Lythronax vs Carnotaurus

Lythronax wins due to superior weaponry

lythronax still had an undoubtedly more formidable bite, also given it's more robust build, lythronax would win this.

Could I ask where a 600kg bite force estimate for Carnotaurus sastrei originated? Carnotaurus would of indeed had a fairly strong bite if ignoring proportions, but I'm not too sure if we should fabricate estimates like that just yet.

I vote Carnotaurus.

What? 600kgf = 600kg, it's a similar unit, the only difference is that kg is used for mass, while kgf is used for force, but they're the same thing. In fact, an object weighing 600kg will exert 600kgf on an object that supports it completely. Newtons aren't very hard to convert either, since 10,000 newtons will be roughly 1,000kgf, since 1kgf = 9.8 newtons, you can round them up.

I was referring to Saltwater Crocodiles, I used them as comparison based on studies showing their bites to be over 1,500kgf, so taking that into consideration, ~600kgf might be too low even for Carnotaurus sastrei.

Who's saying it's a real estimate? I think you are missing the point; I said it's an educated guess, which is not something unallowed in science. "Baseless speculation" is fine to an extent, when it is quite logical. Why would Carnotaurus sastrei pack a bite force not much stronger than a Hyena's?

And regarding my calculation, you're missing the point, again. I'll repeat; since we do not have sufficient data, I scaled Tyrannosaurus rex's biteforce down by the square of the scaling factor (which is for strength, unlike mass, which scales by the cube of the scaling factor), and divided it by 3. The point of weakening it by 3 times is that its biteforce would be obviously superior to the result yielded by dividing it, and even so, th result was quite impressive in absolute terms. I have posted a reference from "Of arcs and vaults: the biomechanics of bone-cracking in spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta)" p. 254 J. B. Tanner et. al."., showing that Spotted Hyenas, even though having a weaker biteforce than that of Carnotaurus sastrei, could crack open large bones.

Why would 1,000kg be pushing it, may I ask? We don't need to be conservative regarding Carnotaurus sastrei's bite force, I have shown calculations that weaken it by a good amount, and it was still impressive in absolute terms. Why would it pack a weaker bite than a Saltwater Crocodile? If we look at the areas responsible for biting force, we can tell that saying such a large abelisaurid would not bite about as hard doesn't make much sense. This is the skeleton of a ~2 metre long Nile Crocodile:

Crocodiles have powerful neck muscles, as you can tell from the robusticity of their necks in comparison to the skeleton.

This image suggests a fairly volumous jaw adductor, seeing as lower jaw isn't as wide as the upper jaw, and the jaw adductor covers the angular/surangular area, the neck was also fairly muscular. 

Saltwater Crocodiles can actually bite with more than 1,500kgf, as I have previously stated, and I cannot understand the concept that it's actually pushing it to assume a bite force superior to 1,000kgf. My point is that the bite force of this animal is brutally underrated here, considering all those factors.

Why should Carnotaurus' bite force be as strong as 1500kgf? Saltwater crocodiles have far more robust skulls than Abelisaurids proportionally, there is hardly any comparison between their anatomy. I honestly do not see how Carnotaurus' bite force should be drastically more powerful than theropods of comparable size (such as Allosaurus fragilis and the immature Baryonyx walkeri specimen).
Carnotaurus has a slender lower jaw and a not particularly robust upper jaw. I personally don't have a bite force estimate for Carnotaurus, but 1 ton seems too much.