Well the Abrahams burns like a bonfire on nightvision is easy target for anything that uses Infrared or Heat Detection. By the way the Leopard would run with Salad Oil as fuel it justs need some burning liquid and 20% should be Diesel. Btw, Germany got the kill switch for your Abrahams Guns guess why;-)
DR bimmer, still talking rubbish I seeThe Leopard 2 has never used Chobham armour and its own ceramic composite armour package actually predates the introduction of Chobham.
The latest versions of the M1 Abram no longer use Chobham, it is obsolete now.
Chobham armour is a generic term for composit armour. So it is not obsolete. The German armour does not predate Chobham type armour. It was developed in the 60's. When was the laprd developed?
They both startet as a US-German tankproject, but the US forked the development because of the too expensive German ideas.
The Abrams is simply a cheaper Leopard, that is more cost efficient, because US needs highnumbers of tanks. While the Leopard is a Best of Breed hightech Tank that guaranties the best protection,fastest attack capabilities and extremly efficient maintenance and therefore is much more expensive.
By years Abrams has received upgrades wich were standard for Leopard...
@FALCON131001 yeah with Iraqi crews who had no experience. and no gps. and no air power. not the range of the Abrams gun. what I want to say is. You could´ve won this with Leo2 aswell. For me this does not count ;)
@tropicthunder332 haha ok i agree with that but i know many stories with Abrams that proves it is combat effective....i am not saying LEO2A6 isnt good because its the best main battle tank of my country but what i am trying to say is that the M1A2 Abrams can match with the LEO2A6
@flyleaf2424 Indeed, they're pretty much identical tanks; same gun, same overall design, probably the same Chobham armour and weight. NATO military tech is pretty universal within itself.
Finally If the Rheinmettalllle gun is the best, accuracy being paramount here. The Abrams should hold (given the number deployed) the longest tank to tank kill?
Production looks like a 2nd car dealers accounts. NL 445 sold 145, Sweden 280 (180 2nd hand), Saudi 200 (2nd hand), & Portugal, Norway, Canada, Austria - 2nd hand, cheap then?
So it is really: modifyable, unused, 2nd hand & available in large numbers.
@smilo996 Yes, because they are so valuable even second hand, countries that cannot afford to buy new ones will buy used Leopards before considering to buy the Challenger2
Thus (The Leopard 2) hardly being a major export success in the 1980s (no tank of the latest generation was), the type became very popular in the 1990s......because, it was better?
@doktorbimmer The only reason to sell a tank of that calibre is to secure political goodwill with another country. Look at how many M1s the Americans sold to Saudi Arabia, and ONLY Saudi Arabia. You don't give up the latest gear in your arsenal just for a few million bucks a pop.
@kovona The U.S. has a unique military protection treaty with Saudi Arabia unlike any agreement with other countries like NATO. Saudi Arabia recieves special treatment for weapons contracts and if any aggressor threatens the US has promised to respond without delay.
The US has sold older model M1 Abrams 4 other countries including Australia.
@doktorbimmer Uncle Sam gotta secure that oil. Its interesting, now that Egypt lost its pro-US regime, I'm sure the Chinese are aching to purchase one of their M1A1s for study, older it may be.
I particularly like these 3 quotes regarding the Leopard:
They are from wikipedia but they perhaps state more clearly than any other reason why other countries have purchased Leopards:
The Dutch army had already rejected the M1 because of its high operating costs and the refusal by the Americans to fit a Dutch version with the 120 mm gun
Not because it was a better tank, cheaper and modifiable.
the natural habitat of the Leopard 2: File:Leopard 2A6 with new smoke dispenser.jpg The natural habitat of the C2 RAC_RDG_index_410.jpg and the abrams: marine-tank-at-29palms.jpg and that is the difference, The RESULTS for the C2 and Abrams: t-72_spalony.jpg The results for the Leopard 2 so far: lineT72a.jpg That is what tanks are for killing other tanks, apc's bunkers, defences, people. not: (no offence to Canadaians or the Dutch). tree-hugger.jpg nuff said.
Actually BAE make & support: C2 Trojan transformer, derivitives, Warrior, GCV, CV90, M113, FCS, ICV, GCV, Paladin, Bulldog (FV430), AAV7A1. Many by purchasing other companies. And?. Why would BAE not be interested in making a next generation MBT.
What other tracked vehicles do the makers of the LeoPard make? The Leopard 2 and a couple of hybrids of the same platform. Not a longterm business model unless supported by DE govt. Seeing as it is so small BAE will likely but Krauss!! Paper tank.
The only other tracked vehicle owned by BAE is the Warrior - global ecomony. Check out their website for an extensive list of all the defence they have either made, procured or developed. Thae fact they were designed originally elsewhere is irrelvant, with the product comes the tech and knowledge. Where did Germany get the idea for the tank from? Whwn Challenger was build it was a national enterpride. associated with GB.
doktorbimmer given that BAE builds a significant number of tracked vehicles already, is the worlds 2nd largest defence comany and the suppliers for the Leopard project do not build really any military vehicles anymore. Logic would make it more likely that BAE is now in a position to build a MBT that would sell worldwide.Retrofitting 70 and 80's tech to the Challenger seems unlikely.
Presumably of course you work for BAE, the MOD and MTU.
@smilo996 Yes, now I'm very certain your an idiot.
"significant number of tracked vehicles" BAE is a conglomerate of many manufacturers, the M2, M3, M113, and M109 are all American designs produced in the US.
The Americans have not produced an all new main battle tank since 1943.
Allthough there are no longer any parts that interchange the Challenger 2 is based on the 1960s designed Chieftain.
@smilo996 The only other tracked vehicle owned by BAE is the Warrior, It is not a Main Battle Tank. The warrior has only one other customer nation besides UK and thats Kuwait. There are currently no new orders for the Warrior.
docktobimmer reverts to emotion not facts, last form of defence. Go to BAE's website & see the number of vehicles that they produce in the UK and abroad. Rheinmetall, Krausse & MAK do not even mention the Leopard. Rheinmetall only makes 4 vehicles, all of them wheeled (on their website). So where is the next Leopard coming from then? BAE sales 2010 E26bn, Rheinmettal.......E2bn. Leopards all sold to countries that do not use them. 23 have been deployed. *20 challys have been deployed. End of.
@smilo996 WTF are you talkin about? The Challenger 2 will be in servce until 2035 with no plans to built a replacement. It will be the last british built main battle tank.
BAE only had one customer nation for the Challenger2... Oman they only bought 50. production stops, no more Challenger2s. exsisting tanks will all have German guns fitted and the first major overhaul program the engine powerpacks updated with MTU (Maybach) engine from the Leopard 2 are planned to be used.
tanknutdave and read the blue on blue pdf. Very sad event. Page 14.
As for Canada being invaded by the USA. The Brits & Canadians already invaded the US & burnt down White House 1. Canadians are too busy smuggling cannabis into the US anyway. 2-0 Commonwealth. Most Americans dont know where it is fortunately. Asked a career woman in NY where Nova Scotia was, GB she said. New Orleans Police Cheif did not know where Ontario was. Canada is safe.
@smilo996 16 countries around the world completely disagree with you because they bought and use the Leopard 2 not the Challenger. Germany invented the modern main battle tank and still leads the world in tank and gun development. Even the brits and Australia found the Leopard 2 out performed the Challenger, the brits opted out for political reasons and the aussies couldn't pass up the deal for second hand M1 Abrams (originally designed in Germany & w/ German gun) at discount prices.
@smilo996 The Challenger 2 (aptly named) is the most outdated, slowest, most underpowered, overpriced, shoddily built, mechanicly unreliable and obsolete tank of all the world class MBTs and with only one customer nation besides the UK only 550 have been built and with no plans for a replacement it is the last MBT to ever be built in the UK.
More accurately 23 in total. 4 hit by IED's 3 disabled & one crew killed. (sadly). Apart from shooting at Afghans with AK47's that's it. No tank on tank, no Milan's, RPG's, T54's, T72's, APC's,
1. You would expect to be able to destroy your own equipment. Not really a combat loss is it. Blue on blue is a sad reality. Where were all the worlds' number 1 tanks during Kuwait, Iraq 1 and 2 and the front line in Afghan, back in the depot being polished and on youtube.
How many Leopards have knocked out an enemy tank, APC, personnel, received a direct hit from a milan missile, fired a round in combat and hit something.......0. U know I'm right.
@smilo996 Correct, but the round that that killed that Challenger wasn't supposed to be capable of doing it. It was a high explosive round designed for soft-skin vehicles, personnel and tearing buildings apart, it shouldnt have damaged so badly a challenger.
Someone is still scratching his head, wondering what gone bad with the armour or what gone so well with the round (as they are MUCH cheaper than the armour piercing ones ;-) )
Oh doctorbimmer...U must be German. Composite armour invented in 1918. Chobham armour invented in the 60's in the UK - the generic name for ceramic composite armour therefore not redundant. See how much chobham composite armour is fitted to the leopard 2....fprado.com. When zee Germans dropped MBT 70 prog they developed their own chobham armour. Chobham armour it is, based on the UK precursor. Not plastic sandwich type of Leo 1. All hoovers are hoovers, a dyson is a vacuum cleaner. See.
doktorbimmer The armour used on the Leopard is produced in Germany from the same spec as sorry Dorchester (not Chobham). It's called sharing tech between allies.
The girl analogy in the bar with respect to the Leopard is correct. In modern times the only tanks to have been combat tested are the Abrams, Challenger, T72, T54, Merkeva... All the others are paper tanks. Challenger 2: longest tank to tank kill, no combat loss, no armour penetration, highest klill ratio.= 2 in the world undisputed.
Apart from 2 small IED's the Leopard has never been tested. It looks good on paper. Challenger, longest tank to tank kill ever 100% kill ratio (kills to losses), no losses ever, no armour penetration ever. 3 most important facts IMHO but in fewer numbers than the Abrams which has also proved very competent. See a girl in a bar & by any measures, she is the best girl you have ever seen. But until you have a relationship, you can't make a conclusion! Vitally the armour on your Leopard is British!
@smilo996 Wrong, although similar the Leopard 2 never used Chobham armour, only Challenger and Abrams used it. The Leopard uses its own carbide/tungsten matrix ceramic armor developed during the MBT-70 program and is not british. Although still kept a secret the orignal Chobham armour is now obsolete.
Your bar analogy was funny.. but irrelevant, the Challenger is not even a close third in the top ten tanks of the world.
@doktorbimmer abrams doesnt use chobam either it uses a similar method and leo did use a type of chobam armor and i said i dont care about the hull desighn like wtf thats random?????
ithe comparison can only be made in theory because the Leopard 2 has not seen any significant action, the odd IED attack. However the Challenger 2 has and is clearly better than both. Not to mention that the amour, which you could argue is THE most important aspect of this kind of tank's ability is British. Guns important but they are different but similar. No national favouritism here.
@smilo996 Look at the facts and you will see that the Abrams and mostly the Leopard are better than the Challenger..... No national favouritism here too.
ich wüsste gerne woher die amis das ganze geld nehmen womit ihre munition bezahlt wird die sie so in nur einem einsatz verbraten ich meine die gesammten militärs aus europe gehen auf präzision dh: ein maximal zwei schuss um ein ziel zu treffen und die amis machen aus einem ziel gleich eine kommplette massenvernichtung wobei es sich bei dem einen ziel vielleicht um 5 oder 6 feinde handelt und das is das traurige was ich net verstehe die amis sind was krieg angeht kleine kinder je mehr also besser
@30sectodeath you stupid asshole of an amarikan patriot the leopard 2A6 is on of the modern tanks in the wolrd and the abrems was updatet not more think befor you write damit amarikans think they are the best
@1989Sock oh yeah whatever. so what if your a German?
do you mean until now you still hate the us(american) btw dont blame the USA about the controversial bombing in your cities which result to higher casualties of the civilian cos the reason we choice d the daylight bombing was to hit the specific target and to avoid some civilian casualties even though its a nose dive decision blame the Brits cos they do there campaign at night which they cant hit the target cos of poor visibility
@Blueatchley12 Nice come back, its pretty obvious you don't care.. don't care to check your facts before you post comments regarding something you know little or nothing about.
The main armament of the M1A1 and M1A2 is the M256A1 120 mm smoothbore gun, designed by Rheinmetall AG of Germany. and copy? ofc! America has bin doing copycat of everything the germans make.
@Dejavvvuuu it is german its a great gun but its a l/44 gun we moddified it to wiegh less but have more armor penatration and fewwer parts and cheeeper but yeah its a great gun
@Blueatchley12 The German L/44 and the M256 have the same max. chamber pressure and both use NATO STANAG ammo specs, ballastic performace is the same.
of coarse the new L/55 out performs both in range and penetration.
All of the the modification to the M356 are cost saving and do not enhance ballistic performance.
@doktorbimmer yes but the abrams uses depleated uranium rounds rather then the steel ones leopard uses and it has beeen confered that the m256 gun has more penatration with this use look it up
@Blueatchley12 You said the guns penetration was better.. thats not true. The guns performance is the same, the Ammo is different though. but they are compatable. Germany does not use DU rounds, thats why they developed the L/55 gun.. it out performs the M256 DU round now.
@doktorbimmer OMG DX you are so wrong ok im going to get my manual brb ok this is straight from a book made in Germany "Some discussian has taken place to retier the old 120mm(4.7in) M256 gun and replaceing it with tthe longer l55 gun but this may never occure the m256 has proven lethal firing ammunition with a depleted uranium core, achieving kills at distances at 4700 m With greater success that the european man battle tanks fireing rounds with tungsten cores from the L55."
@Blueatchley12 The L55 has 7,250psi more chamber pressure or 65.5 tons more muzzle energy than a M265 w/APFSDS round. The L55 DM43/53 round has 6,954ft/s muzzle velocity compared to 5,700ft/s of the APFSDS and gives it an increase in effective range of over 1,600yrds over the APFSDS and a 18% increase of armor penetration at 2,200yrds.
@Dejavvvuuu Yes, all copies. The 105mm L7 gun (M68) used in the original M1 and its predecessor the M-60 Patton is borrowed from Royal Ordnance in the UK too.
The M1 Abrams in general was basicly a copy of the Leopard 2 visa vie the MBT-70 prototype designed by Krauss-Maffei in Germany.
@doktorbimmer No the MBT-70 was a joint project by west germany and the usa. The us provided a good amount of funding for that project until it was canceled
The main gun on the Abrams is made in GERMANY as well as other stuff on the tank. question is, if the americans are so Gr8, why can't thay make it? hmm
the M256 is a cheaper licence built copy of the Rheinmetall 120mm L/44 thats BUILT IN USA, it does not have the hydro-pneumatic recoil system and is not concentricly balanced like the German version.
Americans will smoke you just like in France, and Germany.... were goona fight you so hard.... WATCH THE ENHLISH VERSION OF SAVING PVT. RYAN. THE GERMAN VERSION IS MILD TO SAY THE LEAST. hows this one ' Dont shoot, dont shoot, let em' burn.
@BuBzIeNYNY you have been watching too much hollywood crap made by spielberg jew:) i think in near future Abrams tank will be used on the streets of American cities when niggers will be running on the loose and looting;)
THOSE abrahams are crap if u seen the new leopard it has treat protection thicker armour bigger gun so its bether the us tank has non of that stuff lol
all u americans think u all the best in evryting well by fact the leoparts are the best and im not german so! and its a fact check wikipedia or the us national geograpic its a us tv program shown world wide and the say the same ! any more proof ?! go to discovery channel
@BuBzIeNYNY No, your wrong again dummy, U.S. units are virtually identical to their imperial counterparts, U.S. customary system developed from English units used in the British Empire.
i think your tarded, leo weighs 5 ton less(access more bridges and narrow roads)and rolls 2X as far on a full tank. Abrams is designed to sit in a hull-hidden position and fight
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
abrams easily kills 3 leos, a leo is not gonna eat an abrams hit, where as an abram can eat 5 direct hits by leo, Also the abrams is designed as a defensive tank. ambush from a concelled position then move to a new position. Actually Germans taught us the tactic, shoot' and scoot'
@BuBzIeNYNY totaly stupid what you say...... 1. Abrams defensive Tank ?? lol 2. 5 Direct direct hits by a Leo2A6 ?? rofl .. and so on. first think then write
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@sthcJAX Abrams is a defensive tank. thats why its heavier and runs on jet fuel, more p/w ratio(will move quickly) low mpg/ratio, M1A1 is designed to sit in a hole kill 5 T-72 move to the next hole then kill 5 more T-72. used in an offensive role simply bc if very well can in iraq ie: fuel truck can follow one. sure a leo can disable a abrams in 1 shot, but its gonna take a leo 5 well placed shots to kill an abrams
@doktorbimmer they dont have the same chasis at all.... driver in leo sits on side abrams middle if you look at back rear on abrams it goes go at a 45 degree and gle leo is just flat
@doktorbimmer ok yeah i can seee the similarity in the two but i do know what im talking about in turret ring right under nieth the pinced turret on the leo but dont get me wrong the leopard is a great tank my guess is best tank in the world im just saying there guns are very comparible and the m256 gun is out dated but in the new abrams m1a3 model its going to be huge more armor new engine which is stronger quiter more fuel efficient and fully water proof (whole tank) and new gun.
@doktorbimmer but the leo is a great tank dont get me wrong but the turret ring is widely exposed with pinced turret what do you think would happen is u shot it there
@doktorbimmer leo is more manuvrable then abrams but abrams has more armor since it is slanted 2 ways sidely and upwards that tripples armor so abrams has more then a one foot of armor plus it has diffrent types which also doubles armor so abrams has more armor. And the under side of the piced leo turret if a shells hits the under part of the pinced turret it might ricochiet downward into the turret ring myight jam it.
@BuBzIeNYNY The Leopard 2 has the latest in armor technology, more protection than the Abrams.
The Abrams and Leopard 2 both have the same German 120mm smoothbore gun but the Leo2 to now has the more powerful long barrel L/55 version.. the Abrams does not.
@sthcJAX DONT YOU GET IT SHIT HEAD, 4 ALLIED SOLDIGERS ARE GONNA SIT IN THAT TANK UNTIL IT DIES. WERE NOT GONNA MOVE , FACT IS WE'LL TAKE 4 OF YOUR TANKS DOWN WITH US, ONLY YOUR FIFTH TANK IS GONNA KILL US, RATHER DIE FREE THEN UNDER YOUR NSZI FLAG
Um, not really. USA could take over with little difficulty, but they would lose all their allies. What has the USA got to gain by taking over Canada? Nothing. the USA would face the 53 nations of the Commonwealth. Almost 1.2 billion people.
@RyanBrooksby let me set you stright, first annexation of canada. annex Panama, which we alredy owned then re-took over in '89. Then take Mexico, and keep driving till souther most Argentina. Americanize them all. One Grand American Army
@RyanBrooksby once there all trained up and outfitted and incorprated into Greater American Army, Oceania here we come, True Oceania will also incorp. G.B., Aus, NZ and S. Africa
Among the other thing that perplexed me, is that Leo is the seventh evolution (A7), but had never fought, while Abrams is only the second ........ sign that the original project of Abrams, was already more advanced.
@geoago well it didnt work that way. leopard gradually modify their tanks by little for every batch krauss maffei made. thats why it isnt that hard to upgrade the 2a4 to 2a6. or 2a5 to 2a7. abrams did modified but they arent yet to call it a new version. and recently they jus hold on every modification waiting for the M1A2. so its basically the same. besides US made abrams to suit their needs, and Germans also made leopard to suit their needs, just as how russian, israeli, polish does...
Well the Abrahams burns like a bonfire on nightvision is easy target for anything that uses Infrared or Heat Detection. By the way the Leopard would run with Salad Oil as fuel it justs need some burning liquid and 20% should be Diesel. Btw, Germany got the kill switch for your Abrahams Guns guess why;-)
Atlanisnen 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DR bimmer, still talking rubbish I seeThe Leopard 2 has never used Chobham armour and its own ceramic composite armour package actually predates the introduction of Chobham.
The latest versions of the M1 Abram no longer use Chobham, it is obsolete now.
Chobham armour is a generic term for composit armour. So it is not obsolete. The German armour does not predate Chobham type armour. It was developed in the 60's. When was the laprd developed?
smilo996 3 days ago
The Leopard can travel twice as far as the M1A2 because it needs just half of the fuel. And that makes it much more useful and cheaper than the M1A2.
guikgfzjr7 3 days ago
They both startet as a US-German tankproject, but the US forked the development because of the too expensive German ideas.
The Abrams is simply a cheaper Leopard, that is more cost efficient, because US needs highnumbers of tanks. While the Leopard is a Best of Breed hightech Tank that guaranties the best protection,fastest attack capabilities and extremly efficient maintenance and therefore is much more expensive.
By years Abrams has received upgrades wich were standard for Leopard...
TremereTT 3 days ago
concidering Abrams you have to ask yourself wich gun its using ;) Rheinmetall!
realomon 3 days ago
Both tanks are helpless against RPG - 32...
KRengsib 3 days ago
@KRengsib fucking A ;) hashim rocks!!!!!
realomon 3 days ago
M1A3 rules......LEO2A6 isnt even compan aproven
FALCON131001 4 days ago
@FALCON131001 ever head about LeoA7+???
blackgoldman2 4 days ago
@blackgoldman2 yeah...also i heard about M1A3
FALCON131001 3 days ago
@FALCON131001 Leo2 is combad proven. ask the Danes and Canadians ;)
tropicthunder332 3 days ago
@tropicthunder332 against other tanks?
FALCON131001 3 days ago
@FALCON131001 no but those old T 55 from Sadam dont count. ;)
tropicthunder332 3 days ago
@tropicthunder332 well then it was the A1 version....and i think it was 4.000 T55 vs 2.000 M1A1 or less
FALCON131001 3 days ago
@FALCON131001 yeah with Iraqi crews who had no experience. and no gps. and no air power. not the range of the Abrams gun. what I want to say is. You could´ve won this with Leo2 aswell. For me this does not count ;)
tropicthunder332 3 days ago
@tropicthunder332 haha ok i agree with that but i know many stories with Abrams that proves it is combat effective....i am not saying LEO2A6 isnt good because its the best main battle tank of my country but what i am trying to say is that the M1A2 Abrams can match with the LEO2A6
FALCON131001 3 days ago
The 2A6 is much better than the M1A2
MrLeovdmeer 5 days ago 23
@MrLeovdmeer There the same tank
lordnocts 4 days ago
If these 2 ever got into a battle each other it would come down to who had the better trained tank operators.
flyleaf2424 5 days ago
@flyleaf2424 Indeed, they're pretty much identical tanks; same gun, same overall design, probably the same Chobham armour and weight. NATO military tech is pretty universal within itself.
kovona 5 days ago
@kovona Yes, they are almost the same tank.
The Leopard 2 has never used Chobham armour and its own ceramic composite armour package actually predates the introduction of Chobham.
The latest versions of the M1 Abram no longer use Chobham, it is obsolete now.
All the NATO MBTs M1 Abrams, Leopard 2 and Challenger 2 weigh the same as per NATO STANAG
doktorbimmer 5 days ago 5
leo 2a6 best tank in the world! (after the rat!)
creostyl 1 week ago
M1A2: proven warfighter with 200 to 1 kill ratioo... Leopard II: drives in parades in Europe
SOFSoldier1 1 week ago
@SOFSoldier1 well the leopard II has not been in almost any conflict yet, but they are allmost the same thing
TheMAMPHD 1 week ago
Finally If the Rheinmettalllle gun is the best, accuracy being paramount here. The Abrams should hold (given the number deployed) the longest tank to tank kill?
Production looks like a 2nd car dealers accounts. NL 445 sold 145, Sweden 280 (180 2nd hand), Saudi 200 (2nd hand), & Portugal, Norway, Canada, Austria - 2nd hand, cheap then?
So it is really: modifyable, unused, 2nd hand & available in large numbers.
Find a Leopard, google: Leopard 2 & trailer.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 Yes, because they are so valuable even second hand, countries that cannot afford to buy new ones will buy used Leopards before considering to buy the Challenger2
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@smilo996 Now your starting to make sense, YES the Rheinmetall 120 L/55 IS THE BEST GUN
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
because it has the best gun? because it is the best tank in the world.....
when the shrinking German army offered many of its redundant Leopard 2s at a reduced price. It became successful enough.
Canada have loaned theirs, Saudi bought theirs 2nd hand, the Swiss made their own
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 Are you trying to say that because no one buys the Challenger2 thats why its better?
No one buy it because its slow, underpowered, under gunned, overpriced, and quickly becoming obsolete if its not already.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@smilo996 So what you basicly what you just said is everyone wants Leopard 2s
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
Thus (The Leopard 2) hardly being a major export success in the 1980s (no tank of the latest generation was), the type became very popular in the 1990s......because, it was better?
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 So are you calling 50 export units a success for BAE?
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer The only reason to sell a tank of that calibre is to secure political goodwill with another country. Look at how many M1s the Americans sold to Saudi Arabia, and ONLY Saudi Arabia. You don't give up the latest gear in your arsenal just for a few million bucks a pop.
kovona 5 days ago
@kovona The U.S. has a unique military protection treaty with Saudi Arabia unlike any agreement with other countries like NATO. Saudi Arabia recieves special treatment for weapons contracts and if any aggressor threatens the US has promised to respond without delay.
The US has sold older model M1 Abrams 4 other countries including Australia.
doktorbimmer 5 days ago
@doktorbimmer Uncle Sam gotta secure that oil. Its interesting, now that Egypt lost its pro-US regime, I'm sure the Chinese are aching to purchase one of their M1A1s for study, older it may be.
kovona 5 days ago
I particularly like these 3 quotes regarding the Leopard:
They are from wikipedia but they perhaps state more clearly than any other reason why other countries have purchased Leopards:
The Dutch army had already rejected the M1 because of its high operating costs and the refusal by the Americans to fit a Dutch version with the 120 mm gun
Not because it was a better tank, cheaper and modifiable.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 MOST COUNTRIES BUY THE LEOPARD 2 BECAUSE IT IS BETTER
doktorbimmer 1 week ago 3
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 your last post nothing but nonsensical jibberish? did you forget to take your medication today?
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
Actually BAE make & support: C2 Trojan transformer, derivitives, Warrior, GCV, CV90, M113, FCS, ICV, GCV, Paladin, Bulldog (FV430), AAV7A1. Many by purchasing other companies. And?. Why would BAE not be interested in making a next generation MBT.
What other tracked vehicles do the makers of the LeoPard make? The Leopard 2 and a couple of hybrids of the same platform. Not a longterm business model unless supported by DE govt. Seeing as it is so small BAE will likely but Krauss!! Paper tank.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 BAE could only sell 50 Challenger2 units to a foreign customer.. does that sound like a longterm business model?
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
The only other tracked vehicle owned by BAE is the Warrior - global ecomony. Check out their website for an extensive list of all the defence they have either made, procured or developed. Thae fact they were designed originally elsewhere is irrelvant, with the product comes the tech and knowledge. Where did Germany get the idea for the tank from? Whwn Challenger was build it was a national enterpride. associated with GB.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 Yes, but are any of them a Main Battle Tank?
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
can we see this two sister fighting one another in real battle so that we can see whose the best between this two MBT
30sectodeath 1 week ago
the LEOPARD is the better tank
Doogadeas 1 week ago
Ни разу не видел чтобы Леопард2 где-нибудь в условиях грязи находился или снега, приближенным к непроходимым... Странно.
dorofeev21 1 week ago
doktorbimmer given that BAE builds a significant number of tracked vehicles already, is the worlds 2nd largest defence comany and the suppliers for the Leopard project do not build really any military vehicles anymore. Logic would make it more likely that BAE is now in a position to build a MBT that would sell worldwide.Retrofitting 70 and 80's tech to the Challenger seems unlikely.
Presumably of course you work for BAE, the MOD and MTU.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 Yes, now I'm very certain your an idiot.
"significant number of tracked vehicles" BAE is a conglomerate of many manufacturers, the M2, M3, M113, and M109 are all American designs produced in the US.
The Americans have not produced an all new main battle tank since 1943.
Allthough there are no longer any parts that interchange the Challenger 2 is based on the 1960s designed Chieftain.
No, once again your assumptions are wrong.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@smilo996 The only other tracked vehicle owned by BAE is the Warrior, It is not a Main Battle Tank. The warrior has only one other customer nation besides UK and thats Kuwait. There are currently no new orders for the Warrior.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
docktobimmer reverts to emotion not facts, last form of defence. Go to BAE's website & see the number of vehicles that they produce in the UK and abroad. Rheinmetall, Krausse & MAK do not even mention the Leopard. Rheinmetall only makes 4 vehicles, all of them wheeled (on their website). So where is the next Leopard coming from then? BAE sales 2010 E26bn, Rheinmettal.......E2bn. Leopards all sold to countries that do not use them. 23 have been deployed. *20 challys have been deployed. End of.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 WTF are you talkin about? The Challenger 2 will be in servce until 2035 with no plans to built a replacement. It will be the last british built main battle tank.
BAE only had one customer nation for the Challenger2... Oman they only bought 50. production stops, no more Challenger2s. exsisting tanks will all have German guns fitted and the first major overhaul program the engine powerpacks updated with MTU (Maybach) engine from the Leopard 2 are planned to be used.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
tanknutdave and read the blue on blue pdf. Very sad event. Page 14.
As for Canada being invaded by the USA. The Brits & Canadians already invaded the US & burnt down White House 1. Canadians are too busy smuggling cannabis into the US anyway. 2-0 Commonwealth. Most Americans dont know where it is fortunately. Asked a career woman in NY where Nova Scotia was, GB she said. New Orleans Police Cheif did not know where Ontario was. Canada is safe.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 16 countries around the world completely disagree with you because they bought and use the Leopard 2 not the Challenger. Germany invented the modern main battle tank and still leads the world in tank and gun development. Even the brits and Australia found the Leopard 2 out performed the Challenger, the brits opted out for political reasons and the aussies couldn't pass up the deal for second hand M1 Abrams (originally designed in Germany & w/ German gun) at discount prices.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@smilo996 The Challenger is the only MBT left still uses an obsolete rifled gun.
Soviets certainly did not invent the smoothbore gun.. its been around since the very first cannon silly boy. Germany just perfected it.
The Rheinmetall 120mm L/55 gun is capable of knocking out a target at ranges well beyond that of the Challengers L30A1 gun.
The L30A1 is no longer produced and will be replaced by the RM L/55.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@smilo996 The Challenger 2 (aptly named) is the most outdated, slowest, most underpowered, overpriced, shoddily built, mechanicly unreliable and obsolete tank of all the world class MBTs and with only one customer nation besides the UK only 550 have been built and with no plans for a replacement it is the last MBT to ever be built in the UK.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
More accurately 23 in total. 4 hit by IED's 3 disabled & one crew killed. (sadly). Apart from shooting at Afghans with AK47's that's it. No tank on tank, no Milan's, RPG's, T54's, T72's, APC's,
smilo996 1 week ago
1. You would expect to be able to destroy your own equipment. Not really a combat loss is it. Blue on blue is a sad reality. Where were all the worlds' number 1 tanks during Kuwait, Iraq 1 and 2 and the front line in Afghan, back in the depot being polished and on youtube.
How many Leopards have knocked out an enemy tank, APC, personnel, received a direct hit from a milan missile, fired a round in combat and hit something.......0. U know I'm right.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 Correct, but the round that that killed that Challenger wasn't supposed to be capable of doing it. It was a high explosive round designed for soft-skin vehicles, personnel and tearing buildings apart, it shouldnt have damaged so badly a challenger.
Someone is still scratching his head, wondering what gone bad with the armour or what gone so well with the round (as they are MUCH cheaper than the armour piercing ones ;-) )
Both Chall. and Leo are great, not the Abrahams.
GroovyDrifter 1 week ago
Oh doctorbimmer...U must be German. Composite armour invented in 1918. Chobham armour invented in the 60's in the UK - the generic name for ceramic composite armour therefore not redundant. See how much chobham composite armour is fitted to the leopard 2....fprado.com. When zee Germans dropped MBT 70 prog they developed their own chobham armour. Chobham armour it is, based on the UK precursor. Not plastic sandwich type of Leo 1. All hoovers are hoovers, a dyson is a vacuum cleaner. See.
smilo996 1 week ago
doktorbimmer The armour used on the Leopard is produced in Germany from the same spec as sorry Dorchester (not Chobham). It's called sharing tech between allies.
The girl analogy in the bar with respect to the Leopard is correct. In modern times the only tanks to have been combat tested are the Abrams, Challenger, T72, T54, Merkeva... All the others are paper tanks. Challenger 2: longest tank to tank kill, no combat loss, no armour penetration, highest klill ratio.= 2 in the world undisputed.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 No, The armour of the original Leopard predates Chobham.
Yes, even the brits no longer use Chobham armor it is obsolete, replaced by Dorchester.
The Leopard 2 never used Chobham armor.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@smilo996 If the the Challenger is so much better why are they switching to the Leopard 2 main gun??
No combat losses? what about the the Challenger that was destroyed by another Challenger in Iraq? good shooting there brits ha ha
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
Apart from 2 small IED's the Leopard has never been tested. It looks good on paper. Challenger, longest tank to tank kill ever 100% kill ratio (kills to losses), no losses ever, no armour penetration ever. 3 most important facts IMHO but in fewer numbers than the Abrams which has also proved very competent. See a girl in a bar & by any measures, she is the best girl you have ever seen. But until you have a relationship, you can't make a conclusion! Vitally the armour on your Leopard is British!
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 Wrong, although similar the Leopard 2 never used Chobham armour, only Challenger and Abrams used it. The Leopard uses its own carbide/tungsten matrix ceramic armor developed during the MBT-70 program and is not british. Although still kept a secret the orignal Chobham armour is now obsolete.
Your bar analogy was funny.. but irrelevant, the Challenger is not even a close third in the top ten tanks of the world.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer abrams doesnt use chobam either it uses a similar method and leo did use a type of chobam armor and i said i dont care about the hull desighn like wtf thats random?????
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 I don't know where you get your facts from? comic books maybe?
The original M1 Abrams armor type is officially listed as Chabham armor, in fact it was the first ever tank to use it.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
ithe comparison can only be made in theory because the Leopard 2 has not seen any significant action, the odd IED attack. However the Challenger 2 has and is clearly better than both. Not to mention that the amour, which you could argue is THE most important aspect of this kind of tank's ability is British. Guns important but they are different but similar. No national favouritism here.
smilo996 1 week ago
@smilo996 Look at the facts and you will see that the Abrams and mostly the Leopard are better than the Challenger..... No national favouritism here too.
MrGermanyman 1 week ago
I always wonder how people can turn a tank comparison into a national rivalry. Thats so stupid. But then i remember that this is youtube....
possumGFX 1 week ago
stop fighting the war is already over
so shut up
myisafe 1 week ago
Comment removed
myisafe 1 week ago
ich wüsste gerne woher die amis das ganze geld nehmen womit ihre munition bezahlt wird die sie so in nur einem einsatz verbraten ich meine die gesammten militärs aus europe gehen auf präzision dh: ein maximal zwei schuss um ein ziel zu treffen und die amis machen aus einem ziel gleich eine kommplette massenvernichtung wobei es sich bei dem einen ziel vielleicht um 5 oder 6 feinde handelt und das is das traurige was ich net verstehe die amis sind was krieg angeht kleine kinder je mehr also besser
1989Sock 1 week ago
your stupid leo cant keep up in term of technological advantages with our abrham.. you sucks nazi im just saying O.o
30sectodeath 1 week ago
@30sectodeath And not a single fuck was given... but you do know that we live in 2012 dont you?
tropicthunder332 1 week ago
@30sectodeath you stupid asshole of an amarikan patriot the leopard 2A6 is on of the modern tanks in the wolrd and the abrems was updatet not more think befor you write damit amarikans think they are the best
1989Sock 1 week ago
@30sectodeath oh im sorry it's the leopard 2A7
1989Sock 1 week ago
@1989Sock FYI Leo2A7 is not capable for battlefield scenario its design only for urban combat but the abrham can do both dumbass
30sectodeath 1 week ago
@30sectodeath and just for information I AM A GERMAN
1989Sock 1 week ago
@1989Sock oh yeah whatever. so what if your a German?
do you mean until now you still hate the us(american) btw dont blame the USA about the controversial bombing in your cities which result to higher casualties of the civilian cos the reason we choice d the daylight bombing was to hit the specific target and to avoid some civilian casualties even though its a nose dive decision blame the Brits cos they do there campaign at night which they cant hit the target cos of poor visibility
30sectodeath 1 week ago
@1989Sock thats why they use the method of carpet bombing which result to higher civilian casualty
30sectodeath 1 week ago
@30sectodeath Although the M1 Abrams and the Leopard2 were designed at the same time.. they are the same tank with different turrets and engines..
The Leopard 2 has recieved technology updates on a more regular basis than the Abrams, the M-256 gun is out of date.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@mlk22771 no they us made basic hull desighn and german moddified it us chooose it becaus the abras had more armor
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 The M1 and Leo2 share the same hull design.. if you look at them sideways you can see how similar they are.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
and?? so i dont care?
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 Nice come back, its pretty obvious you don't care.. don't care to check your facts before you post comments regarding something you know little or nothing about.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
The main armament of the M1A1 and M1A2 is the M256A1 120 mm smoothbore gun, designed by Rheinmetall AG of Germany. and copy? ofc! America has bin doing copycat of everything the germans make.
Dejavvvuuu 2 weeks ago
@Dejavvvuuu it is german its a great gun but its a l/44 gun we moddified it to wiegh less but have more armor penatration and fewwer parts and cheeeper but yeah its a great gun
Blueatchley12 2 weeks ago
@Blueatchley12 The German L/44 and the M256 have the same max. chamber pressure and both use NATO STANAG ammo specs, ballastic performace is the same.
of coarse the new L/55 out performs both in range and penetration.
All of the the modification to the M356 are cost saving and do not enhance ballistic performance.
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
@doktorbimmer yes but the abrams uses depleated uranium rounds rather then the steel ones leopard uses and it has beeen confered that the m256 gun has more penatration with this use look it up
Blueatchley12 2 weeks ago
@Blueatchley12 You said the guns penetration was better.. thats not true. The guns performance is the same, the Ammo is different though. but they are compatable. Germany does not use DU rounds, thats why they developed the L/55 gun.. it out performs the M256 DU round now.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer OMG DX you are so wrong ok im going to get my manual brb ok this is straight from a book made in Germany "Some discussian has taken place to retier the old 120mm(4.7in) M256 gun and replaceing it with tthe longer l55 gun but this may never occure the m256 has proven lethal firing ammunition with a depleted uranium core, achieving kills at distances at 4700 m With greater success that the european man battle tanks fireing rounds with tungsten cores from the L55."
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Blueatchley12 The L55 has 7,250psi more chamber pressure or 65.5 tons more muzzle energy than a M265 w/APFSDS round. The L55 DM43/53 round has 6,954ft/s muzzle velocity compared to 5,700ft/s of the APFSDS and gives it an increase in effective range of over 1,600yrds over the APFSDS and a 18% increase of armor penetration at 2,200yrds.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 The Leopard 2 uses tungstem KE rounds.. not steel.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer you know what tungsten is its a type of steel
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 Wrong, the German KE rounds are Tungsten Carbide! Not Steel! Tungsten + Carbon = Tungsten Carbide
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@Dejavvvuuu Yes, all copies. The 105mm L7 gun (M68) used in the original M1 and its predecessor the M-60 Patton is borrowed from Royal Ordnance in the UK too.
The M1 Abrams in general was basicly a copy of the Leopard 2 visa vie the MBT-70 prototype designed by Krauss-Maffei in Germany.
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
@doktorbimmer No the MBT-70 was a joint project by west germany and the usa. The us provided a good amount of funding for that project until it was canceled
thebaskill 2 weeks ago
The main gun on the Abrams is made in GERMANY as well as other stuff on the tank. question is, if the americans are so Gr8, why can't thay make it? hmm
Dejavvvuuu 2 weeks ago
@Dejavvvuuu Actually thats not correct..
the M256 is a cheaper licence built copy of the Rheinmetall 120mm L/44 thats BUILT IN USA, it does not have the hydro-pneumatic recoil system and is not concentricly balanced like the German version.
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
T90 MS Tagil is the best Tank in the World !!!!
KillerGamer625 2 weeks ago
Americans will smoke you just like in France, and Germany.... were goona fight you so hard.... WATCH THE ENHLISH VERSION OF SAVING PVT. RYAN. THE GERMAN VERSION IS MILD TO SAY THE LEAST. hows this one ' Dont shoot, dont shoot, let em' burn.
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY you have been watching too much hollywood crap made by spielberg jew:) i think in near future Abrams tank will be used on the streets of American cities when niggers will be running on the loose and looting;)
jumpthewestwagon 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY Your still an idiot.. go back to watching DVDs
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
we cant say becaues the M1's armoer is classed fied
natemag1 2 weeks ago
Abrams its a pice of crap beside the Leopard 2, every guy who really knows about tnaks know that.
mauricioalfredo83 2 weeks ago
the leo os better because of the dieselengine and the better speed...
also the gun is better.
but its not a fair battle because the abraham is much older...
also bonuspoints for the abraham because its battleproven.
i was a leodriver myself.
MyMMC 2 weeks ago
This music really sucks, man!
LetsGetTr0lling 2 weeks ago
Hello mute button.
SnowRescue69 2 weeks ago
rubbish music! change that! and is there have to be any music in this kind of videos!?
WHITECHILD2 2 weeks ago
THOSE abrahams are crap if u seen the new leopard it has treat protection thicker armour bigger gun so its bether the us tank has non of that stuff lol
sjors91 2 weeks ago
@sjors91 the abrams are battle proven maybe not the best but they are very good..
chuckthedestroyer34 2 weeks ago
all u americans think u all the best in evryting well by fact the leoparts are the best and im not german so! and its a fact check wikipedia or the us national geograpic its a us tv program shown world wide and the say the same ! any more proof ?! go to discovery channel
sjors91 2 weeks ago
ach kommt der ganze scheiss kommt eh aus china leo T90 abrahams ...
MyMcMichael 2 weeks ago
Deutsche Wertarbeit ist halt die beste
89Alastor 2 weeks ago
Leopard is the best tank of the world!!!
Leopard es el mejor tanque del mundo!!!!
ristworld 2 weeks ago
Leopard and Abrams !!! Germany and USA !!! NATO !!! peace for all
19sebi88 2 weeks ago
who gives a fuck.. both are german.. the creators of the M1A2 with TUSK are only on paper americans... born in germany...
061323980 2 weeks ago
The new Leoprad 2A8 is better ;)
TheTiguan2000 2 weeks ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i know i want to hit you in the jaw with like 2000 psi
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY yeah but you still don't know how much that is in metric ha ha
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago 2
@doktorbimmer your right dick fukk im gonna fucking fukk you up either way, and im gonna measure it in American. one pussy down. 6.3 billion left
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY You mean in British Imperial (avoirdupois) units.
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY no in america we dont use imperial. I am Going to put a size American 12 boot in your ass
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY No, your wrong again dummy, U.S. units are virtually identical to their imperial counterparts, U.S. customary system developed from English units used in the British Empire.
That would be a size 47 in Europe (305mm)
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
@doktorbimmer your tarded its called a conversion table, just like c*-f* , their no where near identical, tell me how many cm is= 1' ???
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY OMG! WTF is wrong withu ur total idiot! British imperial units are not metric! Metric is French u fuck tard
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
@doktorbimmer like i said you English fukk we dont use any of your arcaic' systems, you shoulda done know that one.
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY Are you stupid? we still use the English system in America... and I'm an American you dumb ass
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
@doktorbimmer look FUCKFCE YOU DONT WEAR A SIZE American 12 So get lost 37.5 EU/222.7chink
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY No, I wear size 13
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago
@doktorbimmer fukk face we use American; foot,gallon- not imperial/non-metric Asswipe
BuBzIeNYNY 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY Duh.. you really are an idiot.. where do you think the system came from in the first place? China?
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer WTF are you talking about???? What does that shit have to do with Canada?
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
i think your tarded, leo weighs 5 ton less(access more bridges and narrow roads)and rolls 2X as far on a full tank. Abrams is designed to sit in a hull-hidden position and fight
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY Appearantly you don't know the difference between short tons and mertric tons.. maybe ur the tard.
Tanks are not designed to be reveted although they sometimes do.
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago 2
@BuBzIeNYNY All modern Main Battle Tank maneuver "en Defilade" whenever possible.
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The most important thing to remember is that they both use British armour. The most most important aspect of the tank. Ask the crew.
smilo996 2 weeks ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
abrams easily kills 3 leos, a leo is not gonna eat an abrams hit, where as an abram can eat 5 direct hits by leo, Also the abrams is designed as a defensive tank. ambush from a concelled position then move to a new position. Actually Germans taught us the tactic, shoot' and scoot'
BuBzIeNYNY 3 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY totaly stupid what you say...... 1. Abrams defensive Tank ?? lol 2. 5 Direct direct hits by a Leo2A6 ?? rofl .. and so on. first think then write
sthcJAX 2 weeks ago 10
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@sthcJAX Abrams is a defensive tank. thats why its heavier and runs on jet fuel, more p/w ratio(will move quickly) low mpg/ratio, M1A1 is designed to sit in a hole kill 5 T-72 move to the next hole then kill 5 more T-72. used in an offensive role simply bc if very well can in iraq ie: fuel truck can follow one. sure a leo can disable a abrams in 1 shot, but its gonna take a leo 5 well placed shots to kill an abrams
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
@BuBzIeNYNY All tanks are primarily offensive weapons.. thats why they are mobile. The Abrams and the Leopard 2 are the same chassis
The Abrams IS NOT HEAVIER it weighs the same as Leo2 and the Challenger, ever heard of STANAG??? probably not.
The Abrams and the Leo2 have the SAME power to weight ratio.
They also have about the same range (Abrams holds more fuel)
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago 4
@doktorbimmer they dont have the same chasis at all.... driver in leo sits on side abrams middle if you look at back rear on abrams it goes go at a 45 degree and gle leo is just flat
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 Thats because they use different engines.. apparantly you were unaware of that fact too.
The interior layout is different, the Abrams needs twice as much fuel storage, the Leopard has a storage compart up front to carry the track grousers.
The hull design otherwise is the same, they are based on the exact same prototype (the MBT-70) remenber?
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer ok yeah i can seee the similarity in the two but i do know what im talking about in turret ring right under nieth the pinced turret on the leo but dont get me wrong the leopard is a great tank my guess is best tank in the world im just saying there guns are very comparible and the m256 gun is out dated but in the new abrams m1a3 model its going to be huge more armor new engine which is stronger quiter more fuel efficient and fully water proof (whole tank) and new gun.
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 Yes, at some point the Abrams will get the L/55 gun.
The US Army is considering replacing the gas turbine with the MTU (Maybach) Diesel from the Leopard.
Yes, the Abrams is due for an armor package upgrade as well.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer but the leo is a great tank dont get me wrong but the turret ring is widely exposed with pinced turret what do you think would happen is u shot it there
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 I'm not really sure you know what a turret ring is..
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer leo is more manuvrable then abrams but abrams has more armor since it is slanted 2 ways sidely and upwards that tripples armor so abrams has more then a one foot of armor plus it has diffrent types which also doubles armor so abrams has more armor. And the under side of the piced leo turret if a shells hits the under part of the pinced turret it might ricochiet downward into the turret ring myight jam it.
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 That might be true what you say about the turret ring if modern tanks still used solid shot AP rounds, but they don't anymore.
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer i know i mean a sabo round ot mpat (moulti purpose anti tank round)
Blueatchley12 1 week ago
@Blueatchley12 the MPAT is a shaped charge round (HEAT)
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY The Leopard 2 has the latest in armor technology, more protection than the Abrams.
The Abrams and Leopard 2 both have the same German 120mm smoothbore gun but the Leo2 to now has the more powerful long barrel L/55 version.. the Abrams does not.
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago 8
@sthcJAX DONT YOU GET IT SHIT HEAD, 4 ALLIED SOLDIGERS ARE GONNA SIT IN THAT TANK UNTIL IT DIES. WERE NOT GONNA MOVE , FACT IS WE'LL TAKE 4 OF YOUR TANKS DOWN WITH US, ONLY YOUR FIFTH TANK IS GONNA KILL US, RATHER DIE FREE THEN UNDER YOUR NSZI FLAG
BuBzIeNYNY 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY Hey idiot, I thought I told you to go back to watching DVDs or playing video games
doktorbimmer 1 week ago
@doktorbimmer you do understand canada only exists b/c we allow it to. chances are canada will be absorbed by 2050 no later then 2100
BuBzIeNYNY 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY
Um, not really. USA could take over with little difficulty, but they would lose all their allies. What has the USA got to gain by taking over Canada? Nothing. the USA would face the 53 nations of the Commonwealth. Almost 1.2 billion people.
RyanBrooksby 1 week ago
@RyanBrooksby let me set you stright, first annexation of canada. annex Panama, which we alredy owned then re-took over in '89. Then take Mexico, and keep driving till souther most Argentina. Americanize them all. One Grand American Army
BuBzIeNYNY 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY
Argentina?
Pfft, please. Argentina's a threat to itself more so than anyone else. One british plane can demolish their entire airforce.
RyanBrooksby 1 week ago
@RyanBrooksby once there all trained up and outfitted and incorprated into Greater American Army, Oceania here we come, True Oceania will also incorp. G.B., Aus, NZ and S. Africa
BuBzIeNYNY 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY
America won't take over GB.
Because, really...what's the point? we made our "mark" on the world. Now it's time for us to become a greater European coalition.
We need to sort our problems with stupid Germany-Greece problems, France problems, and then finally Europe can be the centre of the world.
America had it's time, 2003.
Unlike you, we don't NEED a huge army. Who's going to attack a nuclear-armed Europe? China? Russia? Iran? Highly unlikely.
RyanBrooksby 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY Go ahead, make yourself look stupid for what you are saying. Do us all a favor and shut the fuck up, k thx.
MrBanBeta 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY
That would mean we'd have to take Quebec too.
Pass...
Waltham1892 1 week ago
@BuBzIeNYNY Your an idiot... now go back to playing video games
doktorbimmer 2 weeks ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@doktorbimmer fukk off
BuBzIeNYNY 2 weeks ago
*Mute*
00BEATE0BARDEN00 3 weeks ago
Among the other thing that perplexed me, is that Leo is the seventh evolution (A7), but had never fought, while Abrams is only the second ........ sign that the original project of Abrams, was already more advanced.
geoago 3 weeks ago
@geoago well it didnt work that way. leopard gradually modify their tanks by little for every batch krauss maffei made. thats why it isnt that hard to upgrade the 2a4 to 2a6. or 2a5 to 2a7. abrams did modified but they arent yet to call it a new version. and recently they jus hold on every modification waiting for the M1A2. so its basically the same. besides US made abrams to suit their needs, and Germans also made leopard to suit their needs, just as how russian, israeli, polish does...
indonesiarayas2 3 weeks ago