The Scale of my Dinosaurs?

[Appalachiosaurus]

Currently, I have a small homemade Diorama full of dinosaurs from all different brands and time periods. I originally thought they were all in 1/40 scale, but they don't really look right compared to each other. Can I ask what scale the following dinosaurs are in?

1. Papo Dilophosaurus

2. Papo Carnotaurus

3. Papo original T. rex

4. Battat Terra Pachyrhinosaurus

5. Battat Terra Dacentrurus

6. Battat Terra Cryolophosaurus

7. Wild Safari Postosuchus

8. Wild Safari Gryposaurus

9. Wild Safari Apatosaurus

10. Jurassic World Blind bag Pachycephalosaurus

I'm asking for an exact scale. Please do not round.

[tyrantqueen]

Safari Postosuchus is 1/20.

[Halichoeres]

Exact is kind of a tricky thing with scales. Real animals vary in size and our estimates vary even more because so many fossils are missing bits of tail and so forth. Add to that the fact that toy makers sometimes take liberties with relative proportions for whatever reason. With those caveats, here are some scales that are meaninglessly precise:

Papo Dilophosaurus: 29.3
Papo Carnotaurus: 34.7
Papo Tyrannosaurus 35.3
Battat Pachyrhinosaurus supposedly 1:40 by dint of being from the Terra line; based on an unusually large specimen according to Mr. Lorusso in the relevant thread.
Battat Dacentrurus, Cryolophosaurus, 1:40
I concur with TQ on the Postosuchus
Safari Gryposaurus: 37.5
Safari Apatosaurus: 51
Not sure on the Pachycephalosaurus, but eyeballing it, it looks to be around 1:50

So if your diorama looks funny, it's mostly because the Postosuchus and Dilophosaurus are too large, and the Apatosaurus is too small.

[Dinoguy2]

Here's a handy (partial) guide:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ucFaarEzro0GRwJ32fkRjfg_klRlMiU1ZJe-nrVQevg/edit#gid=0

Battat Pachyrhino is indeed exactly 1:40 based on my personal measurements, but the Cryo is 1:35. Yes, there may have been larger individuals out there, but I care a lot about depicting an average or at least an actual animal, not a hypothetical extreme version. I'm more likely to display smaller scales alongside my 1:40s than larger ones for that reason - too small is much more believable than too large, and most of these are sculpted at max size, rather than typical size, anyway.

The Safari Apatosaurus is actually just about 1:40 if it's the largest known A. louisae (21m long, 50cm figure).

According to the spreadsheet measurements (I don't have this one to check the figure length), if you want a 1:40 Postosuchus you should get the Toob version!

[Halichoeres]

And there's another example: I took Battat's word about the scaling, so assumed the Cryolophosaurus was 1:40. And Dinoguy and I got different measurements for the same figure maybe just depending on what exactly we measured and what we compared it to, maybe even what we used to measure (I use a narrow tailor's measuring tape). This and the preceding reasons are why I always round: the numbers I gave before are what the calculation gives me, but I don't consider the last couple of digits to mean much.

[RobinGoodfellow]

Dan's Dinosaur web page about scale:

http://stores.dansdinosaurs.com/scale-calculator/

[Appalachiosaurus]

Thanks a lot guys! I did some reorganizing, and it looks a lot better now. May I ask, what is the scale of the Collect A Rajasaurus? I was hoping to add that to my collection as well.

[Brachiosaurus]

Thanks a lot guys! I did some reorganizing, and it looks a lot better now. May I ask, what is the scale of the Collect A Rajasaurus? I was hoping to add that to my collection as well.

its around 1/40 scale, maybe more 1/50 scale, I'm neurotic about scales myself so I don't buy a figure until I find out its scale.
If you live in Connecticut I would recommend going to the dinosaur place, I got mine there 2 days ago on the way back from my grandmothers, its the only place I know where I can buy collectA dinosaurs in person. There is only one rajasaurus left now.

[Dinoguy2]

And there's another example: I took Battat's word about the scaling, so assumed the Cryolophosaurus was 1:40. And Dinoguy and I got different measurements for the same figure maybe just depending on what exactly we measured and what we compared it to, maybe even what we used to measure (I use a narrow tailor's measuring tape). This and the preceding reasons are why I always round: the numbers I gave before are what the calculation gives me, but I don't consider the last couple of digits to mean much.

Yes, it does depend how you measure it. I just double checked actually and I was wrong about 1:33, it's actually 1:35. I use the same kind of measuring tape and measure along the spine, getting about 20cm in total length for the Terra Cryo. The reason is, most fossils are measured this way: Not life posture, but length of skull + vertebral column if placed in a straight line. Of course, other than snakes, no animals have their vertebra in a straight line in life. But if you don't measure the length of the skull and spine on a figure, but use the skull/spine length estimates for the real dinosaur, your scale number will always come out wrong.

Cryolophosaurus was 700cm in life (7m), the figure is 20cm.  20 x 35 = 700, therefore the scale is 1:35. As a 1:40 collector, this is within acceptable margins for me especially since Cryo is only known from one specimen/data point, but I wouldn't go for anything much larger.

The Nanshiungosaurus is 1:27. If you measure head to tail in the figure's posture, it would be 12cm long, and would equal closer to 1:40. But measuring along the spine gives 19cm long, making it a much larger scale than was intended.

You also need to make sure the size estimates for the life animal are current. The example of Ankylosaurus on Dan's Dinosaurs is wrong. The maximum size of the largest known Ankylosaurus is 625cm, not 800cm. That's a huge difference. For fragmentary specimens, a better method is measuring ONLY the known part, and comparing the same part on the figure. The largest known Ankylosaurus is based only on an isolated skull which measures exactly 64.5cm long. I just measured the skull on the figure and it's 2.1 cm long, so we get this:

2.1: 64.5 = 1 : 30.7

Going by total length, you get 1:33 instead, meaning the head to body size proportions are slightly off, at least compared to smaller, more complete specimens. But since the specimen in question is only a skull, we should ignore the body length and scale only by the skull length. Using this scale ratio calculator, http://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/math/ratios.php , it looks like any true 1:40 model of the largest known Ankylosaurus should have a head that is 1.6cm long.

This can make you crazy, so I overcompensate by displaying my figures with a human that is about 1:35, which allows for that fudge factor that all these animals are slightly under maximum size, and the slightly oversized ones are actually on target!