HOME | DD
DrScottHartman — Stan 'n Sue comparison
Published: 2013-03-22 18:54:43 +0000 UTC; Views: 25502; Favourites: 206; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
With Stan and Sue now overhauled, I decided it was time to dust off the idea of comparing T. rex specimens. Eventually I'll update all of them (and add some new ones in), but for the next month or two this will have to suffice. Thanks to better scaling I can corroborate the femoral length of both specimens as published in Hutchinson et al's 2011 paper on computational analysis of tyrannosaur limb and body dimensions, as well as the overall length of FMNH PR2081 (Sue).On the other hand I am unable to replicate the length estimate they provide for BHI 3033 (Stan). Stan's skeletal, as restored here, has a length of 11.28 meters, half a meter shorter than the 11.78 of the scanned mount. The discrepancy seems to stem from how long the reconstructed distal caudals are in the mount, as well as some very odd spacing in the scan (i.e. the mount) between the neck and skull. Otherwise the individual elements match up quite well between the scan and my reconstruction (which is good, because scan data rarely suffers from scaling errors).
Related content
Comments: 143
Man shut up with your lame ass name. At least I show some of my pictures on the internet.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have more than you think of my grinning mug
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah like those ugly ass dinosaur teeth you draw.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol says the guy who has to use Dinosaur King templates to make anything worthwhile.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Listen to yourself asshole all you only have a dozen and 3rd pieces made which hardly sustains any living with the addition of your little Wreck-it Ralph Jr. there, and my dinosaur king drawings have nothing to do with how much money I make.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol. I make art all the time. I just don't upload here often since I'm forgetful. Also show me the professional gigs you've done then. Besides what sorry sucker is motivated to make art out of monetary gain? Sure it's a nice secondary incentive, but I make things mostly because it's fun or I feel passionate about it. Quality over quantity my friend. Though I must admit your Utahraptor sketch is very good.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then where it is? Asshole you make all the time yet you never put it on DeviantArt XD
And plus I have job at an art gallery that's as much professional as it gets...and also I'm give you the B.O.D. the Benefit of the Doubt motherfucker, I don't make art for just money; I do it to express myself and have fun, as an artist you know you need all that support in art to put food on the table; so what's good?
And yeah I bet's really fun that you made only a few things, but I will stand up and say thank you for liking at least on of my Utahraptor pictures and I'll say that your dinosaur pictures are interesting and have some unique qualities, but still doesn't pass up the chain spark that you've cause with me this week and beyond...now if you'll excuse me I'm going off to do my art homework and if I catch on you replying again then you'll face the consequences.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol sure Mr. High and Mighty. Consequences huh? Also what is that job at the gallery exactly?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
To draw of course...and then once finished the piece goes down in the gallery store to be purchased. I already one of them down there now.
And yes consequences do you think I kid?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So you have stuff in a gallery? Photo of your work on sale or it didn't happen xD
I'm done with you for now. Something just came up in my schedule and I won't have time to play with you until the problem is resolved. Tata for now
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh it did happen. But as I said to you I don't upload pictures I take as much...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Hi Scott, I've measured your Stan both in photoshop and in GIMP and it resulted in a 11.3 meters animal. Why do you have it at 10.9 in the image? Is it a mistake?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
it was a typo, the actual lenght is 11.28 meters
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
How come the description sais it’s 11.28m long, while on the image itself it reads "10.9m" for stan?
It seems that the measurement given in the description is the correct one, as that corresponds closely to the what can be measured in the comparison (and I think my measurement is pretty accurate, using the same technique I’m getting a correct 12.3m length for sue, measured along the vertebral collumn, and I also got a correct femur length for stan).
Someone is referring to it further down this page, but I don’t speak Spanish and google translate didn’t give me any answers either.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh jeez. Sorry, I think 10.9 was the old text (before I updated it). Stan is about a meter shorter than Sue, as you've measured yourself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks for the clarification
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
So, is Sue bigger than Stan due to being different genders, or just because Sue is an older T. rex? I've heard both explanations for Sue's larger size.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sue is older - quite literally the oldest T. rex known (~29 years at time of death). Whether they were different genders, and if so whether that would matter for their relative size isn't known at this time, despite lots of claims to the contrary on the interwebs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Also didn't realize Sue has part of her neck missing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah - given the continuity of it I think that was probably the part that was exposed and eroding out of the hill when Sue Hendricks found it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
ScottHartman Dudas Tengo Unas. ¿Cuánto mide el cráneo del T-rex "Stan"? Y la Imagen Estima El Largo Stan en 10,9 Metros y en LA DESCRIPCION 11,28 metros.
Para aclarar mis dudas about Stan
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No tengo las medidas prácticas en este momento, pero yo medí un elenco de Stan varias veces para este esquelético, por lo que no debería estar fuera por más de un centímetro o más en cualquier dimensión . El cráneo de Stan es muy grande en relación con el cuerpo ( y sobre todo el cuello) , pero la serie preseacral es realmente completo , así que no tengo ninguna razón para dudar de las proporciones , inusual aunque parecen .
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
There need to be more mounted T. rexes in Europe.
The only one in my general area is the one at Senckenberg, and that one has very oddly mounted forelimbs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i've been thinking about the difference in between t.rex skulls and i've come to ask, are there any t.rex skulls that match sue's? or is sue the only one found with a broad skull (in comparison to stan's and other tyrannosaurids)?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow, I didn't think stan was missing that much.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah - of course the whole thing is always restored for mounts (no one wants to buy a partial mount) and the specimen hasn't otherwise been described in detail, so it's not easy to figure out which parts are real at first glance (luckily BHI has kept good records here).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Alright thanks bud. Mine was looking like it had a pretty long snout compared with skull images I was finding else where online like the one I posted and I was starting to wonder if that was more correct or not. I've spent way too much time with Jurassic Park as my ideal image of a T-Rex I think.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'm working on a 1:1 Rex head ( hopefully for a future full body piece ) and I've been using your newer " Stan " model for it. I was comparing yours with this image : [link]
I've been told this is a very good model to work from, but is it my imagination or does your updated Stan have a longer skull shape now ? Particularly in the snout ?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
My skull is based on a 3D scan dataset that was reconstructed to take out some of the distortion that individual bones had the in back half of Stan's skull. The photo you link is also pretty good (it's a more recent generation Stan skull - older casts had more distortion in them), but you can still see that the quadratojugal is too low (look at the gap between it and the squamosal!) which means the jugal is still somewhat distorted (and the photo suffers from parallax, which is a common problem when working from public photos of dinosaur bones).
So yes, the skull on my most recent construction is a little lower, but the reasons for it are evident in that photo you linked, plus the photo itself is making the discrepancy look a bit worse than it really is.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
what are the specimen names for these fossils of the bigger T.rex's? or at least whats their length/hight?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
They don't have names, we're talking about fragmentary remains here.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh sorry 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Five T.rex by scott Hartman:
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, you've sleuthed down my older version but alas they are somewhat out of date.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Is it true that only three complete Tyrannosaur skulls have ever been found?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Off hand - There's the AMNH skull, Sue, and Stan are very complete. But it sort of depends on whether you're insisting on 100% completeness. There's a decent chunk of MOR 555's skull, and Peck's Rex also preserves substantial skull portions. The subadult Duffy specimen has a skull that is 70%. And of course if you assume that Jane is a juvenile T. rex (and you probably should) almost all of its skull is preserved (along with the Nanotyrannus type skull, if you want to throw it in).
So there are really a lot of skulls that are complete or have substantial portions known, but it's true that pristine complete skulls are rare - heck, even Stan has some skull bones tweaked, and Sue of course had a skull that was crushed something awful, despite the completeness.
Alas, that's the sort of thing that happens when you leave all the bodies outside for 65 million years :-/
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That looks absolutely great!
Is is just my eyes or is the skull shape also different?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The skull is a bit different - nothing dramatic, but an update none-the-less.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is awesome. It's clear that Sue would wear the pants (or the dinosaur analogue) in any of her relationships.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Assuming it's really a "her".
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
True, we can't really assume any of the T.Rex's genders.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Astounding job as usual mr Hartman.
I as a "mesozoic enthusiast" comic drawer – back when I was working on my dinosaur books – did my own modest study about theropod size, scaling them according to published skull lengths and comparing them each other. And I was very surprised noticing how much the total lengths I found were smaller than the published ones, even considering my probable errors. I checked my results also scaling your skeletals (which were one of my most important benchmarks back then 
So I asked myself why published total lengths are so different from the "actual" ones (at least the ones there were on my sources back then).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think there is a natural tendency to use the largest available length and mass estimate in popular books (we're talking about dinosaurs here!), and then when those estimates appear in multiple places people start to accept them as independent verification.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I actually used size data published on scientific articles and websites (such as Dinodata and Theropod Database).
I just saw you made a comparison between your newest Sue and Giganotosaurus and it gave quite surprising results for me! Giga had way longer legs (and a way shorter skull also) than I thought! Maybe an old "theory" I read on a book years ago it's true: someone said that large theropod genus had comparable size, and thus 12/13 meters were actually their maximum size or so... ^_^
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
One of the things that surprised me about the Sue mount in the Field Museum was how long and low it is, with short legs like a giant corgi.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Part of that is the way they posed the mount (in particular one ankle is too flexed relative to the knee - ouch!), but your overall impression was spot on.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The Black Hills Institute likes to claim Stan is the second largest T. rex after Sue for some reason, yet I'm pretty sure AMN 5027 and Peck's Rex are larger than Stan.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Pretty much all adult specimens are larger than Stan, although not Duffy I guess (another BHI specimen).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>