Hahaha Voting is shot down,afraid of people who got idea of real best Tanks, like Leopard 2 or T90A/MA.Your M1 was often destroyed through RPGs and burnt completly out.
original abrams tank laid waste to the soviet made T-72s in the first golf war, so wat makes u people think that russian T-90 is even close to the M1A2? M1A2 is simpily the best. Only competition is the challenger 2 and leapard 2, only problem is that US is practically best friends with the british, and theres not many leapard 2 produced...lmao,
Your problem is that this tank never had a challange on it's hands
If you actually start a war against an army...not agaist civilians and talibans that are sponsord by CIA as you usually do...you will find out that the Abrams has to be constantly resuplied with fuel...wich is a recepy for disaster if the enemy has air support or even somme elite infantry squads that can cripple the fuel supply route
@skyZZofreniKdesignS yeaa cause thats all we do is just kill civilians right? also, its funny that u say this being that the unitied states is allies with pretty much every country that has a tank that can stand up to the abrams..
@beefcakes42 You are pretty unaducated. T72 in Iraq was not Soviet T72.The Iraqi T72 was downgraded T72 with only half of protection and penetration than real T72.And T90 cant be pierced with RPG of PG7 warheads, this warheads are 50 years old, but M1A2 was often destroyed from few RPG7 PG7 warheads in Iraq you can see all destroyed Abrams wich was burned all of this war penetrated with RPGs or SPTs.
@beefcakes42 Real Soviet/Russian T72 has one of the most powerfull ammonition very similiar to your DU KE penetrators of 800mm RHA.And this russion DU and Wolfram KE penetrators can and will destroy M1A2.But T90 has proven that is can be hit with DU KE of 120mm Abrams without piercing or big damage only few sensors got damaged.M1 of all series never had even tests like This with Russian interior ammonition.So face the fact M1 is worst of all modern tanks.
@Talshet u may be right with all the other stuff, but last time i checked, the m1 was takin out t72s in the first gulf war before the iraqis even knew we were there..let alone the m1a1, and m1a2..if the t90 was so mighty you would hear more about it, instead u hear of the m1a2, british challenger 2, and the leapard 2...those are the best...the only tanks that can stand up to eachother are our allies...
@beefcakes42 First T90 has faced on 500-1000 meters the M1 M829A1-3 sabot rounds, without penetration only few cameras was destroyed or damaged.You hear so many about M1 because people about 14-25 years always posting their opinion of best Tanks without knowledge about any other Tank, and you americans are brainwashing the whole world as part of propaganda,you always said M1,F22,A10,AH64,but you never just research facts or earn experience from real life in military.
@beefcakes42 My father and uncle served in Soviet Union on T64 and T72,they told me lot of this tanks,like they shot with T72 about 7km ranges targets with self adjusting, (only full digital fire control systemes like T90S,T90MS/MA,Leclerc,Merkava and BMD3/4 and BMP2-3 are capable to shot this ranges.M1 has never faced modern HEAT/Sabot rounds on his armor,T90 has faced 5 hits succesful from 120mm M1 canon without penetration.Leo has 40% better armor than M1A2 SEP.
@Talshet thats pretty cool that u have them to tell u things about the tanks, and that may be true being that i dont have anyone who served on any M1, but the M1 performed almost flawlessly agianst the iraqis the first gulf war when tank battle was alot more common then now. granted theyr technology was out dated, the m1 is still on top in terms of latest technology, still making it very formidible agianst any other tank
@Talshet Russia does not have an operational APFSDS with the ability to knock out any modern western tank from the front unless it hits a weakend zone. IIRC the BM-42M is about on par with the M-829A1. Which failed to defeat the armor package of the first generation M1A1HA introduced in 1988. I doubt that Russians got their hands on M829A3 rounds to test on their T-90s. The USA did get their hands on T-84s to test their weapons on.
@EasyEs Russians have BM42 and is capable to destroy modern Tanks this was tested and they use this shells only on "black days".M1 has never faced 125mm russian canon rounds,but t90 has succesful faced M1 canon with modern rounds.And maybe you have no clue of Tanks but what kind of knowledge you have with Tanks.I dont know weak points of Tank fronts.The line between Pan and turret is to small for all AT shells, so there is no realy weak point.
@Talshet How can you make these claims? BM-42 will only kill modern tanks across the weakend zones of the front. Areas like parts of the lower front hull and drivers hatch. I am sorry to have to break it to you but there is little chance Russia got their hands on the DM-53/63, or M-829A2/A3. It is more prossible they got their hands on some KEW-A1/A2 rounds. The T-90A will probably survive everything but a M-829A3 however saying it was tested against this round seems a stretch.
@EasyEs I dont know why people always think german and american sabots are better,maybe you guys overrate DU, DU against wolfram/tungsten lose,cause wolfram has better closeness,that means its more solid.Russian use BM-42M,BK29M,ZBM42 tungsten, and even 9M119 reflex was designed to destroy Leo2 and he has about 40% better armor than M1 and about 10% more RHA than Merkava mk4.BM42M1 was tested on chobham armor of 1500mm RHA about same turret armor of mbt and it penetrate front to backwall
@Talshet Which version of the LEO 2 vs which version of the M1? The 9M119 will be somewhat effective against a Leo-2A1/A2 and M1 and IPM1 but thats about it. The Armor package for the M1A1HA+ (1991) will stop just about anything and is better then Leo-2A4. No the BM-42M1 did not defeat 1500mm of RHA. That claim is insane. The best Russian Round in service is similar in performance the M829A1 deployed in 1988 600-650mm RHA at 2km.
@EasyEs Leo2A4 with AMAP is main export it is the worlds best armored tank, M1A2 SEP can't compared with it it has about 50% more armor from any direction front side and even backside.BM42M1 has destroyed 1500mmRHA the turret fron of M1A2 has about this armor thickness lil bit more maybe.Even M829A1-3 has similiar damage like BM42M and BM29K and even HEAT rounds are more qaulify to destroy armor without ERA like Abrams and Leo2.RHA damage is only theory not real,RPG7 PG7 destroyed M1 too
@Talshet Where are you getting these figures? The armor package on the turret front of the M1A2 SEP is around 960mm thick. What that works out to vs a KE or CE weapon is unknown. Where are your sources for this wild estimates of armor and penitration?
@EasyEs M1A2 SEP has about 1600mm RHA total at front this is the NATO theoratical spezification.Leo2 has NATO specs of 1800 A4 and A6 2000. But the AMAP if you know what it is it was only designed for urban fields it has 25cm thick plates fit with ceramic and bor to protect against HEAT like RPG or SPGs.It has unknown RHA but experts say it has about 2200mm RHA but this is only theoratical the real potential is under secret like any other tank in the world.
@Talshet I assume we are talking about RHA vs CE here. The Leo-2A4 does not have a RHA vs CE 1800mm almost all sources I have looked at put it at about 1000mm across the turret front and 750mm on the hull front.
This makes it little better and in some places wrose then the T-80U T-72BM or early T-90s. One thing to remember is that all figures with K5 multiplier of 1.6 apply only to Short sheathed apfsds. It will get 1.6 vs 3BM-42 while M829A1 might get 1.2-1.3 . Relkit sovles this problem iirc
@EasyEs Maybe you dont understand, RHA that you can find in internet is only theoratical, all real armour capabilities are top secret only Kraus Maffei knows them,but all RHAs you can research are from diffrent "experts" and often experts who delivers kind of propaganda sometimes to overrate but in most times to underrate the capabilities of Tanks,this is used to manipulate potential buyer to prefer the own product.Trust me Leo2 has better armor than M1,T90,Challanger2 and maybe Merkava.
@waddlerobloxxxx It all depends on the crew. I would have to say that the best crew would be found in the M-1. The only reason I say that is because the number of M-1 crews vastly outnumber the number of Leopard crews.
The US is very secretive about what they are going to do next take our stealth program for ex. no one new about that for years, there is no telling what the US will do next.If you know about it they probably have or are working on something better.
everyone needs to under stand that numbers matter , 1v1 this is not the best tank thats for shore , but when were talking about how much you can make and faster it ends up winning. what do you thk happend in world war 2 ? the germans lost not b/c thar weak are dumb but b/c thay did not have the numbers. i see this one guy says the t-90's better, well how bout 1 t-90 vs 10 abrams ? b/c thats what it would end up being in the real world
you fucking retard american you just think bigger is better thats why your all fat, but truth is in real life not world america this tank is fucked, top speed of 5 and gets stuck in any slight puddle. you make huge machines but lack the brain power to make them work.
@kraigthorne no.... were just not as greedy as you americans. France, Spain, China, Italy all have better food than america but they arnt the fat capital of the world?
@RINO92xxl I find it interesting that a man from a country who once controled one fourth of all the people on Earth calling any country greedy. Not to mention what BRITISH petroleum did to the Gulf of Mexico because of their GREED is near unforgivable.
Also a preson from the UK is the last person to talk about countries being fat when the people of the UK are the FATTEST in all of Europe!!! Nauru is the fattest country in the world.
@kraigthorne im not calling your country greedy, just your people. as for oil who do you think uses the most oil in the world? By the way BP is a company not a country, and nope america is defo the fattest country in the WORLD. haha dont get mad because your fat.
The Leopard 2 is the world's best tank, he was finally constructed with German perfection. 120 percent implementation is acceptable to most engineers and you do not carry gas station.
M1a1 is an old tank. It's not the best tank. because it doesn't carry today's electronics and it was made in the early 1980s. This tank is old. The marines replaced M1a1 with better tanks such as M1a1D, M1a1HC, M1a2, and M1a2 Sep. These are more advanced varients carrying today's greatest electronics unlike the old M1a1 tank.
Many people think the M1 abram's firepower isn't unique because of the gun the Abrams uses. It only uses the same gun used on the Leopard 2a5 and not the a6.
Mass x accelleration= force. A longer barrel increases acceleration and not mass. the penetrator on the m829a3 is longer and heavier than DM63, penetrates 790mm of RHA when fired from a m256a1 gun. A DM63 penetrates only 700mm when fired from L55 main gun. This means that the Abrams is more compact and has more firepower than the Leoa6.
@TheCatholic143 - Don't be a retard an L44 simply does not have the firepower of an L55, this an indesputed fact which olnly a fool would argue against.
@TomHartill Lol, the gun used on a tank is only 25% the solution to firepower. The only difference between the l44 and l55 is that the l55 has a longer barrel. This creates higher velocity, nothing else. Isaac's famous formula, mass x velocity = force. The higher the mass and velocity, the higher the penetration.
@TomHartill All together, the M1 abram's m829a3 penetrates about 790mm of RHA at 2000 meters. The DM63 penetrates about 720mm of RHA at 2000 meters. By the way, another flaw of the DM63. THe Dm63 used on the Leopard 2a6 usually creates too much heat destroying the barrel; which is why the Leopard 2a6 in Germany uses the DM53, which has even less penetration, about 670mm of RHA at 2000 meters.
@TomHartill Leopard 2a6 also has 940mm of RHA on the turret. The M1a2 has 960mm of RHA on the turret and also has slightly more protection against chemical warheads.
@TomHartill When you shoot a m829a3 out of a l55 barrel, it will travel 1650mph instead of 1550. This will increase penetration. Even though the Leopard 2a6 uses a gun better than the abrams, the sabot round is so good that the abrams has superior firepower to the Leopard 2a6 even with its DM63 munition.
Mass x acceleration= force. This means that the mass is depended on the round and the barrel being used depends on velocity.
@TheCatholic143 - P1 - I know all about the main gun, you don't have to tell me the inns and outs. The Gemans don't use DU in thier KE penetrators that is the main reason in the difference in penetration. I forget all the stats on penetration there are too many different variables too remeber them all, but I do know that an L55 will outrange an L44, and will also have a higher velocity when firing rounds using similar mass and a similar charge.
@TomHartill Heat rounds in a L55 barrel are usually more accurate than in a l44 barrel. The Leopard 2a6 is probably more effective than the M1 abrams when using heat rounds. M1a2 and Leopard 2a6 are both very great tanks, with their own advantages and disadvantages. For example, the M1a2 consumes much more fuel than Leopard 2a6.
@TheCatholic143 - P2 - An L55 will also have much better results when firing CE rounds such as HEAT. The M1A2 can also fire self-guided warheads which are VERY precise and are reaonably longe ranged, however they never as powerfull as conventional rounds. I think the reason the M1A2 still uses an L44 is purley because they are more effective in urban warfare.
M1A2 uses chobham1 on it's turret I think and will provide considerably more protection against CE rounds than what the leopard uses.
@TomHartill another reason why the M1 series still use the l44 barrel besides better compactness in urban warfare, but also risky when firing a m829a3 in a l55 barrel. Some tests show poor results when a m829a3 is fired from a l55 barrel. I doubt the United States will ever use the l55 barrel in their tanks.
@TheCatholic143 - Oh they will do, it's only a matter of time before the US upgrades to an L55, in fact they will have a new MBT withing 5 years probably. I bet they may have even upgraded if they hadn't gone into Iraq and Afganistan. I even heard rumors that the next US MBT will use chobham2, which I bet will cost a pretty penny to buy from us Brits!
@TomHartill The U.S military might upgrade the l44 barrel to the l55, it isn't 100% guaranteed that the U.S military will adopt as their new main tank gun. Also, the British Chobam Armor 2 is very secret armor. I don't think the U.S military will adopt it. The british doesn't like to give away their secrets.
@TheCatholic143 - The British have given away a ridiculous ammount of secrets to the US. Chobham1 was very secretive and so is some of the extremely advanced Brit desiged sonar and radar which both countries use. Our newest nuclear sub (apparantly the most advanced ship ever built) can sit in the English channel and track the shipping movments in NewYork docks. Both our countries share tech, I scratch your back and ill scratch yours!
@TomHartill It's a possibility that the M1a3 will use chobam2 armor, but it would be very expensive. The depleted Uranium that the current abrams uses is much cheaper to use. Who knows what the M1a3 will incorporate, the prototype isn't go to come out until 2014.
The M1a2 Sep was finished in 1995. It came with much more powerful armor, electronics, and etc, but at the cost of slightly worse mobility. Internation tank Forum ranked the M1a2 Sep first place because it had a unique crew protection in the compartment seperating munition from the crew, about a thousand mm of RHA in the turret armor and 520mm of RHA compared to the Challenger 2's 550mm of RHA on the side. It had the most kills of any other tank in the world today. An amazing tank.
Well considering the Abrams was designed in the early 70s and built in the mid 70s it's pretty goddamn reliable if it's considered number one in the world. I mean it was built at the same time as the Leo and Chally 1 yet it still competes with their successors and with only 3 or 4 upgrades as compared to 7 or 8 (Leopard 2A7) I mean it took the British and Germans long enough but they might have a tank or two that is better.
I think it is very odd to say that Abrams is the best, unless you ride with every tank in the world.Just because it is technically more advanced doesnt mean its the best.
@bushidopride funny... i bet most americans dont know that the mighty m1a2 abrams uses armor developed by the british, canadian made firing systems and a german gun...
@101andrewj funny wrong with wat u just said, the abrams armour is a new version of the british armour adding more stuff into the mix the firing system is american now and america colaborated with germany to make a powerful gun so in a way its german/american ur an idiot
Hi former master gunner Dave johnson here, Love the vid who is the music by , like to see and hear if there is any, And gentlemen gentlemen, Some one who has spent the kind of time that I have in a tank, Will tell you all tanks have their faults its a well trained grew that makes a tank better and more deadly then other tank no matter who makes it , shoot first and kill and it don't matter what the other tank had or how fast it could go, Be good men. Dave
alright, well im in the army and a 19kilo, which is an abrams crewman. There are probably a few things you guys dont know, which is apparent reading your posts, america stole the turret design from germany, and made modifications to the design to make it more accurate, and better, so the turret which is the top half is better than the german leo tank,
You're wrong, the Abrams tank is actually better due to the fact that it can be put into high mass production so they out number the Leopard. This is mainly for the fact that they come from a much larger/superior country. But besides that they're pretty much the same tank.
No it isn`t better at all. When the amercians tested the Leo 2 they realised that it was better than the M1 Abrams. Then they had do decide between arming their army with a german made tank and kill their military industry or save their industry and arm their forces with an slightly inferior tank.
The difference isn`t that big though. The biggest advantage of Leo2 over the Abrams is that it is more reliable
@3Dinvent Yes, agreed, and plus when You have the A-10 Thunderbolt II and best Air Force you don't need the best tank, look at WWII, the Sherman, but it did its job and it did it well. but... it doesn't hurt when your tank is top three if not top, M1 A2, look at its battle ratings!!! <----- It proves it there.
@3Dinvent - The only reason there are so many US tanks is because of the cold war. At the time Germany, Britain, and a few other countries also had a ridiculous number of tanks (over 10,000). Only a minority of US tanks are actually M1A2 SEP's. As for mass production, you do realise that the M1A2 is basically a modified Leopard 2, and the Leopard 2 is easily the most mass produced and easily part replacable tank.
As for the best tank in the world the CR2 is the best, with the leopard 2a6 2nd.
@TomHartill Here's the Isaac's formula put to use in firepower of a tank.
M1 abrams uses m829a3 MUNITION
Leopard 2a6 uses DM63 MUNITION
M829a3 weights 8kg and the DM63 weights 7kg. The m829a3 flies 1,550 meters per second. The DM63 flies 1750 meters. M829a3: 8kg x 1550mps= 12,400 kg of force DM63: 7kg x 1750mps= 12,250 kg of force
This means that the m829a3 generates more kinetic energy and therefore penetrates more than the DM63. This means that the M1 abrams has better firepower
@3Dinvent do you kno that all the m1s in americas possession exept for the prototypes wer built by general dynamics in canada.... so if the canadians can put out 9000 tanks in 25 years..... im sure the germans could do better if they wanted
@101andrewj actually it's made in Lima Tank Plant, Ohio. Yeah we stopped production of the abrams in 1996. The tank was designed by General Motors. The abrams tank uses modifed Chobham Armour, but so does the Chally 2 and Leo 2. The guns of the Leo 2 and Abrams are virtually the same, U.S. just calls theirs different then the L55 W4 whatever. The smooth bore high velocity barrels have actually a longer range overall. Even though the Challenger 2 does have the longest kill shot
@Luka464 The M-1 was designed to fight in places like Serbia. It was designed to hide in ambush and shoot and scoot. When I was in the army I trained with armor units and the M-1 is by far the quetest vehicles out there.
And the m1 uses beter ke penetrators in the l44, that is even more efective than the ke penetrators that the l55 has, and the m1 is smaller so its a smaler target hand only 900 kg heavyer than the leo2 so it has more consentrated armor, and cheaper, and it has basicly the same fire control and other electronic equpment
I don't know where you get your numbers from, but even the German Bundeswehr still has ~400 Leo2 (down from ~2100). Official numbers state ~3500 built.
@Fubak42 what hahahah ur too stupid for words everything about the abrams is german hahahah dumb bitch do you not know who won ww2 WE DID BITCH and do you not think we would take german tech. and integrate it into our tanks ur such a fuckin retard read your facts bitch the gun on the abrams is a german gun, on top of that the german tanks use american electronics, and fire control systems hahah this aint ww2 bitch u fuckin dibshit
@Fregge88 Just because you say something is does not make it so. For example I can call you an ass, but I have no proff of you being an ass, so unless I have proff that you are an ass I can never be honest and call you one. The "Leopard 2S" has NEVER faught another tank, so it is impossable for a honest person to call it the best tank in the world.
@Fregge88 no the abrams would destroy the lepard in a tank battle so yea your wrong but however it does have a few better features i will agre with on that tho oh yea theere is a m1a2 and an up cominig m1a3 so yea the lepard is not in the convesation
@marcus502414 Leopards are THE BEST tanks in the world! My friend has a book that has all the facts on Tanks etc. And the the Leopard 2 a4 was better than the Abram in any other way except that the Abram is 0.5 meters/min faster :P
its crap the t-90a is better i should know since i drove both in BF3
Khan12078 2 weeks ago
@Khan12078 failtroll...
SAULSANCHEZ74 1 day ago
Hahaha Voting is shot down,afraid of people who got idea of real best Tanks, like Leopard 2 or T90A/MA.Your M1 was often destroyed through RPGs and burnt completly out.
Talshet 2 months ago
it's armor came from challenger and it's canon came from the old model of leopard 2.
Best tank? really? cool story.
tops1028 2 months ago
original abrams tank laid waste to the soviet made T-72s in the first golf war, so wat makes u people think that russian T-90 is even close to the M1A2? M1A2 is simpily the best. Only competition is the challenger 2 and leapard 2, only problem is that US is practically best friends with the british, and theres not many leapard 2 produced...lmao,
beefcakes42 5 months ago
@beefcakes42
Your problem is that this tank never had a challange on it's hands
If you actually start a war against an army...not agaist civilians and talibans that are sponsord by CIA as you usually do...you will find out that the Abrams has to be constantly resuplied with fuel...wich is a recepy for disaster if the enemy has air support or even somme elite infantry squads that can cripple the fuel supply route
skyZZofreniKdesignS 3 months ago
@skyZZofreniKdesignS yeaa cause thats all we do is just kill civilians right? also, its funny that u say this being that the unitied states is allies with pretty much every country that has a tank that can stand up to the abrams..
beefcakes42 3 months ago
@beefcakes42 You are pretty unaducated. T72 in Iraq was not Soviet T72.The Iraqi T72 was downgraded T72 with only half of protection and penetration than real T72.And T90 cant be pierced with RPG of PG7 warheads, this warheads are 50 years old, but M1A2 was often destroyed from few RPG7 PG7 warheads in Iraq you can see all destroyed Abrams wich was burned all of this war penetrated with RPGs or SPTs.
Talshet 2 months ago
@beefcakes42 Real Soviet/Russian T72 has one of the most powerfull ammonition very similiar to your DU KE penetrators of 800mm RHA.And this russion DU and Wolfram KE penetrators can and will destroy M1A2.But T90 has proven that is can be hit with DU KE of 120mm Abrams without piercing or big damage only few sensors got damaged.M1 of all series never had even tests like This with Russian interior ammonition.So face the fact M1 is worst of all modern tanks.
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet u may be right with all the other stuff, but last time i checked, the m1 was takin out t72s in the first gulf war before the iraqis even knew we were there..let alone the m1a1, and m1a2..if the t90 was so mighty you would hear more about it, instead u hear of the m1a2, british challenger 2, and the leapard 2...those are the best...the only tanks that can stand up to eachother are our allies...
beefcakes42 2 months ago
@beefcakes42 First T90 has faced on 500-1000 meters the M1 M829A1-3 sabot rounds, without penetration only few cameras was destroyed or damaged.You hear so many about M1 because people about 14-25 years always posting their opinion of best Tanks without knowledge about any other Tank, and you americans are brainwashing the whole world as part of propaganda,you always said M1,F22,A10,AH64,but you never just research facts or earn experience from real life in military.
Talshet 2 months ago
@beefcakes42 My father and uncle served in Soviet Union on T64 and T72,they told me lot of this tanks,like they shot with T72 about 7km ranges targets with self adjusting, (only full digital fire control systemes like T90S,T90MS/MA,Leclerc,Merkava and BMD3/4 and BMP2-3 are capable to shot this ranges.M1 has never faced modern HEAT/Sabot rounds on his armor,T90 has faced 5 hits succesful from 120mm M1 canon without penetration.Leo has 40% better armor than M1A2 SEP.
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet thats pretty cool that u have them to tell u things about the tanks, and that may be true being that i dont have anyone who served on any M1, but the M1 performed almost flawlessly agianst the iraqis the first gulf war when tank battle was alot more common then now. granted theyr technology was out dated, the m1 is still on top in terms of latest technology, still making it very formidible agianst any other tank
beefcakes42 2 months ago
@Talshet Russia does not have an operational APFSDS with the ability to knock out any modern western tank from the front unless it hits a weakend zone. IIRC the BM-42M is about on par with the M-829A1. Which failed to defeat the armor package of the first generation M1A1HA introduced in 1988. I doubt that Russians got their hands on M829A3 rounds to test on their T-90s. The USA did get their hands on T-84s to test their weapons on.
EasyEs 2 months ago
@EasyEs Russians have BM42 and is capable to destroy modern Tanks this was tested and they use this shells only on "black days".M1 has never faced 125mm russian canon rounds,but t90 has succesful faced M1 canon with modern rounds.And maybe you have no clue of Tanks but what kind of knowledge you have with Tanks.I dont know weak points of Tank fronts.The line between Pan and turret is to small for all AT shells, so there is no realy weak point.
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet How can you make these claims? BM-42 will only kill modern tanks across the weakend zones of the front. Areas like parts of the lower front hull and drivers hatch. I am sorry to have to break it to you but there is little chance Russia got their hands on the DM-53/63, or M-829A2/A3. It is more prossible they got their hands on some KEW-A1/A2 rounds. The T-90A will probably survive everything but a M-829A3 however saying it was tested against this round seems a stretch.
EasyEs 2 months ago
@EasyEs I dont know why people always think german and american sabots are better,maybe you guys overrate DU, DU against wolfram/tungsten lose,cause wolfram has better closeness,that means its more solid.Russian use BM-42M,BK29M,ZBM42 tungsten, and even 9M119 reflex was designed to destroy Leo2 and he has about 40% better armor than M1 and about 10% more RHA than Merkava mk4.BM42M1 was tested on chobham armor of 1500mm RHA about same turret armor of mbt and it penetrate front to backwall
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet Which version of the LEO 2 vs which version of the M1? The 9M119 will be somewhat effective against a Leo-2A1/A2 and M1 and IPM1 but thats about it. The Armor package for the M1A1HA+ (1991) will stop just about anything and is better then Leo-2A4. No the BM-42M1 did not defeat 1500mm of RHA. That claim is insane. The best Russian Round in service is similar in performance the M829A1 deployed in 1988 600-650mm RHA at 2km.
EasyEs 2 months ago
@EasyEs Leo2A4 with AMAP is main export it is the worlds best armored tank, M1A2 SEP can't compared with it it has about 50% more armor from any direction front side and even backside.BM42M1 has destroyed 1500mmRHA the turret fron of M1A2 has about this armor thickness lil bit more maybe.Even M829A1-3 has similiar damage like BM42M and BM29K and even HEAT rounds are more qaulify to destroy armor without ERA like Abrams and Leo2.RHA damage is only theory not real,RPG7 PG7 destroyed M1 too
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet Where are you getting these figures? The armor package on the turret front of the M1A2 SEP is around 960mm thick. What that works out to vs a KE or CE weapon is unknown. Where are your sources for this wild estimates of armor and penitration?
EasyEs 2 months ago
@EasyEs M1A2 SEP has about 1600mm RHA total at front this is the NATO theoratical spezification.Leo2 has NATO specs of 1800 A4 and A6 2000. But the AMAP if you know what it is it was only designed for urban fields it has 25cm thick plates fit with ceramic and bor to protect against HEAT like RPG or SPGs.It has unknown RHA but experts say it has about 2200mm RHA but this is only theoratical the real potential is under secret like any other tank in the world.
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet I mean Leo2A4 with AMAP total.
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet I assume we are talking about RHA vs CE here. The Leo-2A4 does not have a RHA vs CE 1800mm almost all sources I have looked at put it at about 1000mm across the turret front and 750mm on the hull front.
This makes it little better and in some places wrose then the T-80U T-72BM or early T-90s. One thing to remember is that all figures with K5 multiplier of 1.6 apply only to Short sheathed apfsds. It will get 1.6 vs 3BM-42 while M829A1 might get 1.2-1.3 . Relkit sovles this problem iirc
EasyEs 1 month ago
@EasyEs Maybe you dont understand, RHA that you can find in internet is only theoratical, all real armour capabilities are top secret only Kraus Maffei knows them,but all RHAs you can research are from diffrent "experts" and often experts who delivers kind of propaganda sometimes to overrate but in most times to underrate the capabilities of Tanks,this is used to manipulate potential buyer to prefer the own product.Trust me Leo2 has better armor than M1,T90,Challanger2 and maybe Merkava.
Talshet 1 month ago
Oh yes, the mighty leopard2 ....the greatest tank to never see actual tank versus tank combat lol.
Oso1G 5 months ago
Where that fuck did the Leopard come into this? I thought the big dispute was between the Challenger and Abrams. People can say anything, for example.
My fuck ing Chevy Camaro is the best tank in the world. It is so sleek it could cut through 3 feet of kevlar.
BallisticBanzai 6 months ago
Yeah, I wouldn't say "the best", but nice try though.
DominusPopulum 7 months ago
"only the strongest will survive" so not the abrams tank awww :/ too sad
Kezzraw 7 months ago
witch version of the Abrams tank is better, the M1A1 or the M1A2?
Mr269ification 7 months ago
@Mr269ification m1a2 is the latest model, so it's better. m1a3 is the next model
val28l 7 months ago
FUCKING YOUTUBE WAR EXPERTS!!!
SmelDiferenToMidget 8 months ago
It's not tank! it's 61 tons shit
deep5890 8 months ago
@deep5890 about 70 tons rly.
val28l 7 months ago
yayaya there may have been over 9000 abrams tankz....
but I wonder how a 1 on 1 tank battel between an abrams edn a Leopard 2A6 would turn out
waddlerobloxxxx 9 months ago
@waddlerobloxxxx It would turn to ... Abrams win with so hits and leopard in one million pieces
fox100cool 9 months ago
@waddlerobloxxxx It all depends on the crew. I would have to say that the best crew would be found in the M-1. The only reason I say that is because the number of M-1 crews vastly outnumber the number of Leopard crews.
kraigthorne 8 months ago
The US is very secretive about what they are going to do next take our stealth program for ex. no one new about that for years, there is no telling what the US will do next.If you know about it they probably have or are working on something better.
killerbear1339 10 months ago
@killerbear1339 Google Future Combat Uniform
kraigthorne 8 months ago
they should redesign the armor on the abrams...
xy274 11 months ago
everyone needs to under stand that numbers matter , 1v1 this is not the best tank thats for shore , but when were talking about how much you can make and faster it ends up winning. what do you thk happend in world war 2 ? the germans lost not b/c thar weak are dumb but b/c thay did not have the numbers. i see this one guy says the t-90's better, well how bout 1 t-90 vs 10 abrams ? b/c thats what it would end up being in the real world
nevin221221 11 months ago
@nevin221221 you cant put 10 abrams aginst 1 T-90 because russians outnumber us military...., atleast with tanks :P
upWiira 10 months ago
@upWiira no .. thars no were nere as much T-90's , look it up . your right thay do have tanks but the good ones no
nevin221221 10 months ago
t-90 is better
blowupuate13 11 months ago
chuck norris
elyksesom 1 year ago
you fucking retard american you just think bigger is better thats why your all fat, but truth is in real life not world america this tank is fucked, top speed of 5 and gets stuck in any slight puddle. you make huge machines but lack the brain power to make them work.
RINO92xxl 1 year ago
@RINO92xxl We ar fat, because we have the best food in the world. If the food in your country was as good as ours you would be fat to. (lol)
kraigthorne 8 months ago
@kraigthorne no.... were just not as greedy as you americans. France, Spain, China, Italy all have better food than america but they arnt the fat capital of the world?
RINO92xxl 8 months ago
@RINO92xxl I find it interesting that a man from a country who once controled one fourth of all the people on Earth calling any country greedy. Not to mention what BRITISH petroleum did to the Gulf of Mexico because of their GREED is near unforgivable.
Also a preson from the UK is the last person to talk about countries being fat when the people of the UK are the FATTEST in all of Europe!!! Nauru is the fattest country in the world.
kraigthorne 8 months ago
@kraigthorne im not calling your country greedy, just your people. as for oil who do you think uses the most oil in the world? By the way BP is a company not a country, and nope america is defo the fattest country in the WORLD. haha dont get mad because your fat.
RINO92xxl 8 months ago
Yoy american idiot !You county is fucking shit !
tema501322 1 year ago
@tema501322 And your country is gay shit.
25Milimeter 1 year ago 2
the only thing that i hate about the abrams is its hopeless fuel consumption since its the only 3rd gen mbt in the world that does less than 1mpg.
MrHoppyknight 1 year ago
The Leopard 2 is the world's best tank, he was finally constructed with German perfection. 120 percent implementation is acceptable to most engineers and you do not carry gas station.
markingsn 1 year ago
@crazyscreamfan2 lol, u think u know everything about weapons just from playing Call of Duty 4? lol
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
M1a1 is an old tank. It's not the best tank. because it doesn't carry today's electronics and it was made in the early 1980s. This tank is old. The marines replaced M1a1 with better tanks such as M1a1D, M1a1HC, M1a2, and M1a2 Sep. These are more advanced varients carrying today's greatest electronics unlike the old M1a1 tank.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
Many people think the M1 abram's firepower isn't unique because of the gun the Abrams uses. It only uses the same gun used on the Leopard 2a5 and not the a6.
Mass x accelleration= force. A longer barrel increases acceleration and not mass. the penetrator on the m829a3 is longer and heavier than DM63, penetrates 790mm of RHA when fired from a m256a1 gun. A DM63 penetrates only 700mm when fired from L55 main gun. This means that the Abrams is more compact and has more firepower than the Leoa6.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TheCatholic143 - Don't be a retard an L44 simply does not have the firepower of an L55, this an indesputed fact which olnly a fool would argue against.
TomHartill 1 year ago
@TomHartill Lol, the gun used on a tank is only 25% the solution to firepower. The only difference between the l44 and l55 is that the l55 has a longer barrel. This creates higher velocity, nothing else. Isaac's famous formula, mass x velocity = force. The higher the mass and velocity, the higher the penetration.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TomHartill All together, the M1 abram's m829a3 penetrates about 790mm of RHA at 2000 meters. The DM63 penetrates about 720mm of RHA at 2000 meters. By the way, another flaw of the DM63. THe Dm63 used on the Leopard 2a6 usually creates too much heat destroying the barrel; which is why the Leopard 2a6 in Germany uses the DM53, which has even less penetration, about 670mm of RHA at 2000 meters.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TomHartill Leopard 2a6 also has 940mm of RHA on the turret. The M1a2 has 960mm of RHA on the turret and also has slightly more protection against chemical warheads.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TomHartill When you shoot a m829a3 out of a l55 barrel, it will travel 1650mph instead of 1550. This will increase penetration. Even though the Leopard 2a6 uses a gun better than the abrams, the sabot round is so good that the abrams has superior firepower to the Leopard 2a6 even with its DM63 munition.
Mass x acceleration= force. This means that the mass is depended on the round and the barrel being used depends on velocity.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TheCatholic143 - P1 - I know all about the main gun, you don't have to tell me the inns and outs. The Gemans don't use DU in thier KE penetrators that is the main reason in the difference in penetration. I forget all the stats on penetration there are too many different variables too remeber them all, but I do know that an L55 will outrange an L44, and will also have a higher velocity when firing rounds using similar mass and a similar charge.
TomHartill 1 year ago
@TomHartill Heat rounds in a L55 barrel are usually more accurate than in a l44 barrel. The Leopard 2a6 is probably more effective than the M1 abrams when using heat rounds. M1a2 and Leopard 2a6 are both very great tanks, with their own advantages and disadvantages. For example, the M1a2 consumes much more fuel than Leopard 2a6.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TheCatholic143 - P2 - An L55 will also have much better results when firing CE rounds such as HEAT. The M1A2 can also fire self-guided warheads which are VERY precise and are reaonably longe ranged, however they never as powerfull as conventional rounds. I think the reason the M1A2 still uses an L44 is purley because they are more effective in urban warfare.
M1A2 uses chobham1 on it's turret I think and will provide considerably more protection against CE rounds than what the leopard uses.
TomHartill 1 year ago
@TomHartill another reason why the M1 series still use the l44 barrel besides better compactness in urban warfare, but also risky when firing a m829a3 in a l55 barrel. Some tests show poor results when a m829a3 is fired from a l55 barrel. I doubt the United States will ever use the l55 barrel in their tanks.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TheCatholic143 - Oh they will do, it's only a matter of time before the US upgrades to an L55, in fact they will have a new MBT withing 5 years probably. I bet they may have even upgraded if they hadn't gone into Iraq and Afganistan. I even heard rumors that the next US MBT will use chobham2, which I bet will cost a pretty penny to buy from us Brits!
TomHartill 1 year ago
@TomHartill The U.S military might upgrade the l44 barrel to the l55, it isn't 100% guaranteed that the U.S military will adopt as their new main tank gun. Also, the British Chobam Armor 2 is very secret armor. I don't think the U.S military will adopt it. The british doesn't like to give away their secrets.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TheCatholic143 - The British have given away a ridiculous ammount of secrets to the US. Chobham1 was very secretive and so is some of the extremely advanced Brit desiged sonar and radar which both countries use. Our newest nuclear sub (apparantly the most advanced ship ever built) can sit in the English channel and track the shipping movments in NewYork docks. Both our countries share tech, I scratch your back and ill scratch yours!
TomHartill 1 year ago
@TomHartill It's a possibility that the M1a3 will use chobam2 armor, but it would be very expensive. The depleted Uranium that the current abrams uses is much cheaper to use. Who knows what the M1a3 will incorporate, the prototype isn't go to come out until 2014.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
The M1a2 Sep was finished in 1995. It came with much more powerful armor, electronics, and etc, but at the cost of slightly worse mobility. Internation tank Forum ranked the M1a2 Sep first place because it had a unique crew protection in the compartment seperating munition from the crew, about a thousand mm of RHA in the turret armor and 520mm of RHA compared to the Challenger 2's 550mm of RHA on the side. It had the most kills of any other tank in the world today. An amazing tank.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
Well considering the Abrams was designed in the early 70s and built in the mid 70s it's pretty goddamn reliable if it's considered number one in the world. I mean it was built at the same time as the Leo and Chally 1 yet it still competes with their successors and with only 3 or 4 upgrades as compared to 7 or 8 (Leopard 2A7) I mean it took the British and Germans long enough but they might have a tank or two that is better.
Rayelth 1 year ago
merkava 4
cheak it out
Nagary1 1 year ago
how about T90?
splitstrim 1 year ago
I think it is very odd to say that Abrams is the best, unless you ride with every tank in the world.Just because it is technically more advanced doesnt mean its the best.
bushidopride 1 year ago
@bushidopride funny... i bet most americans dont know that the mighty m1a2 abrams uses armor developed by the british, canadian made firing systems and a german gun...
101andrewj 1 year ago
@101andrewj funny wrong with wat u just said, the abrams armour is a new version of the british armour adding more stuff into the mix the firing system is american now and america colaborated with germany to make a powerful gun so in a way its german/american ur an idiot
MasterChiefSargeant 1 year ago
@MasterChiefSargeant u kno who builds these... general dynamics... a canadian company
101andrewj 1 year ago
Hi former master gunner Dave johnson here, Love the vid who is the music by , like to see and hear if there is any, And gentlemen gentlemen, Some one who has spent the kind of time that I have in a tank, Will tell you all tanks have their faults its a well trained grew that makes a tank better and more deadly then other tank no matter who makes it , shoot first and kill and it don't matter what the other tank had or how fast it could go, Be good men. Dave
rockstarcarservices 1 year ago
alright, well im in the army and a 19kilo, which is an abrams crewman. There are probably a few things you guys dont know, which is apparent reading your posts, america stole the turret design from germany, and made modifications to the design to make it more accurate, and better, so the turret which is the top half is better than the german leo tank,
ThatGuyHuffy 1 year ago
leopard 2 a6 better than abrams and this gun from abrams is from germany !!!..
fritz592 1 year ago
@fritz592 I must disagree. Guns only prove part of the firepower of a tank.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
its more like a dam heavy tracked super computer
Skid00everest340 1 year ago
M1A2 abrams!
kielkurt 1 year ago
sry to inform that "Leopard 2S" is the best tank in the world Abrams comes on a steady second place
Fregge88 2 years ago
@Fregge88
You're wrong, the Abrams tank is actually better due to the fact that it can be put into high mass production so they out number the Leopard. This is mainly for the fact that they come from a much larger/superior country. But besides that they're pretty much the same tank.
# of Leopard 2S produced: 380
# of Abrams tanks produced: >9000
3Dinvent 2 years ago
Or you listning to discovery channel! and so for your self
Fregge88 2 years ago
The production-rate is not a fact for the quality of a tank...
Apart from that more countries acquired the Leo2 than the Abrams:
Leo: 16 vs. Abrams: 6
Furthermore there more variants and further developments of the Leopart 2. (Leopart 2 s is only one of them!)
Hhutuber 1 year ago
@3Dinvent
No it isn`t better at all. When the amercians tested the Leo 2 they realised that it was better than the M1 Abrams. Then they had do decide between arming their army with a german made tank and kill their military industry or save their industry and arm their forces with an slightly inferior tank.
The difference isn`t that big though. The biggest advantage of Leo2 over the Abrams is that it is more reliable
stalingradComando 1 year ago
@3Dinvent Yes, agreed, and plus when You have the A-10 Thunderbolt II and best Air Force you don't need the best tank, look at WWII, the Sherman, but it did its job and it did it well. but... it doesn't hurt when your tank is top three if not top, M1 A2, look at its battle ratings!!! <----- It proves it there.
Dovi82nd 1 year ago
@3Dinvent - The only reason there are so many US tanks is because of the cold war. At the time Germany, Britain, and a few other countries also had a ridiculous number of tanks (over 10,000). Only a minority of US tanks are actually M1A2 SEP's. As for mass production, you do realise that the M1A2 is basically a modified Leopard 2, and the Leopard 2 is easily the most mass produced and easily part replacable tank.
As for the best tank in the world the CR2 is the best, with the leopard 2a6 2nd.
TomHartill 1 year ago
@TomHartill M1a2 isn't a modified Leopard 2? Who told u that? M1 abrams and Leopard 2 are completely 2 different designs.
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@TheCatholic143 - No there not, they arre very similar in design.
TomHartill 1 year ago
@TomHartill Here's the Isaac's formula put to use in firepower of a tank.
M1 abrams uses m829a3 MUNITION
Leopard 2a6 uses DM63 MUNITION
M829a3 weights 8kg and the DM63 weights 7kg. The m829a3 flies 1,550 meters per second. The DM63 flies 1750 meters. M829a3: 8kg x 1550mps= 12,400 kg of force DM63: 7kg x 1750mps= 12,250 kg of force
This means that the m829a3 generates more kinetic energy and therefore penetrates more than the DM63. This means that the M1 abrams has better firepower
TheCatholic143 1 year ago
@3Dinvent do you kno that all the m1s in americas possession exept for the prototypes wer built by general dynamics in canada.... so if the canadians can put out 9000 tanks in 25 years..... im sure the germans could do better if they wanted
101andrewj 1 year ago
@101andrewj actually it's made in Lima Tank Plant, Ohio. Yeah we stopped production of the abrams in 1996. The tank was designed by General Motors. The abrams tank uses modifed Chobham Armour, but so does the Chally 2 and Leo 2. The guns of the Leo 2 and Abrams are virtually the same, U.S. just calls theirs different then the L55 W4 whatever. The smooth bore high velocity barrels have actually a longer range overall. Even though the Challenger 2 does have the longest kill shot
Rayelth 1 year ago
@3Dinvent Abrams proved to be mighty in the desert, but in Serbia Abrams wouldn't survive 3 hours... America has an unlimited military budget
Luka464 1 year ago
@Luka464 The M-1 was designed to fight in places like Serbia. It was designed to hide in ambush and shoot and scoot. When I was in the army I trained with armor units and the M-1 is by far the quetest vehicles out there.
kraigthorne 8 months ago
@3Dinvent The fact that they can produce more abrams doesnt make the tank itself better! The Leopard is ways better than the abrams.
Depi115 9 months ago
@3Dinvent
And the m1 uses beter ke penetrators in the l44, that is even more efective than the ke penetrators that the l55 has, and the m1 is smaller so its a smaler target hand only 900 kg heavyer than the leo2 so it has more consentrated armor, and cheaper, and it has basicly the same fire control and other electronic equpment
panzerstrelok 8 months ago
@3Dinvent you are totally right, most people just look at the tank's capability, not about their production level and other important facts
reinheart14121412 7 months ago
@3Dinvent
I don't know where you get your numbers from, but even the German Bundeswehr still has ~400 Leo2 (down from ~2100). Official numbers state ~3500 built.
oOozeddoOo 7 months ago
@3Dinvent There are Over 3.000 Leopard2s produced
But yes,the Abrams will outnumber the Leo
Germanyisthebest1 6 months ago
@3Dinvent
Mass production make a tank not the best ...
Quality is the thing and the abrams has no chance against the leopard 2S in quality and power
Fubak42 6 months ago
@Fubak42 what hahahah ur too stupid for words everything about the abrams is german hahahah dumb bitch do you not know who won ww2 WE DID BITCH and do you not think we would take german tech. and integrate it into our tanks ur such a fuckin retard read your facts bitch the gun on the abrams is a german gun, on top of that the german tanks use american electronics, and fire control systems hahah this aint ww2 bitch u fuckin dibshit
goldenkro 5 months ago
@Fregge88 Just because you say something is does not make it so. For example I can call you an ass, but I have no proff of you being an ass, so unless I have proff that you are an ass I can never be honest and call you one. The "Leopard 2S" has NEVER faught another tank, so it is impossable for a honest person to call it the best tank in the world.
kraigthorne 1 year ago
@Fregge88 no the abrams would destroy the lepard in a tank battle so yea your wrong but however it does have a few better features i will agre with on that tho oh yea theere is a m1a2 and an up cominig m1a3 so yea the lepard is not in the convesation
marcus502414 6 months ago
@marcus502414 Leopards are THE BEST tanks in the world! My friend has a book that has all the facts on Tanks etc. And the the Leopard 2 a4 was better than the Abram in any other way except that the Abram is 0.5 meters/min faster :P
SuomiBroadcast 6 months ago
@Fregge88 Leo2 has far less armor, less acceleration, lower absolute max driveline speed, less effective optics, and is generic commercial crap.
Also, we build about 30 times as many M1s as the Leo2.
redreaper2020 5 months ago
i've been up close with one of those things-man are they awesome
QuabProductions 2 years ago
Very nice!
SonyaMarie23 2 years ago
the abrams tanks is the best tank in the world
rmt1997 2 years ago 2
amen
QuabProductions 2 years ago