Pinterest Stumbleupon Whatsapp
Ads by Google

There are three topics that should never be discussed at the dinner table: religion, politics, and the relative merits of Star Trek and Star Wars. Luckily for us, MakeUseOf isn’t a dinner table.

While any debate around the two great Star franchises tends to get… passionate… Will The Web's Unreasonable Expectations Ruin Star Wars: The Force Awakens? Will The Web's Unreasonable Expectations Ruin Star Wars: The Force Awakens? Read More I’m going to try and approach the subject as logically as Spock. I’m not going to talk about which canon is better — it’s obviously Star Trek — but instead focus on whose cannons are better. Let’s take a look at the technology of Star Trek and Star Wars Star Trek and Star Wars: The Battle For Technological Supremacy Star Trek and Star Wars: The Battle For Technological Supremacy Which science fiction giant had the better technology? If they were put head-to-head, which sci-fi universe's gadgets would carry them to victory? Read More .

Space Rules

Before diving deep into this debate, it’s important to set a few ground rules.

I’m not an expert on either series so I’m going to be leaning on the work of far more enlightened thinkers; the Trek-Wars wars have been waged over countless forums and websites for many years. Generally, what was considered canon before Disney acquired Lucasfilm and J.J. Abrams rebooted Star Trek is going to be admissible.

Also, what is shown is going to be favored over what is said. On Quora, Rom Lokken explains that a Star Wars Star Destroyer is reported as being able to generate power equal to 1 percent of the sun’s energy output. This is ridiculously inconsistent with the actual observed performance of Star Destroyers in the film. “For those crying foul,” he writes, “a Star Destroyer that needs that much power (to create the abilities displayed) would represent the most fantastic inefficiency ever conceived.”

One major complication is that, while Star Trek writers at least attempted to create plausible explanations for the technology, George Lucas did what he wanted by throwing in random technobabble. When taken alongside the Force, it’s easy to see why some fans consider Star Wars to be an epic space fantasy rather than a science fiction tale.

Ads by Google

With all that in mind, let’s dig in.

Androids

We’re actually pretty keen on robots Why Replacing Humans With These Robots Makes Sense Why Replacing Humans With These Robots Makes Sense Are there any jobs where automation and precision are so valuable that robots are actually more deserving of them than humans? Read More here at MakeUseOf. Star Trek and Star Wars both feature great robot characters: C-3PO, R2-D2 and Data are all fan-favorites. C-3PO is a yellowish droid who talks a lot, while Data is a yellowish android who talks a lot. So far, so samey. Unfortunately for C-3PO, his tech just isn’t up to scratch.

C-3PO was pieced together from junk parts by a crazy kid, whereas Data was carefully designed and created by a mad scientist. Data also has the advantage of being “fully functional,” hyper-intelligent, and an integral part of the Enterprise crew. C-3PO gets in the way, while R2-D2 is little more than a gun sight on wheels. Data even won the MakeUseOf staff vote by an overwhelming margin. Yes, I actually polled my fellow authors.

Star Trek 1, Star Wars 0.

Medical

This one’s another simple call. If the Skywalkers lived in the United Federation of Planets they wouldn’t need to worry so much about their arms. Yes, they’re able to get them replaced with cybernetics, but Bones would probably be able to reattach the originals. While my colleague Philip Bates is interested in getting upgraded How Bionics Will Extend And Improve Your Life How Bionics Will Extend And Improve Your Life Thought of as a science fiction pipedream, the science of bionics is often viewed as sinister. However, in the real world, bionic technologies can extend and improve your life. Read More , I’d sooner keep my real limbs.

Everything short of instant death — just don’t wear a red shirt! — seems to be curable on the Enterprise. With technology like tricorders that can instantly diagnose almost all ailments, Star Trek takes this one with ease.

Star Trek 2, Star Wars 0.

Engines

This one is interesting. The warp drives on Star Trek ships use a matter/antimatter reactor, while Star Wars ships use comparatively lower-tech fusion and fission reactors. Looks like another easy victory for Star Trek, no? Perhaps not.

The issue is in the actual performance of the drives. ST-vs-SW.net places the fastest speed achieved by a ship in the Star Trek universe at around 21,000 times the speed of light, with slower ships maxing out at around 9,000 times light-speed. However, most ships probably cruise at something around 2,000 times the speed of light. In the Star Wars canon, the fastest ships come in at around 16,500 times light-speed but the typical cruising speed is around 11,000 times the speed of light. So, although the fastest Star Trek ships may be capable of greater speeds than Star Wars ships, they tend to cruise at far lower speeds.

Outside of light-speed drives, Star Wars takes it handily. The Empire’s Star Destroyers are shown to be ponderous beasts, slow to maneuver in real space, unlike the Federation’s ships which are practically capable of pirouetting on a dime.

Therefore, I’m going to call this one a tie. Star Trek gets points for the more advanced drives, faster top speed, and maneuverability, while Star Wars takes it for average speed, which would be more important more of the time.

Star Trek 3, Star Wars 1. Things are heating up.

Weapons

Weapons are another controversial topic. Boba Fett’s ship, Slave 1, is described as having 64,000-gigawatt lasers and 190 megaton missiles, while the puny Enterprise-D only has a 3.6-gigawatt main gun and 64 megaton missiles. This is where Rom Lokken’s rule from earlier kicks in.

“Some of the energy readings suggested for Star Wars laser weapons would instantaneously vaporize any unshielded craft, not to mention the atmosphere in between them, in rather spectacular fashion,” he explains, continuing, “Nothing in the physical behavior of these weapons supports these values.”

With that established, the case becomes a lot more clear-cut. In his Quora article, Rom devotes several paragraphs to explaining all the way Star Trek weapons are superior to Star Wars ones.

Weapon tech is also no contest. Photon torpedoes travel at warp speed. This means that are unblockable by SW vessels whose reaction time is such that skilled humans can provide superior guidance as compared to their computers (thus their manual firing). Photon torpedoes are matter/antimatter devices whose yields have been described as being able to wipe out cities with a single torpedo. Proton torpedoes are sub-light (and slow) missiles that can destroy city blocks.

He’s equally decisive on the subject of lasers.

Without going into the difficult discussion around energy outputs of beam weapons. ST beams are computer controlled, use the vastly superior Trek sensors and computer systems and have output that has been described as being capable of destroying the entire surface of a planet. Turbo lasers (save and except the Death Star) have limited firing arcs and while incredibly numerous are dramatically limited by poor fire control and range.

I have to call it: Star Trek 4, Star Wars 1.

Sensors, Shields, Replicators, and Transporters

When I started writing this article I thought the Star Wars franchise would put up more of a fight. Instead, I’m combining sensors, shields, transporters, and replicators into a single category to avoid an absolute massacre. All four technologies broadly deal with detecting or manipulating energy. In every case, Star Trek wins out.

The sensors on the Enterprise are orders of magnitude better than anything in the Star Wars universe. Starfleet sensors can scan ships trillions of kilometers away, while ST-v-SW.net concludes that Star Wars scanners seem to be limited to a few hundred thousand kilometers. Star Trek scanners can read the DNA of opposing crews, while the best offered by Star Wars could only determine that Yoda wasn’t a Wookie.

While shields are a huge part of the Enterprise’s capabilities, large ships in the Star Wars universe don’t have anything comparable. An X-Wing wouldn’t be able to get through a Starfleet ship’s shields, but can easily get close enough to the Death Star to destroy it.

Star Trek society is post-scarcity. Replicators mean anything can be created anywhere. Poverty and hunger are things that just don’t exist in a meaningful way. The opposite is true in the Republic and, later, the Empire. Slavery, hunger, and poverty are all seen in the films. Another easy win for Star Trek.

Transporters are actually very similar technology to replicators, and once again, Star Wars has no answer. Kirk and crew get can get beamed anywhere they want on a whim, while Han Solo is stuck slogging along in his rust bucket.

I’m going to be gentle. Star Trek 5, Star Wars 1. Even though this could easily be 8–1 to Star Trek.

But What About the Force?

The Force is the one thing that really takes Star Wars away from being science fiction. Its pseudo-religious undertones and utterly unexplained properties make it very difficult to compare with anything in Star Trek.

Take lightsabers, which only a Jedi can use as they’re reliant on their ability to use the Force. Are they tech? Or are they just a magic sword? If they’re tech then they earn Star Wars a half-point for close combat gear, but if they’re magic I’m inclined to dock the series a half-point because George Lucas’ constant retconning annoys me.

Either way, it doesn’t make much difference to the final score. It’s 5 plays 0.5 or 5 plays 1.5 depending on how you view the Force. Star Trek takes the trophy. Live long and prosper.

This is the bit where you get to tell me how wrong I am. I’ve skipped over loads of different technologies — like the holodeck Your Own Holodeck: Will The Star Trek Fantasy Become a Reality? Your Own Holodeck: Will The Star Trek Fantasy Become a Reality? Will advances in virtual reality technology make the Star Trek holodeck a common room in every household in our near future? The "holodeck" fantasy is getting much closer to reality than you may think. Read More — from both canon. Please, if you disagree with anything I’ve said, let me know, at length, in the comments. Comparing the two series is definitely an art, not a science.

  1. star wars
    October 26, 2016 at 1:47 am

    The force outmatches any technology no matter how advanced it is The power is unlimited
    You might say they were only comparing canon and that is also OK because if you master the force enough it will be almost impossible to die. witch is canon confirmed in tarkin novel which is canon. In legend there no doubt there are to many factions of the force that outmatch even the greatest battle station os ship no matter how many. You can even bring back an entire army back to life which is canon in the clone wars series. And medication who cares you can die and comeback to life with the right teachings. I could turn the hole crew against the captain and destroy there own ships. The force has many abilities so i think it should have many points you put the points in section but the force has hundreds of abilities and hundreds ways of use which means subjects beyond technology. And just overall star wars is more entertaining. Star wars is better also because their ships don't look like there shooting laser beams of light.

    • Star Trek
      November 10, 2016 at 11:47 pm

      You do realize there is Q in star trek right. It will puff all the Jedi is single snap of fingers form 20 millions lightyear away. ( jedi force can barely affect anyting farther than within the building) That is Hands down star trek winning

  2. Scott
    June 5, 2016 at 8:30 am

    Ladies and gentlemen, I love the back and forth discussion of which is better st or sw. As for myself, I'm just as much of a sw fan as I'm a st fan. I have seen every sw movies and cartoons when they came out with the exception of the first sw since I was too young to go. Likewise, I have seen every st movies and shows. So on that note, the facts just don't lie.
    Han: "does point 5 past light speed."
    Warp 9.6 1909 faster than light.
    In Empire Stikes Back, you can see that their scanning ability is greatly limited. They couldn't even scan that the Falcon had landed on their hall.
    Picard: lasers couldn't even get through our navigation shields.
    In Conundrum, you can see the Enterprise quickly target and destroy 15 unmanned fighters, in sw they would be lucky to quickly target and destroy one fighter. They had a hard enough time to hit a light corvette right in front of them.
    In another episode of STTNG you can see the enterprise destroy an asteroid with one or two torpedoes. In STTM they do it with one torpedo. In STDS9 they do it with Phasers. And in all of the cases, the asteroid is much larger than they are.
    ST ships are more maneuverable, can change course while at warp or even traswarp, which is something that people keep forgetting about here, and can fight at these speeds.
    In STN we see the Enterprise take a hit from a part of another ship and still keep going. In SWTESB a star destroyer gets hit with a small asteroid and the tower gets blown off possible even destroying the ship as we have seen in SWROTJ when the super star destroyer is critical damaged after loosing its tower. Also in STN the Enterprise rams another ship and it is still available to limp its way back to starfleet.
    Now I can go on if you want me to, but I think I have made my point. If we take the technology as it is showing in the movies and TV shows, ST wins hands down. I love SW for the technology and its story line, but as Spock noted, logic has to give way to physics. Physically SW cannot win against ST.

  3. ALEXANDER BIRCH
    May 12, 2016 at 9:46 pm

    This is fairly obvious. Star Trek is the winner. Why?
    1) Weapons. Lasers are stated to be dramatically inferior to Phasers/disruptors on several occasions. Turbo lasers are undoubtedly very powerful, but as no Canon comparison is given, I cannot compare them. The targeting systems on a Star Destroyer are, as shown in numerous battles, either useless or non-existent. A galaxy class vessel almost never misses anything. The death star cannot be ignored, but seems to be fairly useless, plus, on a number of occasions, planet destroying technology is shown in Star Trek, although is not as instant, but a torpedo bombardment can destroy a planet in a matter of hours. Proton and Photon torpedoes seem to be fairly similar, but, like phasers can be used during faster than light speeds, which is impossible in Star Wars. Also, in hand to hand shooting, stormtroopers are beyond useless, whereas hand held ST weapons are highly accurate.

    2) Shields. Again, they seem to be non existent or completely useless in Star Wars. In Star Trek they are long lasting and effective, and some high tech Federation vessels, such as the USS Defiant and the USS Prometheus have ablaitive armour, which can absorb blasts even when the shields are down.

    3) Sensors. Sensors in SW cannot even detect droids. Sensors in ST can detect cloaked ships, and even determine the structure of the DNA of a life form on the other side of a solar system.

    4) Cloaking devices. Nothing comparable in SW.

    5) Replicators. Nothing comparable in SW.

    6) Transporters. Nothing comparable in SW.

    7) Ship manoeuvrability. In star wars it is evident that anything bigger than a fighter or the Falcon cannot turn on the spur of the moment, whereas a huge 685m long sovereign class vessel has similar manoeuvrability to an X wing.

    8) Cloning. Equal ability. In SW, there are the clone troopers, and in ST there are the dominion troops, the Jem'hadar. It is unclear is there are more clone troopers or Jem'hadar, but in a fight the Jem'hadar would butcher the Clone troopers. Plus the clone troopers are just humans, but the Jem'hadar are specifically created species, genetically designed to fight.

    9) Ship size. SW easily wins, unless you count Borg cubes. Size is irrelevant however, unless the ship is bigger so that it creates more power, which is obviously not the case in either universe. The most powerful ST ship is probably the Defiant, which is tiny, and the Falcon is obviously also very powerful, and is also tiny.

    10) Miscellaneous weapons:

    Anti coagulant polaron weapons (ST) used by the Jem'hadar, stops blood clotting, so victim bleeds to death, unless they get medical help.

    Energy dampening weapon (ST) used by the Breen, renders a ship powerless so it can be destroyed with a single shot.

    There are other star trek weapons that I haven't covered, but I think that the evidence above proves that it is unnecessary to bother.

    11) Lightspeed. It isn't stated in canon how fast Lightspeed is in SW, so it can be assumed that it is the same as the spped of light, whereas the max speed of a standard ST ship is somewhere between Warp 8 and Warp 9.9, with Warp 1 being the equivalent to the speed of light.

    I haven't even got onto AI, but it is clear that Data's positronic brain is superior to that of C 3PO, and so is his manoeuvrability and strength. Then there are battle droids, cowardly, stupid and useless excuses for robots.

    I like both SW and ST immensely, and I enjoy watching them.

    If the empire chose to challenge any of these powers as of the year 2379, they would be annilated:

    United Federation of Planets
    Klingon Empire
    Romulan Empire
    Cardassian Union
    Breen Confederacy
    Dominion
    The Borg
    And even the Ferengi Alliance!

    You notice that this is only a technology comparison, I have left out Q and the force.

    However, if you are looking for the ultimate sci-fi power, the answer is the Daleks from Doctor Who, whose overwhelming desire to kill and indestructible shell makes them more dangerous than the Borg. Also, they created the Reality bomb, which can disintegrate all of reality apart from themselves. Notes to stupid people on Daleks: they aren't affected by stairs, they can fly, and the sink plunger isn't a weapon, it's a hand, but they can suffocate with it. They are armed with an energy gun which electrocutes.

  4. Matt
    May 6, 2016 at 7:34 am

    While I am a huge Star Wars fan, I like Star Trek as well. I have to say this, Transporters, Holodeck, combat in hyperspace, all Star Trek. However, raw power and speed has Star Wars. In a one on one battle, Star Wars will win, because Star Trek is based on reality, while Star Wars is not. It is like comparing Bears to Dragons. But what I do not see anyone mentioning is Treks trump card.

    If they get Q to help, Star Wars will lose

  5. Brandon Bowers
    May 2, 2016 at 8:26 pm

    So I have a question? Why is it that a pro Star Trek fan wrote a supposedly "non biased" article depicting the two franchises?

    I mean obviously he is biased because I didn't see him mention that C3PO was more intelligent than data which is a known fact. Or what about how R2D2 could fly any cruiser by simply accessing into the ships navigation system.

    Star Trek: 0 Star Wars: 1

    Medical:

    I'm thinking he forgot about the bacta chamber that Luke was in during the Empire Strikes Back (which isn't surprising since he is biased) but I'm fairly certain that Star Wars and Star Trek medically balance eachother... I mean when was the last time a Star Trek character burned in lava for hours and still survived?

    Star Trek: 1 Star Wars: 2

    Hyperdrive:

    He actually was able to give a non-biased argument on here for once. I agree that this would result in a tie. My only concern is that he got his facts wrong on this. It has been reported that Star Wars' star destroyers can reach speeds up to 1,000,000 times the speed of light.

    http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Propulsion/Propulsion2.html

    Star Trek: 2 Star Wars: 3

    Weapons:

    Star Wars wins because the author, harry Guinness, broke one of the ground rules for this article. He first took an article talking about a Star Wars advantage and claimed it to be false. Then he went to the same article to show a reason Star Trek has "better" weapons. Also the rules state that if it has been shown through film and tv then it will get the favor over the written argument. That means that his whole argument favoring Star Trek is irrelevant and discarded for a forfeit in this category.

    Star Trek: 2 Star Wars: 4

    SENSORS:

    Star Trek wins

    Star Trek: 3 Star Wars: 4

    SHIELDS:

    Star Trek wins

    Star Trek: 4 Star Wars: 4

    REPLICATORS:

    Star Wars wins (replicated one soldier and cloned him into millions)

    Star Trek: 4 Star Wars: 5

    TRANSPORTERS:

    Unfortunately because there is more evidence supporting that Star Wars has the better and greater number of transporters I have to give them the edge. If u count beaming people from Star Trek then you must be able to count every transport ship that Star Wars has. And even though beaming people is really cool, it is very unreliable and uncomparable to the Star Wars vehicles of transport.

    Star Trek: 4 Star Wars: 6

    FORCE?:

    If this is a battle of greater technology than the force would not count.
    However the light saber would because while many call it magic, scientists have discovered that the light saber is actually possible to create. So in ground combat the light saber has no flaw and few, if any, Star Trek ground weapons could stop it.

    Star Trek: 4 Star Wars: 7

    This is a more accurate comparison for the simple reason that I'm not as biased as the Author of this article. I suggest he tries to be like Spock and have no bias. If he can't do that then he needs to stop making articles based on controversial topics.

    • Standoff
      September 7, 2016 at 2:09 am

      On some points I agree for instance while some medical applications like a bacta tank is highly inefficient to a dermal regenerator they can be considered equal to a degree though on some things I have to disagree with for instance weapons.

      Weapons in Star Wars is shown to be highly inaccurate than Star Trek weapons regardless if the person who started this argument broke one of the rules surrounding it by taking written fact by someone else. if so we ignore that piece suggested and instead look at the other evidence that is provided by the movies and shows for instance Star Trek ships have aft and fore weapons meaning they can fire in any direction they wish while in Star Wars the ship has to be turned around if an attacker is behind them meaning they have no weapon systems they can use if an enemy gets behind them though this might hold true to most ships in Star Wars but not all. So that should instead be a point for Star trek

      Next we have replication while a considerable feat to clone that many you have to understand this important fact. Cloning takes time while flash cloning does exist in Star Wars it also exists in Star Trek and the reason why I think it falls short of Star Trek replication is due to the fact that cloning takes a bit more time than actual replication from a replicator that Star Trek has. Bar the Jem'hada who are soldiers that mature in three days once they are birthed the replication that you and me are talking about are very different and I am talking about near instantaneous replication which Star Trek has which can make weapons clothing to food which is similar to transportation whereas with transporters your converting matter into energy and then converting it back into matter in another location whereas the replicators in Star Trek convert energy into matter meaning that while Star Wars require manufacturers to make equipment etc all the federation have to do is go to a replicator and replicate what they need though that doesn't mean they can replicate everything but it gives them something over Star Wars what's a more impressive feat? Cloning? Or energy to matter conversion that can most likely replicate anything you want? This should be a point for Star Trek yet again.

      As for transportation that is entirely incorrect. Yes Star Wars does have an impressive amount of transportation ships to carry troops but you misunderstand the tactical advantage of transporters. Whereas troop transports can be shot down and in this case they would be due to the federation or any other power in the Star Trek universe being able to shoot accurately it would be like shooting fish in a barrel or swatting a fly to these powers regardless if they have a fighter escort it would change nothing. Transporters can convert matter into energy and back again but you see the real kicker is this in Star Trek shields absorb kinetic and energy weaponry meaning transportation cannot be made due to the fact that the energy converted from matter cannot bypass the shields due to the fact it can absorb the energy making it unsafe to transport while Star Wars only has deflector and Ray shields and only one can be active at a time with the most common form of shields on Star Wars ships being deflector shields meaning they would be vulnerable to energy attacks and because of that the federation could beam explosives over and you can imagine what happens. They can even bypass solid rock and metal not to mention it is a great tool to use to attack an enemy by beaming behind their flank or useful for taking strategic positions first . The applications of transporter technology if it Came to a fight would be extremely useful due to the fact that there is very little counter for energy weaponry.

      As for the force its telekinesis I will have to give a point for that but as for light sabers due to the fact that the federation have beam weapons as in they can fire a continues stream which might not be able to be blocked by a light saber and there a few ways it can end. One the federation weapon overloads the containment field surrounding the plasma blade causing the light saber to potentially short circuit or explode. Two due to the fact that a light sabers are plasma and blasters bolts have some contained is the reason why light sabers can deflect them while federation energy weaponry is made up of nadions particle energy that could potentially bypass the light saber due to the different make up of energy think about magnets two negatives repel one another as in they are the same as is the lightsabers and the plasma contained in the blaster bolt but due to the fact that nadions and plasma are different might mean that a lightsaber might not be capable of blocking it. The next case is, that the lightsaber can block it but I doubt that the person behind the blade would be able to block multiple beams of highly accurate energy if there is more than one person firing so yeah I am not sure the person behind the lightsaber can come out on top in this case but yeah while a fan of both series I just feel that Star Trek has the overall technical advantage.

    • Stormshadow
      September 7, 2016 at 2:22 am

      On some points I agree for instance while some medical applications like a bacta tank is highly inefficient to a dermal regenerator they can be considered equal to a degree though on some things I have to disagree with for instance weapons.

      Weapons in Star Wars is shown to be highly inaccurate than Star Trek weapons regardless if the person who started this argument broke one of the rules surrounding it by taking written fact by someone else. if so we ignore that piece suggested and instead look at the other evidence that is provided by the movies and shows for instance Star Trek ships have aft and fore weapons meaning they can fire in any direction they wish while in Star Wars the ship has to be turned around if an attacker is behind them meaning they have no weapon systems they can use if an enemy gets behind them though this might hold true to most ships in Star Wars but not all. So that should instead be a point for Star trek

      Next we have replication while a considerable feat to clone that many you have to understand this important fact. Cloning takes time while flash cloning does exist in Star Wars it also exists in Star Trek and the reason why I think it falls short of Star Trek replication is due to the fact that cloning takes a bit more time than actual replication from a replicator that Star Trek has. Bar the Jem'hada who are soldiers that mature in three days once they are birthed the replication that you and me are talking about are very different and I am talking about near instantaneous replication which Star Trek has which can make weapons clothing to food which is similar to transportation whereas with transporters your converting matter into energy and then converting it back into matter in another location whereas the replicators in Star Trek convert energy into matter meaning that while Star Wars require manufacturers to make equipment etc all the federation have to do is go to a replicator and replicate what they need though that doesn't mean they can replicate everything but it gives them something over Star Wars what's a more impressive feat? Cloning? Or energy to matter conversion that can most likely replicate anything you want? This should be a point for Star Trek yet again.

      As for transportation that is entirely incorrect. Yes Star Wars does have an impressive amount of transportation ships to carry troops but you misunderstand the tactical advantage of transporters. Whereas troop transports can be shot down and in this case they would be due to the federation or any other power in the Star Trek universe being able to shoot accurately it would be like shooting fish in a barrel or swatting a fly to these powers regardless if they have a fighter escort it would change nothing. Transporters can convert matter into energy and back again but you see the real kicker is this in Star Trek shields absorb kinetic and energy weaponry meaning transportation cannot be made due to the fact that the energy converted from matter cannot bypass the shields due to the fact it can absorb the energy making it unsafe to transport while Star Wars only has deflector and Ray shields and only one can be active at a time with the most common form of shields on Star Wars ships being deflector shields meaning they would be vulnerable to energy attacks and because of that the federation could beam explosives over and you can imagine what happens. They can even bypass solid rock and metal not to mention it is a great tool to use to attack an enemy by beaming behind their flank or useful for taking strategic positions first . The applications of transporter technology if it Came to a fight would be extremely useful due to the fact that there is very little counter for energy weaponry in Star Wars.

      As for the force its telekinesis I will have to give a point for that but as for light sabers due to the fact that the federation have beam weapons as in they can fire a continues stream which might not be able to be blocked by a light saber and there a few ways it can end. One the federation weapon overloads the containment field surrounding the plasma blade causing the light saber to potentially short circuit or explode. Two due to the fact that a light sabers are plasma and blasters bolts have some contained is the reason why light sabers can deflect them while federation energy weaponry is made up of nadions particle energy that could potentially bypass the light saber due to the different make up of energy think about magnets two negatives repel one another as in they are the same as is the lightsabers and the plasma contained in the blaster bolt but due to the fact that nadions and plasma are different might mean that a lightsaber might not be capable of blocking it. The next case is, that the lightsaber can block it but I doubt that the person behind the blade would be able to block multiple beams of highly accurate energy if there is more than one person firing so yeah I am not sure the person behind the lightsaber can come out on top in this case but yeah while a fan of both series I just feel that Star Trek has the overall technical advantage.

    • James
      September 13, 2016 at 11:38 pm

      Wow, you are quite a bit off I am afraid. But you are entitled to your opinion. Star Trek wins in virtually ALL categories. Speed is one exception. But the funniest thing is that many people seem to forget that when comparing Star Trek people often forget there are more species than just Star Fleet. Many races in Star Trek have speed greater than the Federation. Including Slip Stream, Warp, Enhanced Warp, Trans Warp, Trans Warp Hubs (which give nearly instantaneous transportation at short range and across the entire galaxy in less than 30 minutes), and various other types as well. Some ships have regenerative hulls, shields, systems that actually clean the interior of the ship with no effort needed or pesky druids getting in the way. Data is a great deal more intelligent than C-3PO when you consider all aspects of intellect. Both have insane computational capabilities but Data goes beyond that in many ways. And let's not forget his physical capabilities. No wookie is pulling his arms off, that's for sure. He would be among the strongest compared to any creature in Star Wars. Light Sabers are great and would give a big advantage in the ground game. However, there are so few lightsabers used that the difference in any ground battle is minimal. In addition to that, lightsabers are not foolproof. They are only capable of deflecting single beam directional weapons. Any weapon that fires in a Wave, Force, pulse,or area effect which Starfleet weapons are capable of doing will bypass the effects of a lightsaber. The information about the lightsabers weakness to these type of weapons is actually described in Star Wars. Plus let's not forget, unlike Starwars that fires individual bolts to be deflected Star Fleet technology is continuous beams meaning that he will have to lock their saber to deflect that one beam continuously While others can still fire at them. Since the rules of this comparison where to compare things that we can see and verify vs. Implied or read Star Wars characters have terrible aim. But of course to say the same thing for Star Trek, red shirt nobody's often die to add to the danger of a scene. That to me is kind of a wash. Though armor can be worn it offers little to no protection against such weapons.
      In truth, there simply really is NO COMPARISON. Star Wars tech simply can not compare. Not even a little. I love both so very much. I love all Sci-fy very much. And Star Wars is no exception. I enjoy each for what they bring to the world of imagination.

  6. Luminatrix
    April 12, 2016 at 6:39 pm

    Slight high-jack here :P

    Day 1 – War Theatre
    “You wanted to see me, General?” Rodney inquired.

    “Yes, you know the Attero device intended to stop the Wraith from using their hyperdrives through-out the entire galaxy?” said the General.

    “Yes…yes the Lantern device that distrupts wraith hyperdrive technology…what about it?” Rodney replies, nodding.

    “Good, I want you to re-configure the Attero Device to distrupt Star wars (Imperial ships) from entering Hyperspace. That should permanently strand every imperial ship all through-out the entire galaxy.” He ordered.

    “Uh sure…that will take me a day. Maybe even less if someone is threatening me with citrus,” Rodney answers, shivering in reminiscence.

    “Perhaps I should order the chefs in the mess hall to make citrus salad?” The general replies dryly.

    “Uh no…that’s fine, the Attero Device will be ready within the hour!”

    Day 2 – War Theatre
    “The Attero Device is ready, General!” Rodney mumbles out.

    “Good, before we activate it, I want you to build the Arcturus power generator in a remote area of the Star Wars galaxy. Cloak the facility if you have to for maximum security.” The General ordered firmly.

    “But the Arcturus Project didn’t pan out. If we activate it, the power generator will overload due to exotic particles being released and destroying the very fabric of reality!” Rodney responds, horrified.

    “That is the point. The entire Star Wars galaxy will be destroyed from the overload. Make no mistake McKay, we are at war. Sure we can win with our fancy tech but the imperial fleet outnumbers us which makes the outcome of this war uncertain which is not acceptable.” The General replied.

    “We can use Atlantis to destroy an entire imperial fleet? We can build replicators and unleash them on their galaxy? What about calling in the Ascended Ancients to cash in that favor and destroy them? Our Daedalus-class ships alone are vastly superior in terms of shields, weapons and hyperspace technology compared to theirs!” Rodney implored, looking pale.

    “Sure we can throw all that and probably destroy the Imperials which would take time, but why go to all the trouble when we can go with my awesome plan?” The General droned.

    “Nooooo, please don’t make me blow up a Galaxy! It was bad enough when I blew up an entire solar system…people wouldn’t let me hear the end of it even after 6 months!” Rodney protested loudly.

    “Mmmm I have a craving for Citrus marinated chicken,” The general said, smacking his lips.

    “I’ll have the Arcturus device built within the hour using Asgaard matter constructors!” Rodney replied hastily.

    “Excellent, as soon as the Arcturus device is activated and on the verge of an overload, I want you to immediately activate the Attero Device afterwards which will disable every Imperial ship Hyperdrive engine in the galaxy…thus stopping them from escaping,” The general drawled.

    “Oh my, that is absolutely brilliant,” Rodney breathed in wonderment. He muttered excitedly, repeating the plan over.

    “The Arcturus device will release exotic particles into the Star Wars galaxy which will eventually destroy the very fabric of reality in that universe. The Attero device will stop their ships from attempting to enter hyperspace and tracing the location of the Arcturus device or attempting to try destroying it before their universe gets destroyed.”

    “Yes, well why waste resources when the great Rodney Mckay can destroy an entire SW universe by his lonesome,” John Sheppard replied with amusement.

    “Well I aim to – oh ha ha very funny John. Just another day in at the office and my genius gets underappreciated.” Rodney sulks.

    “Oh and Rodney, get SG-1 to use to the Time Jumper (puddle jumper with time machine) to track down Doctor Who and fire a couple drones at his silly and rather primitive phone booth,” Shepard ordered as an afterthought.

    “Ok sure…uh what about the Star Trek universe?” Rodney asks.

    “Oh them? Not even worth thinking about! Such a technologically backwards people wouldn’t even be considered a threat,” Came Sheppard’s flippant reply.

    Three days later, the Star Wars universe is destroyed in an epic display. The death toll on the Star wars universe was complete, no survivors remained. Not a single life was lost in the Stargate universe, although Rodney McKay nearly died from an allergic reaction to the citrus he accidently digested. General John Sheppard was promoted for single-handedly starting and ending a war in five days that hardly costed any resources or money expenditures. Rodney McKay was once again, denied a Nobel Prize for his part and rants about his unappreciated talents as he sits in the basement of Area 51.

    Doctor Who’s phone booth was destroyed by a dozen drones as the time traveler attempted to escape. Neither the time traveler nor his silly phone booth would ever darken the doorsteps of sci-fi genre again…. Nor the cries of silly fanboy rants could be heard with their beloved worshipfulness destroyed in a flippant manner.

    In the void of space, a lone replicator survives and latches onto a Borg Cube, only to begin replicating using the materials onboard the ship. The replicator had managed to avoid the wave sent out by the Dakara ancient superweapon, only to be swept away in an unstable vortex that transported it to the Star Trek universe. Within three months, the replicators had amassed a number in the trillions and assimilated the entire Borg collective. Within six months, most of the galaxy including the Alpha Quadrant, have been completely destroyed by the replicators. Within nine months, not a single survivor remained in the Milky way.

  7. Sarah Goodwich
    March 5, 2016 at 6:13 am

    Regarding engines:
    Star Wars might be faster on average, but only for travel-- not for combat. Unlike hyperdrives, warp-driven ships can also FIGHT at warp, i.e. with phasers and torpedoes; meanwhile Star Wars ships have to fight on old-fashioned rocket-power, while their sensors are expressly stated that they cannot track ships at lightspeed.
    And we saw in "The Force Awakens" that Star Wars shields only keep out things that movie at lightspeed or slower, so phasers and photon torpedoes would go right through.

    So since the entire crux of Star Wars is combat, then their engines would only be good for running away-- but it would only take ONE really fast ship to catch them.

    • Drew
      September 27, 2016 at 5:30 am

      There would be no "Catching up." In star trek, Voyager would have taken 75 years to get across the Galaxy. In a "Galactic Empire", with literally "galactic" in its name, things would never get done with that kind of speed. In fact, Obi-Wan Kenobi made a Journey from Couruscant, a Core World, to Kamino, a planet in a satillite Galaxy beyond the Outer Rim, in a one man starfighter with no bathroom, no legroom, and only an astromech (Gunsight on wheels) for company. this trip CANNOT have taken more than a day. So, if the SW Galaxy is 120,000 lightyears or 38,000 parsecs across, as most sources say, and the rishi maze is about 30,000 Lightyears outside the rim, obi-wan made a journey of 90,000 lightyears in a day. If it took an entire day, obi wan traveled at almost one and a half lightyears per second, which is literally 47,304,000 times the speed of light. Those numbers make the Borg look slow. That is literally 2000 times faster than this article claims the faster federation ships go. By the time the enterprise went to warp, the star destroyer would already be parsecs away. So, even if things went unfixably wrong for Star Wars, they could just run away.

  8. Sarah Goodwich
    March 5, 2016 at 6:01 am

    Star Trek: machines that can take a person apart, molecule by molecule, and re-assemble them a great distance. Can travel through time, blow up stars with small rockets, and create perfect virtual reality. Fuel is so powerful that a mere spoonful of it can rip away half of Earth's atmosphere. Can bend gravity and use advanced quantum-computing.

    Star Wars: Technology is so lame they still use magic; fusion-power.

    It's pretty clear who's more advanced.

    • Brandon Bowers
      May 2, 2016 at 7:40 pm

      Your completely right except the part where you explain how anything in the Star Trek universe is plausible? I didn't see your degree in physics but there is more reality in the Star Wars tech than there is in the Star Trek tech so sorry Hun but Star Wars wins.

      • Mglosk
        May 31, 2016 at 2:23 am

        BTW the lightsaber is not scientifically possible. That hasn't been proven. Right there your biased opinion is wrong from the get go. You compared Transporters on a Federation ship with Space ships that can transport things. Ridiculous. The STWU has the force, STU has Q, the Organians, and plenty of others with powers that make the force laughable. Weapons, I'd love to see what a GENESIS DEVICE would have done to your precious Death Star. hahahahaha. You say that they can clone an army in the SWU, so has the STU, the federation doesn't do it because it's against their moral code. It could easily be done with Transporters, and has been done with Transporters in two episodes that I can think of off the top of my head. And then there is Time Travel.

  9. Christian Harvey
    January 17, 2016 at 11:49 pm

    FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCKKKKKK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  10. The American Brit
    January 10, 2016 at 8:13 pm

    Interestingly, I don't think I've ever seen any article match up all of Star Wars canon vs. all of Star Trek canon. Almost every debate ends up being Federation Vs. Empire. While there is a debate raging in the comments right now as to the legitimacy of this article, I can say without a doubt that all of the Star Trek TNG-era galaxy wins out pretty quickly over Star Wars. All of the Borg, 8472, Federation, Klingon, Romulan, Cardassian, Dominion, and various Delta-Quadrant fleets assembled would kick Star Wars's ass. But let's give SW a better chance. If we broaden the horizons to encompass all of Star Wars's history and EU, they'll bring in some pretty badass and devastating superweapons and armies of Jedi and Sith. Fair enough, they're starting to... oh, look, the Alternate-Universe Vulcans just opened up a few new Black Holes in some interesting places. Bye-bye.

    There's also the often-untouched issue of research and adaptability. In pretty much all of Star Wars, the only way any side has ever dealt with a new threat is to blow it up, losing many lives in the process. And most of the time, it's only destroyed due to some fatal flaw in its construction. In Star Trek, on the other hand, the entire might of the Federation, Romulan, and Vulcan science centers would be able to find the solution to almost any new problem that presented to them. And don't even think about bringing up the Borg when it comes to adaptability. The Borg have shown the ability to adapt to damn near anything thrown at them, there's no particular reason to believe that after a few defeats at its hands, they couldn't also adapt to Death Star level weaponry.

    • Tony Jiang
      January 10, 2016 at 11:59 pm

      there are sith lords who caused supernovas, and also magcal force gods

      • Brandon Bowers
        May 2, 2016 at 7:43 pm

        Not magic... The force is based of of an old Buddhist belief that all life in the universe is connected through a force that binds everything together. Star Wars isn't a religion but it has more truth in it than Star Trek.

      • Mglosk
        May 31, 2016 at 2:25 am

        Star Trek has the Greek Gods, the Organians, Q, M, and various others that are on power levels that make the force look like a joke.

    • Grand
      January 15, 2016 at 7:11 pm

      If the Borg adapt the Star Wars waepons, there are no dangerous for the Borg :)

  11. jerrymacgp
    December 27, 2015 at 4:10 pm

    One word: Transporter. Not only could any Federation starship, Klingon warship, Romukan war bird or Borg cube simple beam timed explosive devices (e.g. a photon torpedo) into the middle of any SW vessel, they could also just beam their weapons & deflector generators out into space, disarming the SW vessel at a stroke.

    • grodoudou2
      December 29, 2015 at 10:10 pm

      transporters are considered extremely unreliable and dangerous and can be negated easily with sheilds

      • The American Brit
        January 10, 2016 at 8:03 pm

        Transporter technology hasn't been considered unreliable since the era of Star Trek: Enterprise. In terms of accidents per year, in the Star Trek universe, it seems that transporter technology is at least an order of magnitude safer than modern air travel. As for shields, Star Wars's shield technology is arcane, unexplained, and at times practically non-existent to say the least. Whatever it is, I highly doubt it could block a transporter beam travelling through subspace.

        • Tony Jiang
          January 11, 2016 at 12:02 am

          solid dense objects and telekinteics distrupt teleporting

    • James926
      January 26, 2016 at 5:37 am

      Agreed, the transporter device is the game changer. If any holes are created in an enemy's ship the transporter can beam the crew or parts of there of into space. The other main part of ship to ship combat is weapon ranges and the ability to have tracked focused energy beam vs a single blast of an energy weapon. If the Federation ships have a superior weapons range and the ability to aim and maintain a focused fire, the fight is essentially over vs a small x-wing or tie fighter type craft. The capital ships are another matter. Either way this is a fun debate in a fantasy world. I have watched all that the star trek franchise has produced as well the star wars movies. I appreciate both, but I will always say star trek by far exceeds star wars in quality acting, story lines and sheer volume of product.

  12. Volkmar
    December 23, 2015 at 8:02 am

    The Force stands no chance against Star Trek's Q.

    • grodoudou2
      December 29, 2015 at 10:08 pm

      there are also all powerful god beings in sws too

  13. ArkTemple
    December 23, 2015 at 5:09 am

    I personally like Star Wars better but I agree with everything you say Star Trek has way better technology "for the most part there are obscure races and tech where Star Wars is superior" sabers are tech but if you don't have the force you can't do as much with them, what confused me what the weapons not the space craft but ground weapons from what Iv seen of trek the weapons were odd and seemed inefficient can some one tell me more about trek weapons?

  14. TREK IS BETTER
    December 1, 2015 at 9:01 am

    STAR TREK WIN A BATTLE. IF SPECIES 8472 WITH 132 BIO SHIPS, THE BORG WITH 300 BORG CUBES AND THE FEDERATION SHIPS FROM THE 29' CENTAURY DESTROY EASY THE STAR WARS EMPIRE!

  15. What do you think?
    November 27, 2015 at 5:56 pm

    Star Trek will win ab space battle. With 1 Million Jem Har'da ships and 300 Borg Cubes Star Wars loos a battle. Star Wars weapons are not so powerfull as Star Trek weapons, one shoot from a Borg Ship and the Star Wars ship is unable to fight. The Borg adapt the Star Wars lasers and destroy all Ships from Star Wars.

  16. Brian Meade
    June 28, 2015 at 8:11 pm

    Star Wars still wins. They explain why at the very start of Episode 3: "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away"

    If Star Wars was already that advanced a long time ago, several galaxies away, by the time they arrive to meet Star Trek, how much more advanced do you think they'd be???!?!

    • ArkTemple
      December 23, 2015 at 5:11 am

      I was going to make a point about that in relative time scale Star Wars is more advanced and the force is a huge power advantage depending on the individual, but if they faced off right now with the tech known trek is more advanced unfortunatly

  17. Chad Goodwin
    June 25, 2015 at 4:37 am

    Wow, this has got to be the most biased analization of the 2 since st-v-sw.net
    Medical - SW you can revive a person from death using bacta and you give ST the point?
    Engines - SW goes faster and further. Literally traveling halfway across the galaxy in hours. ST takes years.
    Weapons - SW has shown they can destroy planets. ST stated they would use an entire complement of torpedos to destroy a meteor.
    Shields - SW takes a lot of volley back and forth to destroy each other's ships, stated in Empire the Star Destroyers would take to long to take down the shields of the planet. ST - one hit 30% of the shields gone, plus if you have the right phasing,their shields are worthless.

    • Nathaniel Wood
      June 28, 2015 at 6:43 am

      you are right but at the same time partialy wrong
      in star wars Bacta can heal critical injuries but the person has never been dead however in the original series spock loses his BRAIN and then the just pop it back in theve also been able to bring back Neelix after he's been brain dead for 18 hours. star wars has never been able do that, you may claim General Grevious was in worse condition but he was "salveged" from his criticaly injured condition after being in a crash
      Engines true star wars beats common engines but they have developed engines so poweerful that they could be everywhere in the the universe at once but due to this being to risky only alien ships have ever had engines to beat the empire
      Weapons the range of star trek weapons mean that they could distroy star wars ships before they ccould get into weapons range and the spread of photon torpedos may bet true at some point or another but in Enterprise the Enterprise earths first warp 5 ship using the first phase cannons they installed themselves in flight managed to oblitorate part of a large asteroid and 5 romulan ships can destroy the surface of a planet easily only needing an hour or to to destroy it completely and 9 small species 8472 ships can destroy a planet with much more power than the empires super weaon and im not even going to meantion the planet killer
      sheilds: star trek has stated that lazers cant damage sheilds and only sheilds that have been developed to stop transporters can stop them hence the constant stowaways with Enterprises early sheilds being breached by tranbsporters and star wars has terrible sensors so even if they did manage to have weapons with the same frequency as star treks sheilds one button tap could put an end to that and if star trek couldnt scan their sheild frequency and set their phasers and photon torpedos to shoot through it they could just set their weapons to remodulate and when their weapons went through just keep it at that frequency.
      so starfleet would beable to beam one photon torpedoonto the death star from outside its weapons range and completely oblitorate it easily.
      and in the hand to hand "lightsabers can block energy blasts" might be your argument but can they defeat a weapon that can shoot everything infront of it? no

      • Chad Goodwin
        June 28, 2015 at 12:05 pm

        Yet Grievous was dead and brought back - regardless of "salvage" or not.

        Warp 10, lol. You refer to the theoretical (and later revised) warp 10 being everywhere at once. But this was proved wrong when they revised and made warp 11, warp 13, and transwarp. So your point is invalid and non-cannon. For every ship we see on ST their engines are slower than SW.

        In regards to range, "Sacrifice of Angels" and "What you leave behind" demonstrate that the range is not what ST fanatics wish it was. Both sides line up a wall of ships and instead of doing the tactical thing of focusing fire, they all shoot the closest ship. Ever wonder why? Its because thats the one in range.

        LoL you didnt even quote the laser thing right. Besides we are not dealing with just lasers in SW. any more than ST is just dealing with photons.

        Teleporters is the default argument for ST. yet there are so many things that interrupt it... like density. They could not teleport thru granite. Yet Durasteel is more dense (and SW likes thick hulls). So your teleport a photon torpedo onto their deck would not work.

        • Nathaniel Wood
          June 30, 2015 at 11:41 pm

          Warp 10 and being everywhere at once is clearly shown in Star Trek Voyagers episode "Threshold" top Paris breaches warp 10 twice and is Everywhere at once and yes Star Wars is faster with the only thing being similar is a Borg transwarp conduit
          In regards to that In the "Sacrifice of angels" they target the closest Cardassian ships hoping to provoke them into opening a line anywhere and when they do eventually push through they attack the ships surrounding them which would be the closest one and in "What you leave behind" it isn't just a straight lined up firefight the ships fly around between ships.
          Yes it's not just lasers Star Wars also has Turbolasers, microwave lasers, guided missiles, proton torpedoes, concussion torpedoes, proton bombs and nuclear bombs Star Trek has Phasers (cannon, emitter and arrays) Photon, Quantum, spacial and Transphasic Torpedoes which can also be reconfigured to deliver a different payload for example a Trilithium Resin Torpedo. Quantum, Photon and Tractor beam mines and the main deflector dish can be reconfigured to shoot different beam types to do anything from disabling shields to stabilising a nebula and this website details total weapons range
          http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSW-WeaponRange.html
          And looking back at your comment I agree and we're not just working with lasers so the shields would probably react as they normally do.

        • Eric Gartner
          July 7, 2015 at 2:30 am

          You left out Disruptors which break molecular bonds [lol durasteel], Tetryon, Kregar Wave, Trilithium devices [Kills a star], Thalaron, Time Travel, Gateway technology [Makes hyperdrive like an old man crossing the street], and a lot more in CANON.

          Warsies keep throwing in their non canon novel crap. A Lucas said, if it's not on screen it didn't happen. Look up the quote on Wiki. And the whole "Long time ago" thing is subjective. Remember, ST has the Iconians which had the above gateway tech hundreds of thousands of years prior.

          Don't get me wrong, I like Star Wars (3, 4, and 5) but I watch them when I want to see some mindless nonsensical action film.

        • Mglosk
          May 31, 2016 at 2:30 am

          You are mixing up old warp tech with new warp tech. In the old days Warp 15 was around current warp 9 speeds. Please keep up.

      • Trekker
        December 5, 2015 at 9:44 am

        Star Trek is better. The Borg adapt the Star Wars weapon and destroy the Star Wars universe (or all we be assimilatet).

    • Picard Alpha
      July 18, 2015 at 11:37 am

      You sure don't mean since StarDestroyer.Net?

      1) I don't recall anyone being revived from literal death by using bacta.
      2) Depends. In both cases it seems to depend on how well charted areas of space are. Both can go very fast in well-charted area of space yet slow down to crawl in uncharted areas.
      3) They had to vaporize it to prevent evidence from falling into Romulan hands, Which would use lot more energy than simply fragmenting it, and asteroid itself was far, far larger than the Enterprise.
      4) That is only indicative of relative power of weapons and shields within each franchise, not of relative power between franchises.

      • Nathaniel Wood
        August 10, 2015 at 6:48 am

        The weapons range of the ships give Star Trek the advantage over star wars the Nebula class SCIENCE SHIP has a weapons range of 600000km whereas Star Wars's Star Destroyer has to be within line of sight and a range of about 1000km the main ship of the Empire could be beaten by a ship designed for science

        • grodoudou2
          December 29, 2015 at 10:20 pm

          still doesn't mean destryoers can engage at long range, besides, many times in star trek they fight close as 5 kms of each other if not more

  18. Kevin
    April 30, 2015 at 4:44 pm

    The "long time ago" is irrelevant since ST centers on Earth, and ST is far away. Due to time dilation, it could be at the same time.
    SW: Droids were built for Specialized utilitarian purposes (IE translators, mechanics, soldiers etc)
    ST Data was built to be able to grow and develop, like a human.

    • Nathaniel Wood
      August 24, 2015 at 5:03 am

      Yes data was built for that but let's go for star treks robot equivelent of an astromech the humble Exocomp a flying tool replicating robot who gain artificial intelligence on its own a simple remote controlled robot gained ai, droids are designed to be independent and have basic intelligence so there only becoming more independant, st also has holograms, the EMH had ai and even it's diagnostic program did

    • Phillip
      November 17, 2015 at 7:06 pm

      Um that's not really how time dilation works. Also, time dilation is a product of relativity, and any ship that goes faster than the speed of light has already broken that system. If FTL were subject to time dilation, any one of the Enterprises would have ended up thousands and probably even millions of years into the future.

  19. Non Trekkie
    April 14, 2015 at 11:25 pm

    As previously said, apples vs. oranges, a long time ago vs. the future.

    I think that Star Wars thematic elements were more about the character's resourcefulness, doing more with less, and in the case of The Force, with absolutely nothing, whereas the Trek thematic elements were more about what incredible things people could do with pinnacle-level technology. SW had less advanced tech so that the feats the characters were able to accomplish were that much more astonishing. The difference is embodied in the Millenium Falcon - it's a patchwork of different pieces thrown together by many different owners culminating in its reputation under Han Solo as one of the most feared ships in the galaxy and lasts over 100 years (past the second galactic civil war.) SW (in the tech sense, which is also often mirrored in character development,) tends to start broke, with stock parts and scrounged materials and continues to build and modify as needs arise on an individual basis until mastery is reached. Trekkers get the top-of-the-line model right out of the gate, blow it up, then get the new improved model. I'd rather have Trek's tech, but SW characters as crew, because, when it comes right down to it, tech is only as useful as the people using it.

    And, oh yeah, R2-D2 is a HELL of a lot more than a gunsight on wheels.

    OK trekkies, I'm done, you can eviscerate me now, but I've said my piece so I won't be reading any of it.

    • neuronalapoptosis
      January 13, 2016 at 3:58 am

      I like a lot of what you have to say. R2-D2 is only a gunsight though unless you get into his "character." And that's where cannon conflicts with tech. The character of R2 get's given emotions and ingenuity. Honestly if the character of R2 was real, it would have built it's self a voice box and gone off and did it's own thing. So it's a conflicting character that's somehow both more and less then it actually is. It has something that wasn't written into the lore. It has more tech then they tell us it has. So is it as advanced as Data, or is it a gunsight? For arguments sake it's just a gunsight, but the character was written to be more.

      That's where a lot of the discrepency is at. Things in SW was intentionally ambiguous, as you say. ST has ridged constructs. The lore of ST is more defined.

  20. ileon9
    April 14, 2015 at 1:57 pm

    but what if its the same universe Star Wars is long ago and Star Trek is in the future what if after the Star Wars series ended hundreds of thousands of years passed and then the Star Trek series began what if use of the force as commonplace is gone but instead a select few with the force are part of some kind of magic cult where they hone there skills in a galaxy far far away from where the crew is so you never see them also on the subject of robots yes the robots had great AI in Star Wars but your forgetting one crucial question would you rather have a robot placed in a battlefield scenario that is stupid and bickers with there comrades like a four year old or a much smarter and more useful robot that can work together with others but doesn't have as good ability to interact with humans also if you look at the actual aesthetics of the tech in Star Trek vs Star Wars Star Trek is more streamlined and all in all pretty whereas in Star Wars the tech is more bulky compare a TV from 3 or 4 years ago to now what do you see now tech is more streamlined flat screens Star Trek might win for now but who knows what the Future will bring...

    Star Wars .5, Star Trek .5, Star Universe 1

    ps sorry for any spelling mistakes i am working on it also all my Star Trek knowledge is based on later series and i know little of Star Wars so sorry if there is bad info

  21. ted
    April 14, 2015 at 1:17 pm

    Star Trek..... Shields are down within 10 seconds of the beginning of every battle.

    Star Wars ... Need to get inches away from a 3 meter(?) exhaust port to hit it with advanced technology. (Death Star)

    Based on those views, Mars Attack , Wins. The best part was killing all the politicians first.

  22. Steven
    April 14, 2015 at 8:48 am

    As Harry said at the beginning, "When taken alongside the Force, it’s easy to see why some fans consider Star Wars to be an epic space fantasy rather than a science fiction tale." I like them both, and for those different reasons!
    Even the creators acknowledge that intent. One was "Action/Adventure" and the other was a mechanism to really explore ideas, perceptions, and possibilities (even if it got side-tracked now and then). I have read the "Tech Manuals" for both, and again, there is a much more intentional and concerted effort to base Star Trek on plausible science, whereas Star Wars really just tries to justify with techno-babble whatever they want to dish out.

  23. billyway2kewl
    April 12, 2015 at 2:28 pm

    Oswaldo "The Doomsday Machine " destroyed more solar systems and was a lot harder to destroy than the Death Star .

    The Enterprise enters system L-370 and finds that all seven planets in the system have been destroyed, smashed to rubble. Proceeding to system L-374, they find the same thing: debris where there were once healthy planets the previous year.

    Kirk asks Spock if the 97 megaton fusion explosion that would result from an overload of the impulse engines on the Constellation would be enough the destroy the planet killer. Spock reminds Kirk of the device's neutronium hull, which no known force can penetrate. Forcing kirk to send the Constellation down its throat, finally not completely destroying it just ceasing is functionality.

  24. Oswaldo
    April 12, 2015 at 3:17 am

    As far as weapons go, there's nothing in the Star Trek universe that comes even close to a planet-killer such as the Death Star.

    • Anonymous
      April 12, 2015 at 4:52 pm

      Dyson sphere - Nuffield said!

    • Khai
      April 12, 2015 at 6:07 pm

      Star Trek II
      the Genesis Device.

      Star Trek (reboot)
      Red Matter.

      erm.. they can create planets from a nebula and a black hole.

      one Genesis Device would recreate the Death Star into a (short lived) Planet...

    • Jaime
      April 12, 2015 at 10:11 pm

      Species 8472. Eight of their bioships can destroy a planet

  25. B Nice
    April 12, 2015 at 12:01 am

    A minor quibble with the robot section. Star Trek had 1 person create 2 androids that no-one in the Star Trek universe was able to duplicate or equal. Data used found extra parts to build a female one. The only other AI in that universe appears to be the ship computers.

    Meanwhile in Star Wars, robots are so common that a child, granted a gifted one, can build one. Whole armies of robots are produced. In fact robots are the commanders of whole armies.

    • Blueluck
      April 13, 2015 at 11:22 pm

      That's exactly the point I wanted to make.

      Star Trek: Intelligent robots of slightly greater than human physical and mental capability is right at the edge of their technological capability. There's one person who managed to make prototypes, inconsistently, which never did quite figure out human society or learn emotion.

      Star Wars: Intelligent robots of physical and mental capabilities far greater than humans are ubiquitous. Yes, the individual capabilities of each robot vary, but would you really want your toaster to be equipped for combat or your alarm clock to speak 6 million languages? Also, they integrate fully into society and have emotions.

      Star Trek 0, Star Wars 1

      • Dea Caelo
        June 19, 2015 at 8:46 pm

        You're forgetting Holograms like Moriarty and the EMH series. Star Trek can accidentally create sapient life with a misspoken computer command. The reasons why these machines aren't used more widely is A) given the capacity to learn, they tend to go haywire/rebel unless they're very near human baseline. This is a thing in SW universe too, which is why part of droid maintenance is to wipe the memory/mind periodically. ST had a maintenance drone they had to destroy because of this. B) for any task that doesn't need critical thinking, you can do it just as easily with a transporter/replicator program in the main computer. and C) the few instances of accidental holographic sapience are still working their way through the courts to reclassify them as citizens and not property.

        for non-holographic androids there are many in the universe, most of which are responsible for the various ancient ruins across the galaxy. Their efficiency when they turn on their masters s ironically why they have such a comparatively small population. One of the semi-major races, the Breen, is suspected of being an android race that killed their creators and then just continued.

        Star Ward droids are more mature, widespread, and integrated into society...as an amnesiac slave race. However, their performance severely lacks. Heroic droids, like R2D2, occur because their owners did not properly wipe them regularly and are rather rare. In contrast, even the lowly EMH MK II grew beyond his programming and helped retake a ship within hours of his activation.

      • Coemgein
        January 5, 2016 at 7:21 pm

        There are far more androids in the Trek universe than just the ones you mentioned. First off, there were 5 total in the Soong line: Data, Lore, B4, Juliana Tainer, and Data's short-lived creation Lal. In the Original Series, Harcourt Fenton Mudd had many androids, and Spock even assissted in the building of one. And in Voyager, the Pralor and Cravic of the Delta Quadrant created (and were destroyed by) their own Automated Personnel Units. There are a number of other examples, but that gets the point across.

        As Dea mentioned, distrust of androids was a large reason they didn't become more prevalent, a very common theme in sci-fi (see Asimov, Isaac). This could also be seen in Star Wars, with the frequent "we don't serve droids in here!" in bars.

        I'm also not 100% convinced droids in SW were all that superior to humans. Granted, R2 could open a door quickly (among other things), and 3PO could... well, he excelled at being really annoying. As fighters, though, the B2 droids and droidekas were pretty dang awesome.

        Overall, I much prefer Trek's approach to androids, but I could see plenty of room for both device types in the same universe.

  26. Phids
    April 11, 2015 at 5:36 pm

    Seems to me we're comparing apples to oranges. Take, for example their military engagements. Star Wars makes use of mass amounts of infantry units, such as droids or clones, each carrying something akin to a rifle, and duking it out on open battlefield. Does this not seem like the most unlikely battle scenario given the types of technology the sides possess? But flying lasers on teh ground look so cool to those of us watching. One other side, we have an absence of military engagement in Star Trek apart from space battle or intra-ship incursions. I suppose this makes much more sense given the technology. Whoever has control over the skies above a planet can easily bombard that planet, barring any type of massive shield.

    • Michael Dowling
      April 14, 2015 at 2:57 am

      From what I've read,people are strongly for or against one or the other of these two.I love Star Trek because it deals with the important issues humanity faces in a sci-fi context.

    • Harry
      May 7, 2015 at 9:30 am

      In Star Trek there are real ground battles during stuff like the Dominion Wars. They're just not the focus of the series.

    • Michael Dowling
      May 7, 2015 at 9:04 pm

      Elaborate space operas are not serious sci-fi in my book.

  27. Michael Dowling
    April 11, 2015 at 3:05 pm

    I detest Star Wars with a passion.It reminds me of an elaborate space opera/video shoot 'em up arcade game. Needless to say,I am a devoted Trekkie!

    • random observer
      April 14, 2015 at 2:40 am

      I like them both actually. You are correct about Star Wars being a shoot-em-up though. Trek does tend to get a little high-handed and preachy at times though.

    • Harry
      May 7, 2015 at 9:29 am

      The elaborate space opera bit is what everyone loves!

  28. lordmogul
    April 11, 2015 at 5:12 am

    In Both Universes exists more than just the Federation and The Repuublic/the Empire.
    What about all the other things. Especially Star Trek has more than just what is focused on (the Federation) : Beeings on god-like levels like the Q or the Organians, Engines that are able to travel across the entire galaxy in a few days or even faster.

    Also the size of the energy output of an energy weapon doesn't say anything about its power: It's all about efficincy.
    A Federation ship could use the transporter to beam away the command crew or things like power generators of enemy ships, or even put things like bombs directly onto the bridge (and we know what a figher crashing into the bridge of a star destroyer can do)

    Also the holo dech eechnology is seen to be able to create holographic images of ships in space that are hardly distinguishable for enemy sensors.

    In the Star Trek Universe we've seen faster technological advancement than in Star Wars.

    A conflict between Star Wars and Star Trek would never mean, that only Federation against Republic/Empire, other factions in both universes would be forced to intervene in the fights (like the Dominion Wars in Star Trek for example)

    Even if I'm defendig the Star Trek side here, I'm a huge fan of both series and would rather see a friendly alliance against enemies.

  29. cmmOSU81
    April 11, 2015 at 1:19 am

    But, Star Wars was "a long time ago," and Star Trek is in the future. Who knows what advances there would be in the Star Wars galaxy if they could catch up time-wise to Trek?

    • Indo
      April 14, 2015 at 4:45 pm

      Excellent point.

    • Indo
      April 14, 2015 at 4:50 pm

      As far as engines are concerned, I thought your article was about tech superiority, not practicality. You say ST engines are better and faster, but in SW, they are used at faster cruising speeds more of the time, which you would then call a tie. Tech superiority in the engine room? ST wins.

      • grodoudou2
        December 29, 2015 at 10:26 pm

        but in star wars they can travel across half the galaxy at least the size of ours in a matter of hours!

        • Coemgein
          January 5, 2016 at 8:14 pm

          In an early episode of The Next Generation, the Enterprise-D travels over 2.7 million light-years and 1 billion light-years respectively in a matter of only a minute or two. And this with only the influence of a single alien with enhanced perceptions. Also, by use of a Borg transwarp conduit, Voyager went what was probably 30,000 ly in a matter of minutes.

    • Harry
      May 7, 2015 at 9:28 am

      Good point Indo! I was feeling kind of sorry for Star Wars so I may have been a little gentle on that call.

      • grodoudou2
        December 29, 2015 at 10:33 pm

        only because you make extremely distorted judgements and are extremely biased

  30. billyway2kewl
    April 10, 2015 at 10:59 pm

    In Star Trek The Organians demonstrated a number of abilities. At least one of them, Trefayne, was aware of events at great distances, reporting that space vehicles had assumed orbit about his world and that men had beamed down

    To prevent the conflict between Humans and Klingons, they managed to emanate extreme heat from every harmful object available, including phasers controls in both fleets. As beings of pure thought, they are either immortal or extremely long-lived; Claymare commented that no one had died on Organia in "uncounted thousands of years".

    It is unclear exactly what the Organians really looked like but they stated they had once been humanoid. They had developed beyond the need for physical bodies millions of years earlier and "that of us which you see ... is mere appearance ... for your sake".

  31. likefunbuntot
    April 10, 2015 at 8:32 pm

    Both Star Trek and Star Wars have published technical specs with a high degree of canonical validity. Trek's technical specs in any given area are usually one to three orders of magnitude lower than Star Wars. Reading about the Star Wars universe, you see sentences like "The Republic Completed its study of Physics in (whenever it was)." To suggest that Star Trek is even competitive with Star Wars in these respects simply ignores all published evidence to the contrary.

    The flagship of the Federation regularly falls prey to the machinations of its own Sex Simula-- I mean Holodeck and the monthly spatial anomaly encounters and time loops rack up a solid body count as well. One suspects crew casualties aboard less well staffed vessels must be much, much higher.

    I suspect that a single Star Destroyer could conquer the entire Federation and any two TIE fighters could probably handle a Galaxy-class ship by themselves.

    • Kenneth DeVries
      April 10, 2015 at 11:59 pm

      But how did the Imperial Walker ever make it through the design process without someone saying, "What happens if you knock it over?"

    • Dea Caelo
      June 19, 2015 at 10:41 pm

      The problem is that SW writers, even tech writers, don't know a parsec from a metric second. Literally. A single person paramilitary craft, like slave 1, will be 3 orders of magnitude above a federation ship. A capitol ship, such as an ISD, is many orders of magnitude above that. A small capitol ship, such as the Venator, can go through 40,000 metric tons of hypermatter per second. The largest super star destroyers many orders of magnitude more, and all three death stars orders of magnitude more again. The question is, then, can you stick with cannon energy numbers?

      If you want your ships to function in a galaxy that more or less has the same physics as our own, the answer is no.

      Simply put, the galactic empire is an amalgamation of type I and lower civilizations. It considers the Death Star to be a large engineered structure where the lower limit for a type II civilization is the production of a Dyson sphere. It doesn't even encircle the entire galaxy in which it resides the way .

      Now, 40,000 metric tons of something is a lot. that much of a hard, dense substance like granite wold be a cube 244,000 meters to a side. Containing that many tachyons is a massive, and likely energy consumptive process. However the actual consumption of the fuel, like any fuel, is the smallest part of the fuel cost. It must be transported and manufactured or refined, both more energy expensive than storing the fuel itself. Also, as numerous as star destroyers are, they are a tiny minority of all the ships in the galaxy- there are orders of magnitudes more of each successive smaller model. Nor does the fleet in total count for the majority of a civilizations power curve- each individual needs food, housing, manufacturing, droid power, etc.

      Added all up, these power curves- especially with the great age of galactic civilization- greatly exceed the available energy. Not only Star Trek fans but especially the SW movies
      simply ignore all the published evidence and specs. Both the movies and the published media ignore physics, though the latter most egregiously.

  32. Liviu
    April 10, 2015 at 7:30 pm

    Stargate beats the crap out of both. :)

    • Harry
      May 7, 2015 at 9:27 am

      Meh, any Culture warship would rip through the lot of them! ;)

  33. Kenneth DeVries
    April 10, 2015 at 5:39 pm

    I will never stop saying this: Star Wars is not science fiction, it is space fantasy, and its technology is essentially magical. Star Trek's technology is at least pseudoscience. Magic vs. pseudoscience - pick the one you like and say that's the winner!

    • Deere
      April 11, 2015 at 7:21 am

      > I will never stop saying this: Star Wars is not science fiction, it is space fantasy, and its technology is essentially magical.

      "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
      ~ Gandalf the Chrome.

    • Harry
      May 7, 2015 at 8:39 am

      There's enough hard tech in Star Wars to at least compare them. Plus thought experiments are fun!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *