There's a bit of a misunderstanding in your question. While both giant short-faced bears (Arctodus simus) and saber-toothed cats (like Smilodon) were apex predators during the Pleistocene epoch, they were not predators of each other.
Breakdown
* Giant short-faced bears: These bears were massive, reaching heights of over 11 feet tall and weighing up to 1,500 pounds. They had powerful jaws and large claws, making them formidable hunters. Their diet likely consisted of large herbivores, including bison, horses, and even mammoths.
* Saber-toothed cats: These cats were impressive predators known for their long, saber-like teeth. They were more agile and probably hunted smaller prey, such as deer, elk, and even young mammoths.
Why They Weren't Predators of Each Other
* Different hunting strategies: Giant short-faced bears were likely opportunistic scavengers and hunters, while saber-toothed cats were more specialized ambush predators.
* Different sizes and prey: The size difference suggests they targeted different prey. It's unlikely a saber-toothed cat would attempt to take down a full-grown giant short-faced bear.
Possible Interactions
* Competition: While not hunting each other, they likely competed for food resources, especially large carcasses.
* Scavenging: They might have scavenged the same kills, leading to occasional confrontations.
In conclusion: Giant short-faced bears and saber-toothed tigers were both apex predators in the Pleistocene, but their size, hunting strategies, and prey preferences suggest they were not predators of each other.