smedz
Ursus abstrusus
Recent Graduate
Posts: 410
|
Post by smedz on Aug 10, 2019 22:15:28 GMT -5
Asia and North America both have their black bears, and both have pretty similar ecological niches in their ecosystems. So I was wondering which would be the victor in a fight. What are all your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Aug 10, 2019 22:33:14 GMT -5
The American black bear can grow larger and stronger than an Asiatic black bear. On average both males weigh about the same which I around 300 pounds.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Aug 10, 2019 22:41:36 GMT -5
Well, these 2 species of black bear are very similar. Yes, the American black bear can grow much heavier and at max weights would definitely win. But if we talk about weight parity, lets say both at 400 lbs, my vote goes for the Asiatic black bear because its more aggressive, that is the main difference i see right now.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 28, 2019 14:56:44 GMT -5
The giant short-faced bear of N. America vs the giant mystery bear of Europe, Ursus ( ? ) tyrannus.
With this freaking acer notebook, I cannot post pictures. Anyway... these two bears weigh 2,000 pounds each.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Oct 28, 2019 16:34:03 GMT -5
It is pretty much established that Ursus "Maritimus" Tyrannus was actually Ursus "arctos" , so knowing this, in a fight vs Simus, both at same weight, around 2000 lbs, but can weight up to 2500 lbs, i would say Tyrannus takes it 6/7 out of 10. Being a brown bear would make it more robust all around, stronger front limbs, stronger bones, and much better grappler than Simus. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 29, 2019 0:48:21 GMT -5
I agree, At equal weights, simus will be taller while tyrannus will have greater girth, Simus will have a more powerful bite, but tyrannus is the superior grappler.
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Oct 29, 2019 2:41:47 GMT -5
I agree, At equal weights, simus will be taller while tyrannus will have greater girth, Simus will have a more powerful bite, but tyrannus is the superior grappler. If Ursus tyrannus is a big as said, it will win but according to one source, it is only a 400 pound brown bear (it will lose at that weight). Regardless Ursus Tyrannus is more brown bear like either way.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 29, 2019 2:54:58 GMT -5
Lars, the typical Steppe bear, the Pleistocene brown bear was bigger than a modern-day Kodiak bear. Ursus ( ? ) tyrannus was larger than the Steppe bear, bigger than any cave bear, and larger than a modern-day polar bear. However.... show us this source please.
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Oct 29, 2019 3:40:51 GMT -5
Ursus maritimus tyrannus (Ursus maritimus tyrannus Kurtén, 1964)
?Ursus arctos priscus Order: Carnivora Family: Ursidae Size: 3,5 m in length, 145 cm in height, 350 - 1000 kg of weight Time period: the Late Pleistocene of Northern Eurasia (70,000 years ago) Typical representative: Ursus maritimus tyrannus Kurtén, 1964 Ursus maritimus tyrannus is an extinct subspecies of polar bear, known from a single fragmentary ulna found in the gravels of the Thames at Kew Bridge, London. It was named by the Finnish paleontologist Björn Kurtén in 1964 and is interpreted to represent a relatively large subadult individual: the ulna is estimated to have been 48.5 cm long when complete, recent studies only weigh it at 400 kg, for comparison modern subadult polar bear ulnae are 36–43 cm long. Dating back to the Late Pleistocene, approximately 70,000 years ago, it is the oldest fossil assigned to the polar bear; however, an unpublished reinvestigation of the fossil suggests that the fossil is actually a brown bear. Commonly used names include: Pleistocene polar bear or Tyrant polar bear. prehistoric-fauna.com/Ursus-maritimus-tyrannusThis is the source, however, I would agree with you that Ursus Tyrannus is a Steppe Brown bear.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Oct 29, 2019 4:36:41 GMT -5
Wow ok, it says recent studies give it about 400 kg (881 lbs), never seen that phrase before, that is weird but not surprising since prehistoric animals are being downsized all the time, but that would really be a huge downsize. Anyhow, more research would have to be done, all the other sites that place Tyrannus as the largest ever bear of the Ursus gene should be checked again to see if they mention those more recent studies.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 29, 2019 5:55:01 GMT -5
881 pounds is slightly heavier than the average Kodiak bear, at least from the little research we were able to do. Also, equal in size to Ursus splaeus. However, I would not chisel this number in stone just yet. The size of Ursus arctos is related ( of course ) to food availability. Within a zoo environment, a brown bear can grow larger and heavier than even the world's record polar bear. For a Pleistocene grizzly to reach 2,000 pounds or more is not an absurd idea. Several zoo bear's have done this. Frankly though, the grizzly is better off not being a real giant like his short-faced distant cousins. Ursus arctos is without a doubt the better survivor.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 31, 2019 5:46:01 GMT -5
Some ( not all ) sources give 1200 pounds as the average weight of Arctodus simus. If so, then we have a face-off between an 800 pound grizzly and a 1200 pound short-faced bear. This grizzly is two-thirds the weight of the giant. Result of your conversion: 800 pounds (avoirdupois) is equal to 362.87 kilograms Result of your conversion: 1200 pounds (avoirdupois) is equal to 544.31 kilograms
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Oct 31, 2019 5:57:30 GMT -5
Brobear: i know the weights of prehistoric bears are just estimates of some fossils found, but for Arctodus Simus, me and you spent alot of time debating, and even you gave the average weight of Simus closer to 2000 lbs based on some websites and estimates. Take a look at one of your posts:
Reply # 53
domainofthebears.proboards.com/post/10855/thread
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 31, 2019 6:09:11 GMT -5
I'm not saying that Arctodus simus did not reach 2,000 pounds and more. I'm not saying that a 2,000 pound simus was uncommon. I'm just saying that the *average Arctodus simus ( according to some experts ) weighed roughly 1200 pounds.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Oct 31, 2019 6:18:36 GMT -5
I'm not saying that Arctodus simus did not reach 2,000 pounds and more. I'm not saying that a 2,000 pound simus was uncommon. I'm just saying that the *average Arctodus simus ( according to some experts ) weighed roughly 1200 pounds. Oh but in your post that i linked you said the "average" was around 1900 lbs. But ok yeah, could be less. Simus can reach up to 2500 lbs though. Me and you talked alot about this, you have to remember brobear.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Oct 31, 2019 6:23:53 GMT -5
In my reply #1 of this thread, i said that Tyrannus should win more, but i said that based on the average weights that we always thought he had, around 2000 lbs. But if this bear had an average weight of around 880 lbs as those latest studies show, then at average weights, Simus should win more often then not. At same weight, Tyrannus takes it.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Oct 31, 2019 6:40:45 GMT -5
I'm not saying that Arctodus simus did not reach 2,000 pounds and more. I'm not saying that a 2,000 pound simus was uncommon. I'm just saying that the *average Arctodus simus ( according to some experts ) weighed roughly 1200 pounds. Am just curious Brobear, where did you read that the average weight of Simus was roughly 1200 lbs according to some experts? Because i never seen any site talking about the average weight of Simus. All i have seen are sites that state that Simus "could" had weighted from 1800 to 2500 lbs. All the sites and info were posted here :
domainofthebears.proboards.com/thread/101/arctodus-simus
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 31, 2019 19:19:08 GMT -5
Could not relocate. But few sites give any averages. However, many claim from 1500 or from 1800 to 2,000 or to 2,200 pounds. In fact, very few sites agree on their weights. I will say ( imo ) the average is high - perhaps 1800 pounds. Truth: Arctodus simus was a giant too big for any bear of the genus Ursus to grapple with if contested at average weights. At weight-parity, then the grizzly is champ.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Oct 31, 2019 19:27:38 GMT -5
Could not relocate. But few sites give any averages. However, many claim from 1500 or from 1800 to 2,000 or to 2,200 pounds. In fact, very few sites agree on their weights. I will say ( imo ) the average is high - perhaps 1800 pounds. Truth: Arctodus simus was a giant too big for any bear of the genus Ursus to grapple with if contested at average weights. At weight-parity, then the grizzly is champ. Yeah, about 1800 lbs average weight is more like it according to most sites. I also agree on the grizzly (brown bear, Ursus arctos) being the champ at weight parity.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Nov 1, 2019 0:41:20 GMT -5
I will add to this, if it were possible to pit these two antagonists at head-and-body length parity, the grizzly would be the heavier of the two. But not possible. The short-faced bear was truly the king during his life on earth.
|
|