs.

Your giganotasaurus is actually much taller than either giganotosaurus could ever be.

______________

3) Giganotosaurus could not raise its head like that. Giganotosaurus actually had a relatively short, thin primitive neck that was not S-shape.
mark0731's avatar
I have wondered about a thing. First you made Ankylosaurus, and after that you made an Mx (Maximum sized) version for it. Then could you make a big/long (1.95 m) skulled version for Giganotosaurus (with the same size)?
SameerPrehistorica's avatar
I can't do that because for now there is not much evidence that it had a long skull.
mark0731's avatar
And why is that a problem? I just want to see how it would look with that older skull estimation! You can wrote under it in the description that now it is considered inaccurate or something like that.
Rhinos-Rule's avatar
Wasn't he 45 ft long?
Calibersoul2012's avatar
No, that was just exaggerations long ago. There are only two supposed specimens.

The first giganotosaurus is a primary specimen supposedly 70% complete, classified as MUCPv-Ch1. It was hypothesized to be larger, but it is now officially known to be about 40ft in length.

The supposed secondary specimen for giganotosaurus is MUCPv-95. But it is entirely based on a crudely preserved piece of mandible theoretically to a giganotosaurus that might have been 40-43ft (at most a foot longer than T. rex specimen Sue). However, it is highly fragmented and cannot nor should be relied on for serious numbers; always take with a heavy dosage of salt.


In short:
There is no evidence of any giganotosaurus specimens beyond 40 to possibly 43ft in the entire field of paleontology.
Giganotosaurinae's avatar
Will you update this guy?
SameerPrehistorica's avatar
Giganotosaurinae's avatar
Now it looks much better!
anonymous's avatar
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In