Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Giganotosaurus carolini by Rodrigo-Vega Giganotosaurus carolini by Rodrigo-Vega
So how do you want SOME DINOSAURS!

XD and not just any dinosaur.

G.carolini here to pwn all you T.rex fanboys ^^


Ok, this are my arguments. Because people is very into this T.rex vs C.carolini thing.. but I'm too lazy, so I'm just copy pasting what I written on a forum:

-A meter or two in lenght makes a whole lot of additional body mass when projected into three dimensions.
-Giganoto's skull is 1.92 cm, Rex's is 1.45. Giganoto's is significantly larger.
-Even when T.rex's head seems more hevily built for it's size, remember than strong jaws and blunter teeth are often a trait of scavengers to intimidate and crush bones. (Such as bear and hyenas) Giganoto's more aerodinamic, gracefull and... sharper design lines are the trait of the predator. For much the same reason ninjas don't tend to wield maces, the longer, sharper and seemightly weaker weapons of G.carolini seem more apropiate to strike fast and deep into the bulnerable areas of prey to kill it as fast and efficiently as possible. The crushing and chewing prowess T.rex supporters mention so often are more useful once the target is dead than to actually kill it.
Other than that, I think all the T.rex supporters are far too influenced by the awesome name, all the movies featuring the animal over so many more years, patriotism, you name it, over cold logic and the simple idea that Giganotosaurus just really seems to have been a larger, more dangerous animal

Yea that's right to fricking sauropods (replting to someone who said G.carolini was only dangerous to sauropods :/). Because everybody knows only pussified dinosaurs would hunt the largest animals to ever walk the fricking universe as we know it, way softer than an elephant sized ostrich with bad teeth.
Which gets me to my next point.
Think about their abailable prey.

Were at the time and place tyrannosaurus lived herbivores larger than itself or even of his own size? the ornitischians herbivores that roamed Laurasia back then were hardly near as big as Rex himself, whereas Gondwana's landscape was dominated at the time by the largest herbivores to ever live, the Titanosauroidea, some of them 10 times larger than Giganotosurus.
A regular T.rex might have never seen anything even slightly larger than itself (a female maybe, which would be a chance to make love, not war) and would proabably run shitless if it did.

So all in all, this are not very anatomically different animals any slight advantage is rather subjective, but if they'd meet they would probably think of each other as belonging to their own kind, which is after all the only similar thing they have seen. So, what fallows would be what usually heppens when 2 animals of the same type meet if one is one is larger than the other (Don't even twice as larger, just noticeably larger or bulkier)

T woul say to himself "That is one large and ugly guy, better do not mess with.. not worth it"
And G would say: "Gimme your lunch money, twerp"
Add a Comment:
XStreamChaosOfficial Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2015  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Very badass!
hatzegopteryx03 Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2015  Student General Artist
That is awesome!
lolIstink Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2015
Technically Tyrannosaurus COULD have preyed on Alamosaurus, but it is probably couldn't be much bigger than Giga even if you use Celeste or MOR 008 or UCMP 137538 to compare. Some may argue that Celeste and UCMP 137538 scaled with Sue is bigger than Giga, but each specimen could have varying proportions. Both C.rex and UCMP are scaled from TOE BONES!!! How reliable can that be?

P.SS I'm not a Giga nor T.rex fanboy.
giganotosauruslover Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2015  Student Traditional Artist
This is coming from a MAJOR Giga fanboy, but I do believe T. rex would win about 65% of the time. I do agree with the "bone crushing equals scavenging" thing. There is no way T.rex would get its mouth around Giga's neck anyway. As for the "ten times larger than Giga" statement, name one 450 foot long dinosaur. Most of the sauropods of the time were more like 2 or 3 times its size. Giga was indeed larger, up to 45 feet, but that's not much. T.rex was 18-22 feet tall, Giga was slightly shorter, at 18-21 feet. Giganotosaurus was estimated to have had a top speed of 31mph, while Rex was only 20. T. Rex had a brain twice as large as Giga's, but that's not saying much, as Giganotosaurus was literally a banana brain. Triceratops was not that strong at all, but Ankylosaurus was a tank! However, Limayosaurus and Andesaurus (Which were around the same size as Alamosaurus, and were the sauropods that were actually around at the same time as Giganotosaurus; Argentinosaurus evolved around the same time as Giganotosaurus went extinct, and Mapusaurus evolved from it.) were tanks in that they were 60 feet each. Giga had binocular vision, just not as good as Rex.
LoikiCattt Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
Skudde Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2014   General Artist
Straight to my favourites thanks to the excellent description :D Also amazing artwork!
KaijuExodus Featured By Owner Oct 19, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
btw Tyrannosaurus encountered Alomosaurus so
KaijuExodus Featured By Owner Oct 19, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
lmao no
markhellscreamer Featured By Owner Jul 7, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Amazing drawing is this traditional or digital ???
AuroraL1GHT Featured By Owner Jul 29, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I definitely agree with you, but I did not come to list facts about the Giganotosaurus.
First off, this drawing is very detailed, it must've taken a long time to draw this!
Second, why does everybody argue about this subject? They were animals trying to survive in a prehistoric world, not superheroes in your favorite movies. 
StevenGordonArt Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
It's not easy to have conversations comparing large therapods, because it seems like they always devolve into who would kill the other in a fight, as if they're video game monsters or super heroes.

Plus, people seem to get ultra-defensive about T-rex, as if genuinely compelling arguments toning down the "King" are like little spears in the childhood.

FrostyWaters Featured By Owner Feb 13, 2013
Old tiny brain!

Still love the big guy though.
blue-hugo Featured By Owner Oct 15, 2012
Very nice, I love dinosaurs! :)
Artistic-Pineapple Featured By Owner Sep 19, 2012
what program did you use to create this? it is very amazing.
GokuMartin Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012




ztk3sni Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2012
But remember that if Rex gets so much as one bite on the Giga, it's all over.

Giga would take a few bites, and then wait until the enemy would bleed to death.
Cusido Featured By Owner Apr 12, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Wow! It looks awesome, dude!
Rainwalker1060 Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2012
did you use any digital effects or just pencil?
Rodrigo-Vega Featured By Owner Apr 4, 2012  Professional General Artist
On the contrary, this is purely digital image. :)
ZealRaegus Featured By Owner Sep 9, 2012
On the contrary, I would disapprove everything you have to say sir about T.Rex. You do realize that Alamosaurus (sauropod) was found in Texas with a large hole on the vertebrae. The only predator in its time period that was the top predator in the area was T.Rex. There was no other animal that could make such a large hole. Whether it was predation or scavenging is unknown. But, we can say that T.Rex did in fact eat Alamosaurus. So for T.Rex running away and scared has been disapproved already.

Secondly, saying that having a biteforce designed to crush is mainly for scavengers can be disapproved even more! The fact that lions, alligators, canines, and great white sharks can break bone, does this mean they are scavengers? No. I didn't think so. Now, for top predators in the environment, they must play the role of hunter and scavenger. The same goes with Giganotosaurus. >-> You also say that bears and hyenas are scavengers. That can be greatly disapproved too. Bears are known to hunt fish, deer, and elk. Hyenas scavenge, yes. But hyenas are not "full-time" scavengers. They hunt as well. The only true scavenger are vultures and buzzards due to the fact they can scavenge due to their anatomy of not wasting a lot of energy when moving/flying since they use the currents of the air.

Now, I must mention that T.Rex is very well muscled. I really don't want to say Giga is pathetic and weak, cause that is definitely not the case! It's just that T.Rex is more heavily muscled than Giga. Why? Well, if you have to carry a half ton head around, along with completely strong neck that can yank 1,000 lbs of meat, then your legs must weigh a lot. T.Rex's leg each weigh one ton. They must also propel the heavy predator at bursting speed of 15-20 mph (that's just my speculation). You really can't say Giga can win by outmuscling T.Rex.

The next thing is brainpower. T.Rex's brainpower is far stronger than that of Giga's. Giga's brainpower is half of that of T.Rex's. T.Rex hunts the most dangerously armed prey of all time, Triceratops and Ankylosaurus. The only way to take out such heavily armored prey is being able to outpower them. But, T.Rex also must be able to outthink his opponent. The only way T.Rex would even survive and get a meal, is being able to strategize. How do you get by a fully armored ankylosaurus? Definitely not going head on! You have to think. T.Rex also hunted Hadrosaurs, who were typically fast.
Giga's prey consisted of either fast or REALLY large prey. How do you take down Sauropods? Well, you have to be consistent on biting them. Why? Due to their heavy build.

Now, another thing about T.Rex, is the eyes. T.Rex has one feature that Giganotosaurus does not have. That is forward-facing eyes/binocular vision. This means T.Rex can perceive depth and distance from its target that its facing. It has a good view range, which when facing its opponent, without losing focus when the target gets too close. Giga would have that issue. With this feature, T.Rex could make the first strike and end the fight immediately.

Now, I am going to point out that length has little to do with a fight and the fact that the most complete skeleton of Giganotosaurus carollini was 43 ft long and Sue the T.Rex being the most complete being 42 ft long...Not much of a difference my friend. It wouldn't matter in a fight.

For fear factor, T.Rex has an edge. Being taller. Now, why is that? Well, they are both the same hip height, being 13 ft tall at the hips. BUT! T.Rex keeps its head higher..."Why is that?" You will ask. Well, the reason: s-shaped neck. T.Rex keeps its head higher due to its neck being lifted by this s-curved shape its neck makes. This lifts its head higher. This makes T.Rex SLIGHTLY taller. Giganotosaurus has fought larger dinosaurs, I won't lie! But meeting a PREDATOR that is taller than you might have an edge in a fight to scare him off.....or not.

There, I've sent my argument and made my points in it. It's your choice to either accept it or not. It's your choice if you want to argue about it. It's whatever.
I know I placed a lot. >-< But, I do know my dinosaurs. If you want to know more about T.Rex, I can give you more info. I know all I know about Giganotosaurus, but until we can get more fossils, I can't really get any further studies about it. Sorry. I seriously wish there were more Giga skeletons dude. =\

And please, I know I'm a T.Rex fan, but I do love dinosaurs and I do love Giganotosaurus! =D
Rodrigo-Vega Featured By Owner Sep 9, 2012  Professional General Artist
This is a long one, so I will be quick, seeing as I must show my manners and reply all arguing comments and opinions :)

- T. rex feeding on Alamosaurus could more likely than not be a case of scavenging as researchers would promptly find out and celebrate healing marks as a sign of predatory behaviour. Also note that Alamosaurus wasnīt a -giant- sauropod, and at 21 meters was comparatively less well defended than a smaller, better armored or faster animals of the time.

- All the animals you listed are at least partically scavengers (I'm not saying that that makes them any less formidable, of course). I insist that most predators that get 99% of their meals from living prey have comparatively weaker jaws than the former group. Falcons, cats, vipers, swordfishes and cheetahs will rarely if ever eat something they hadnt killed themselves.

- Eh.

- Probably. Even then, the study of the brains of extinct animals is sketchy. If we were aliens from the future and dug out modern day skeletons of earth, would we say that elephants and cetaceans were smarter than humans because they had bigger brains? Even then, Rex was a more modern dinosaur after all, and seems to have had a larger brain, so I guees I would have to grant you that.

- I already got this one a lot and its -baloney-. It -is- true that rex had a thinner, lower snout in comparison to the base of his own skull, as oposed to Giganoto and other theropods which basically had an annoying wall of bone and flesh between both eyes, giving rex a better -range- of binocular vision. But every last half-assed predator has had binocular vision since there have been fishes chasing each other. The only difference is that Giga's binocular vision was more limited to the things directly in front of him, whereas rex had some more depth perseption to the sides of his skull.

- Ok, right.

- This is a rather weak area of discussion for any kind of objective argument, are we trying to -meassure- what an apex dinosaur would be afraid of? really?
ZealRaegus Featured By Owner Sep 9, 2012
Well, that is true. But to be a top predator, one must hunt and scavenger. Both predators (Giga and T.Rex) were the top predators. Top predators of their niche usually will scavenge when the opportunity comes by. Even if there are predators that just made their kill, it doesn't mean they'll turn tail and go hunting. Nu uh. They'll confront the hunter and scare them off to get a free meal. It's a whole lot easier to get something for free and working your ass off! XD

Now, let to talk about Alamosaurus. You do realize that the fragmentary fossils we found suggested that it could grow to much larger proportions? That's what I have read up about Alamosaurus, but this can be disapproved. I will discuss this with Thomas Holtz, maybe he might have some knowledge about Alamosaurus since he is a T.Rex enthusiast. XD Lol.
CubeTron23 Featured By Owner Aug 3, 2015  Hobbyist Digital Artist
The length of these comments
ZealRaegus Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2015
No duh. It's what happens when two people who are openly enthusiastic about dinosaurs wanna talk about their favorite subjects! :P
CubeTron23 Featured By Owner Aug 13, 2015  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Yeah, I knew that, but it's just too long to read XD
JeeOneProd Featured By Owner Mar 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
incredible ! a little cat :))
earthgolem22 Featured By Owner Mar 8, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
nice! love the slobber effect.
n0hav0cyet Featured By Owner Mar 3, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
A little something to slightly refute your statement: Scientists have recently discovered an Edmontosaurus pelvis with nearly HEALED T. Rex bite marks. A significant form of evidence that it was also a predator on occasion. 8-)
Rodrigo-Vega Featured By Owner Mar 3, 2012  Professional General Artist
I never said otherwise, in fact thats a well known fact from some time, it also happened with T. horridus.
n0hav0cyet Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Oh yeah. :facepalm:
Chofy87 Featured By Owner Mar 3, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
T_T hermoso
JLBlacksmith Featured By Owner Feb 26, 2012
Harry Dresden Where are you? ^^

Great picture!
TOASTme69 Featured By Owner Feb 17, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Drachenvuur Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Ahhh, good ol Giganotosaurus. My second favourite dinosaur ^^ You drew him so well.
I would agree with everything you've said (about G being the hunter instead of T), but then I remembered I'm one of those guys who loves the innacurate raptors over the accurate ones XDD So I'm a hypocrite lol
Rodrigo-Vega Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2012  Professional General Artist
You've never seen the -right- accurate raptors, I was thinking about making a picture to explain just that..
Drachenvuur Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Oh I have, but I'm a sucker for the Jurassic Park style.
CharmanRaa Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2011
love it and completely agree... i wouldn't want to be on either of their bad sides though.
IceSpoon Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2011
I have always been in the Giga's side, and not only because he lived in the field next door (I'm chilean :P ), but also because is faaaa[...]aaaar more bad ass. You need skills, teeth and balls to bring down an Argentinasaurus (even a young one), but you only need a big mouth and/or an ambush to take down a Parasaurolophus.
Carcharodontosaurus, Allosaurus, Albertosaurus and Giganotosaurus were badass carns, T-Rex? ....only a big mouth :P
fatih35 Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011
that is great!!!!!
SketchySG Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2011
Good arguments, dood. T-rex is a complicated piece of work in terms of its biology. I'm no expert, but I've guessed that it was very bearlike in it's behavior; bears hunt prey, but more often than not they bully other carnivores and scavenge to save on energy. In fact, I think younger rexes did more hunting because of their slimmer builds. As they got older and bulkier, they started to throw their weight around to get free food from their younger rivals.

Now Giganto, he was a GIANT KILLER. Tyrannosaurus hunted animals that were about its own size. That's cool. But Giganto hunted sauropods! The biggest, toughest brutes around! You're right on the ball with that; this predator, likely with some help, could bring down 80 ton titans.

And yet, can't we all agree these are ANIMALS, and not superheroes? They were both apex predators, and despite being unrelated, they seem to be equal in terms of practicality. After all, if they weren't good hunters, they wouldn't have been around long enough for us to find their fossils, right?
Rodrigo-Vega Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2011  Professional General Artist
SketchySG Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2011
Wow. IRIRIV just sent me a brofist.

Fangasm, ACTIVATE!
StriderSyd Featured By Owner Oct 9, 2011

I admit that I'm not well versed in any science,
but as I understand it, the fossil record is incredibly short.

Despite all the fossils found around the world,
fossilization itself was not a common/regular occurrence.
(Due too the rather specific conditions needed to fossilize at all)
Current Paleological science believes that the dinosaur fossil record
only shows 10% (someone correct me on that) of the various animals living at the time.

Who knows what else was running around at the time?
How many and what kinds of dinosaurs were there that NEVER fossilized?
It blows my mind thinking about this sometimes.
(it's fun to do this to myself).
There could have been something bigger and/or meaner out there other than Big-T or Big-G.

Cool pic
Rodrigo-Vega Featured By Owner Oct 10, 2011  Professional General Artist
Absolutely. But I'm sure far less than 10% is fossilized let alone known.
Slayerofstuff Featured By Owner Sep 4, 2011
Regarding the comment of Blunt teeth and a broad skulls. Bears and Hyena's are opportunistic predators, they both can actively hunt, but will never pass up a scavenge.

The neighboring herbivores of Tyrannosaurus were also much more capable of defending themselves than the sauropods of where Giga's lived, and there is fossil evidence to suggest that T-rex did actually fight some of these beasties (Tooth marks in the broken horn of a Triceratops for example).

Liking the picture though, tis very nice.
Rodrigo-Vega Featured By Owner Sep 5, 2011  Professional General Artist
The fact that some animals had more stuff that looked like human medieval weapons doesnīt mean itīs always more capable of defending themselves better.
The sheer size of a big sauropod makes a sudden stomp, kick or movement of the tail (or any other part of the body really) as if not much more dangerous than any spike or club.
Slayerofstuff Featured By Owner Sep 7, 2011
There is evidence to suggest they did however. Why else would Tricera's carry such huge horns and the frill? Considering what predators it lived with at the time, it probably would at least attempt to lance them with it.

These Giant sauropods were probably rather sluggish too. given how much they would've weighed, most of their protection would've come from their gigantic size.
Rodrigo-Vega Featured By Owner Sep 7, 2011  Professional General Artist
Well, of course they were more dangerous than an animal of equivalent size -without- those same weapons, but not necesarily more dangerous than an animal 10 times their size that didnīt have them.

Even though, there seems to be evidence (I hate to say or hear "there is evidence" while discussing these subjects, "there has been evidence" of things that turned out to be total BS) that Triceratopsī defences were mostly for show, intimidation or even sexual display.

For example if you look here: [link] you can see that the nose and the smaller horn are barely held in place by a thin bone bridge, there is no heavy support structure as it would be expected from an animal that charges with itīs head like a bull, a ram or a pachycephalosaurus.
If such a massive animal, would recieve a strong impact nose-first into a large enemy, that bone could break catastrophically, virtually breaking off a big part of the animals head..
At the same time the horns and the frill are an extended part of the skull, unlike "true horns" as they have only evolved in mammals, that in case that they miss-charge actual horns can break off without harming the animal and often even growing back. Thatīs mostly why it is thought that most dinosaurs with horns or frills used them for display only, because they were thin layers of bone, which means that if they get broken, It is their skull getting shattered in pieces. Which usually a very bad thing.
Mature triceratops (also known as Torosaurus) also had a hollowed frill, which is as good of a defence as a thin frame of circular bone with an extended patch of skin in the middle. Not much.

As actual defences they probably were just good to shake and chase at smaller predators, annoyances and to wield in non-lethal combat with members of their own species for territorial and mating reasons.
Slayerofstuff Featured By Owner Sep 8, 2011
Interesting point there, I'll have quick read on it.
JohnWarrior90 Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2011
I think your designs on dinosaurs are amazing. Nice job. I also like the dinosaurs you make.
Add a Comment:


Submitted on
April 1, 2010
Image Size
520 KB


51,950 (9 today)
1,032 (who?)