@MrDeath4Life2O Well, yeah but remember that the Russians also have planes, Chinese have planes and the Best AA and SAM weapons in the world. They also have tanks and in fact, their Armored units are better organized and equally prepared to all NATO armies. Look, before he could see the fire, he is already dead, the BMP-2 has equal range and a higher rate of fire than the LAV and Bradley. Maby the BMP-1 but not the BMP-2/3.. THe BMP-3 has 8km range ATGMs .......
@kingmigget they are both apc/IFV but you need a skirt on for the bradley. and it takes 10 minutes for all the crew to set it up. its basically just an airbag a couple bullets and it will pop. i know that they have a different purpose.
Why does it bother Americans so much that it was build it Canada a lot of your equipment comes from foreign designs you guys just modify it for your use then change enough so you won't have to buy a licensee
@Mattc23q Uneducated Kid? The Bradley was designed to fight on the open plains of Europe and stick close to the Abrams when the Soviets were piling through the Folda Gap. No armoured vehicle is designed to fight in an Urban enviroment, it's the worst place to bring a large vehicle, but a wheeled vehicle would have an advantage in an urban enviroment, as it would be quiter than squeaky and clanky tracks and would be less likely to be fully imobilised if it loses a wheel than a whole track.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 It was originally designed for that, but since it never got used in the plains of europe the newer models were designed for urban combat as seen in the gulf war and 2003 invasion of iraq, it's got 6 firing ports to engage targets from multiple directions as seen in an urban environment, and its 30mm gun is used to take out light civilian vehicles and small buildings, you wouldnt expect a 30mm to be pinned against a t-70 or a t-80?
@Mattc23q Bradley can deal with a T-72 with a TOW. Not sure if I would trust the TOW against the T-80's newer reactive armour. I don't think the firing ports were added for urban combat, I think they came as standard. My Bro tells me that he would prefer the M-113 over both of them. It's easier to manouvere than the Bradley but it's got better mobility cross country and over rubble than the LAV or the Stryker. Hes in the army BTW.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Yeah, the Bradleys is just a waste of tax payer money, same with the stryker, the M113 can take a rocket just like the bradleys, its rare for 2 rockets to hit the same vehicle, But i'd take the Lav or the ASLAV over any of them, just has more style.
clearly tracked vehicles are better, but what difference does it make when you cannot afford to put all your troops in them... you can buy lots of these canadian LAVS for the price of 1 bradley... look at germany in ww2, they had by far the best armor, but when you got 2000 tigers going up against 100 000+ shermans and t-34s, it dont really matter how good your tiger tank is, your still gunna lose
@admonster11 Why is everyone on the internet so damn stuid? Do you honestly believe that the Saudi government would slaughter its own people? They want stability as much as everyother nation, they want freedom as everyother nation. Freedom is not the American system, freedom is non-oppression from outside, or internal forces! Why has the world moved from racism to religous descrimination? In the end we are all brothers. We breath, sweat, bleed, and think the same!
@TexasMadeChicano its because people are generally stupid..I do honestly believe that they will slaughter any people who will threaten royal or Islamic rule as they showed so eager in Bahrain.. and as a hell hole which Saudi Arabia is nothing good will come from them and arming them in modern weapons is just mental!
@TexasMadeChicano I got your point totally! Everyone was running away from States to live in Saudi Arabia and other freedom loving countries in the middle east.
@TexasMadeChicano best part of their rich tradition..Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council, just issued a fatwa asserting that there is no minimum age for marriage, and that girls can be married “even if they are in the cradle.”
@admonster11 thats an interesting opinion, care to elaborate, or should we take your word for it, that the saudi military or any military would just go out and engage civilians, considering the cost, i'd say whatever you think is mostly propaganda
@vamparik its a savage country which resembles north Korea just with shits lots of money! They cant have freedom because they occupied by totalitarian religious system. half of the population women are enslaved at home cant go out without male guardian.
I went there very interesting experience. but Its like time travel their minds are hanging in void between 6th century and modern times my only point is that we should not arm them in our hight tech western military equipment
@thecow777 The military's intentions don't have to deal with killing civilians, but they love making high profits which Saudi Arabia is willing to give to them for their weapons.
Yeah Hate to break it to you but the country of origin is the country that designed the vehicle. Production drones in a factory only know how to push buttons and tighten screws. Or if they are really smart, solder and weld.
These were produced by GM Defense in Canada with a Detroit Diesel engine. My wife (then girlfriend) saw one on the hi way down in florida and was surprised that a tank could go so fast and had tires, mind you this was back in '85. Seems like yesterday. Semper Fi
my ass you can fit 6 scouts in the back, all we could fit inside were 4 tightly packed scouts. still remember when we first got them in 1st LAI Batallion. I do love the vehicles and were an asset in desert shield/desert storm.
my ass you can fit 6 scouts in the back, all we could fit inside were 4 tightly packed scouts. still remember when we first got them in 1st Lai bn. I do love th evehicles and were an asset in desert shield/desert storm.
Tracked vehicles have to be chased by mechanics in soft vehicles, in todays wars thats not a good way to fight. The worst weapon on a modern battlefield is infantry thats why canada nearly gave up using main battle tanks. USA created the stryker army the stryker doesnt need to rely on soft vehicles to chase it to keep it running.
@NielsShoe I thought Canada was still using the German Leopard 2A4s? I do know they do use the "Mobile Gun System" variant of the Styker (105mm gun variant)
The LAV has several platforms, the LAV-25 is just one. There is the LAV-AT, a tow missle mounted platform. There is a platform that has 81mm mortors fired from the back. The LAV-C2, which is the communication platform. The LAV-LOG, or logistics platform. A recovery platform with mechs. aboard. In the LAR Bn. all of these LAV's work together to make a very impressive force. Not to mention the Marine in the back of the LAV-25 who are a weapon all there own. Semper FI
@Tyco200 oh yeah... well this LAV can drive even if its missing most of its wheels or has a chunk blown out of it.... a bradley loses its tracks and its done... loses its drivetrain and its done... this can take way more of a beating and continue to operate... and it can be repaired on the fly much easyer... not 2 mention you can buy 3 of them for less then the price of 1 m3a3... im not sayin a LAV3 or 25 will win in a 1 on 1 fight with a m3a3... im jus sayin that they have there advantages 2
@101andrewj Well, I can agree with that. But having a chunk blown out of the vehicle? I doubt it could take that much punishment. However, it is true that wheels are better than tracks.
@Tyco200 You're right. There might have been minimal improvements to this vehicle, but look up Gustafsen Lake. It was a conflict between RCMP and First Nations going back about 15 yrs., and a LAV was disabled by a single rifle bullet (Not kidding. Look it up, if the article hasn't been censored). I assume the drivetrain or a CV joint was damaged. Those wheels are fairly exposed. And we all know now what a POS the Strykers proved to be in Iraq.
@BaconTV123 I Dont care about the american version, The Can-Australian version (ASLAV) Designed in Canada, Made by a Australian and Canadian, Assembled in Sydney, Australia.
@Fiend2011 General Motors is the company that owns the factories. It is also an American company meaning their products are made by an American company. Therefore it is an American Product. Just Like the AK-47 is made everywhere its still a Russian Gun. As for Sweeden they can claim the LAV-25 as much as Lockheed Martin can claim the Pak-50.
@robschroeder365247 Hey cockhead. I know you want to say everything is American,but the LAV series was made BY CANADIANS,and it was a CANADIAN design The funding was American.
@robschroeder365247 That's not true...it's is invented by the Candian the design was given to GM(American) then parts are built and assembled in Canada...oh and Canada already has a better version called LAV-III
@robschroeder365247 Canadian vehicle designed and produced in Canada. Same as the stryker. I cant figure out why you guys are so xenophobic, its not like anyone said they were made by china.
@25Milimeter MOWAG designed the Piranha, which the LAV and the Stryker are based on. No matter how much of the vehicle is manufactured or modified elsewhere, it will always be a Swiss vehicle.
except smaller and slower. Its just a Coyote... I would much rather be in a LAV then that vehicles... but hey im a Bison driver (Variant of the Coyote)
this seems like it has a limited use considering it cant engage tanks, is used mainly for engaging troop transports, and we already have the bradley for transporting troops.
Yeah, good finnish technology ;). Have you ever thought about it? Lots of good military hardware come from nordic countries. Norwegian AA missiles, Swedish Saab airplanes, bazookas and Bofors' countless large caliber guns, Finnish Patria vehicles, like that Rosomak of yours, and Sako's sniper rifles that are used by 29 countries law enforcement and/or militaries.
Yeah, but it Stryker was based on european design, that comes from Switzerland. Mowag Piranha, put it on youtube and you might find and see it. Seeing them leaves no room for doubt.
Along highway 1 during the invasion of Iraq, these things, equipped with night vision sights mowed down alot of RPG gunner way before they could get in range.
The Coyote Recce vehicle is one of the best Armoured Recce Vehicles around... the Coyote is the only reason the US has the LAV-25 because they were impressed with the vehicle when the Canadians used it. Same thing with the Stryker.
Thank you. Could an additional removable mine protection be mounted at the front of the vehicle? I am considering this for patrols through cities like Kaboul. Would you, if realizable, consider it as an advantage, or does the existing protection give full satisfaction?
Looks very fuckable girl for Russian BTR 90 and BMP 3. Americans, please come up with something that not so funny. Russian weapons ROKS, US weapons SUCKS:
Even russian dont like BMP-3. Whats wrong with this weapon system? USA weapons suck? .... i disagree. BTR-80 is so unsafe that crew prefers to ride in the roof instead inside it.
In the war nothing is safe, but have to be usefull.
BMP 3 is light weight tank, wich can also sweem and even have WC inside. It has also very good weapons. It can carrye 10 solders and 1000kg weapons. It looks very usefull for me in the war.
So is that why russia lost in afghanistan? because the russians have such great equipment that they lost in afghanistan! but... if you say US equipment sucks then why are we winning?
In wich war you USA "winning"? In Korea, In Vietnam or in Iryq and Afganistan? You should check in Wikipedia Russian thechnology losies in Afgan war and compare with US loses in Vietnam or in Korea. Check in Iraq and in Afganistan too, and that's without Russian help, if Russia would have helped Iraq and Afganistan now with weapons USA wouldn't even been there so long. Since WW2 USA lost every war where they faced Russian weapons. Korea MIG 15. VIETNAM AK 47 and MIG 21. That's fact
maybe you should get YOUR facts right. We won korea and we won the military battles in vietnam. do something useful and read up on the wars because your obviously dont know shit.
You kill lots of Vietnamis woman and children, but they kill 50000 US military for it, that's not winning, that's means you got fucked in Vietnam and in Korea.
we may have lost 50,000 troops but the NVA lost 520,000. not only did we win but we owned the skies which the NVA had RUSSIAN pilots flyin for them. the russians couldnt do shit and still cant. they dont have enough money for a war because they are poor.
How you can be right, are you fucked up in your head? USA lost war militarally with Vietnam and with Korea. that's fact. Just becouse of USA have great propaganda, brainwashing sistem wich can only shows US advantige, dosn't changes the fact that Americans got fucked in Vietnam and in Korea with Russian weapons. It was humilating fuck, but you think you are heros anyway don't you? "freedome loving people" in my ass USA is evel country in this planet.
And you think Americans won in Korea? Americans never won anything, just destroy and kill woman and children. Militarally USA suckes, especially when it's faced Russian weapons. FACT!!! You can argue teoretically, but fact it's fact, Russian weapons always on winning side.
yeah Australia lost 11 because they aren't doing shit in Afghanistan... who's doing the most? US and UK. how much troops do you even have in Afghanistan? like 300?? and we didn't lose Vietnam, just look at the battles.. khe sahn, hue, etc. you say you like American history but you don't know shit.
nah dont worry i dont like american history...and well u went to iraq cuz of weapons of mass destruction but as soon as korea drops a shit load of nukes america dusnt see that....PUSSIES...PUSSIES, george bush was doin fukn nothin over there, and muthafuka 11 of our troops die cuz there sas not just grunts, so they got skillz unlike ur army...wake up
lol do realize how retarded you sound? you obviously dont know anything about the American military operations...
Americans are doing all the real fighting dumb asss!! and the Brits are doing their part, are you fucking retarded??....You dont even know your countries role in the war! your not even worth this comment, thanks for wasting my time cocksucker, go fuck a kangaroo
u cant answer to any shit i say, thats funny...americas pretty good at dying too, but i guess it wud b unamerican to not put ur army in someone elses country...np wastin ur time lol...not like u got anythin else else to while ur child porn downloads..bye bye bitch
on an LAV, an RPG hit will be less likely because of the sloped armor. more likely than not the round will ricochet and fly off elsewhere. also mind you the LAV is constantly improving in terms of reliability, sighting systems and survivability. yes the main gun on the LAV remains the same (albiet with an improved internals and barrell), but the sighting system is FAR improved from when it was first introduced
it is a cool post. its amazing how the LAV advanced throughout the years. now its more powerful, much improved sighting system, improved turret and much easier to maintain and repair
TheDevilDogGamer!!!
pwndumbppl 1 week ago
Can a LAV-25 have a mounted TOW on it?
planetary109 3 weeks ago 2
@MrDeath4Life2O Well, yeah but remember that the Russians also have planes, Chinese have planes and the Best AA and SAM weapons in the world. They also have tanks and in fact, their Armored units are better organized and equally prepared to all NATO armies. Look, before he could see the fire, he is already dead, the BMP-2 has equal range and a higher rate of fire than the LAV and Bradley. Maby the BMP-1 but not the BMP-2/3.. THe BMP-3 has 8km range ATGMs .......
zerocker45 2 months ago
way better than the fking bradley. slow SOB that is. and non-aquatic
Mrinsanepain 2 months ago
@Mrinsanepain bradleys serve a slightly different purpose than the lav-25s do. also, bradleys are indeed amphibious.
kingmigget 2 months ago
@kingmigget they are both apc/IFV but you need a skirt on for the bradley. and it takes 10 minutes for all the crew to set it up. its basically just an airbag a couple bullets and it will pop. i know that they have a different purpose.
Mrinsanepain 2 months ago
Why does it bother Americans so much that it was build it Canada a lot of your equipment comes from foreign designs you guys just modify it for your use then change enough so you won't have to buy a licensee
TheCFarmy 2 months ago
Not sure about real counterpart but i will always pick BRDM2 or BTR90 over LAV-25 at any time in ArmA 2.
ghos7bear 3 months ago
The M3A3 Bradley is so much better than this crap
airplanef22 4 months ago
@airplanef22 Totally different vehicles, this is designed to be infantry fast support the Bradleys is Heavy APC, designed for Urban Combat.
Uneducated kid.
Mattc23q 3 months ago
@Mattc23q Uneducated Kid? The Bradley was designed to fight on the open plains of Europe and stick close to the Abrams when the Soviets were piling through the Folda Gap. No armoured vehicle is designed to fight in an Urban enviroment, it's the worst place to bring a large vehicle, but a wheeled vehicle would have an advantage in an urban enviroment, as it would be quiter than squeaky and clanky tracks and would be less likely to be fully imobilised if it loses a wheel than a whole track.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 3 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 It was originally designed for that, but since it never got used in the plains of europe the newer models were designed for urban combat as seen in the gulf war and 2003 invasion of iraq, it's got 6 firing ports to engage targets from multiple directions as seen in an urban environment, and its 30mm gun is used to take out light civilian vehicles and small buildings, you wouldnt expect a 30mm to be pinned against a t-70 or a t-80?
Mattc23q 3 months ago
@Mattc23q Bradley can deal with a T-72 with a TOW. Not sure if I would trust the TOW against the T-80's newer reactive armour. I don't think the firing ports were added for urban combat, I think they came as standard. My Bro tells me that he would prefer the M-113 over both of them. It's easier to manouvere than the Bradley but it's got better mobility cross country and over rubble than the LAV or the Stryker. Hes in the army BTW.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 3 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Yeah, the Bradleys is just a waste of tax payer money, same with the stryker, the M113 can take a rocket just like the bradleys, its rare for 2 rockets to hit the same vehicle, But i'd take the Lav or the ASLAV over any of them, just has more style.
Mattc23q 3 months ago
BATTLEFIELD 3
karna77330 4 months ago 66
@karna77330 that was my first thought when i saw this video :p lol
BillNickJim 2 months ago
@BillNickJim lol
karna77330 2 months ago
@karna77330, Better REAL LIFE!!!!
pommyrooter 4 weeks ago
@karna77330 wow
usmceflips 3 weeks ago
BTR is like a hammer compared to this fly.
LynxSr 5 months ago
@LynxSr no. most early model BTRs (manufacured around the same time as the LAVs) had .50 cal MGs and paper-thin armor.
even modern BTRs arent much better than these, they use a similar gun, a 25mm auto cannon.
Mechfan666 4 months ago
clearly tracked vehicles are better, but what difference does it make when you cannot afford to put all your troops in them... you can buy lots of these canadian LAVS for the price of 1 bradley... look at germany in ww2, they had by far the best armor, but when you got 2000 tigers going up against 100 000+ shermans and t-34s, it dont really matter how good your tiger tank is, your still gunna lose
101andrewj 5 months ago
TeamGhost it is built in a Ford Motor factory located in Canada.... YOu can thank the Americans for building it.
CTisME99 5 months ago
Luis Antonio Valencia 25
cIibsterd 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cIibsterd "Luis Antonio Valencia" are those people who made/designed it? or am i missing something? O_O
vijayman123 5 months ago
LOL "soviets".
boognish1975 6 months ago
who cares where its from its not like Canada doesnt buy stuff from other countries and its not like we are allies
ak907jk 6 months ago
WTF this is Canadian Vehicle
homme012 6 months ago
Comment removed
admonster11 7 months ago
its sold now to Saudi Arabia it will be interesting to see how they masacre unarmed civilians using LAV-25
admonster11 7 months ago 7
@admonster11 Why is everyone on the internet so damn stuid? Do you honestly believe that the Saudi government would slaughter its own people? They want stability as much as everyother nation, they want freedom as everyother nation. Freedom is not the American system, freedom is non-oppression from outside, or internal forces! Why has the world moved from racism to religous descrimination? In the end we are all brothers. We breath, sweat, bleed, and think the same!
TexasMadeChicano 6 months ago
@TexasMadeChicano its because people are generally stupid..I do honestly believe that they will slaughter any people who will threaten royal or Islamic rule as they showed so eager in Bahrain.. and as a hell hole which Saudi Arabia is nothing good will come from them and arming them in modern weapons is just mental!
admonster11 6 months ago
@admonster11 Well their a proud nation and of its tradition. I remember a time when America once brought down anyone who wanted equal rights.
TexasMadeChicano 6 months ago
@TexasMadeChicano I got your point totally! Everyone was running away from States to live in Saudi Arabia and other freedom loving countries in the middle east.
admonster11 6 months ago
@TexasMadeChicano best part of their rich tradition..Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council, just issued a fatwa asserting that there is no minimum age for marriage, and that girls can be married “even if they are in the cradle.”
admonster11 6 months ago
@admonster11 Don't forget about the Bradley IFV.
planetary109 3 weeks ago 2
@planetary109 Eurofighter assembly line its being build as well
admonster11 1 week ago
@admonster11 thats an interesting opinion, care to elaborate, or should we take your word for it, that the saudi military or any military would just go out and engage civilians, considering the cost, i'd say whatever you think is mostly propaganda
vamparik 3 weeks ago
@vamparik its a savage country which resembles north Korea just with shits lots of money! They cant have freedom because they occupied by totalitarian religious system. half of the population women are enslaved at home cant go out without male guardian.
I went there very interesting experience. but Its like time travel their minds are hanging in void between 6th century and modern times my only point is that we should not arm them in our hight tech western military equipment
admonster11 1 week ago
@admonster11
yes because the military uses its time and money to massacre unarmed civilians for no purpose or gain what so ever
thecow777 2 weeks ago
@thecow777 The military's intentions don't have to deal with killing civilians, but they love making high profits which Saudi Arabia is willing to give to them for their weapons.
planetary109 1 week ago
Swiss Designed the basic hull. Canada designed the entire vehicle with turret.
Americans bought it.
Leathlord 8 months ago
thanks Canada :)
XDemonRoxasX 8 months ago
@XDemonRoxasX No prob
PcGamerPaul 8 months ago
Swiss designed, Canadian modified, assembled in America. Jesus Christ.
SnakeTheFox 8 months ago
american sucks
tulaytulaytulay 9 months ago
Yeah Hate to break it to you but the country of origin is the country that designed the vehicle. Production drones in a factory only know how to push buttons and tighten screws. Or if they are really smart, solder and weld.
unseenxxx 10 months ago
I'm curious why they didn't mount a TOW on it to engage enemy tank (Like the BTR has).
20YrBillionaire 10 months ago
@20YrBillionaire
it was too heavy and it had to be anphibious
excuse my spelling
SaintsSpecOps 10 months ago
@SaintsSpecOps I didn't realize a tow weighed that much, I guess you could just put a javelin on it (or several) for tank engagement.
20YrBillionaire 10 months ago
i love military vehicles!!
6digit 11 months ago
Put an ATGM on it, then you can engage heavy armoured tanks.
Sismiques 11 months ago
Both the US and Canadian versions are developed from the Swiss MOWAG Piranha 8x8.
Anlushac11 1 year ago
25mm = stupid calibre.
BringBack500s 1 year ago
@BringBack500s 25.4 mm = 1 inch... so it equals about .98 cal
SebbeLundblad 1 year ago
I guess General Motors originated in canada along with an untold number of sell outs....right?
1973frassrand 1 year ago
These were produced by GM Defense in Canada with a Detroit Diesel engine. My wife (then girlfriend) saw one on the hi way down in florida and was surprised that a tank could go so fast and had tires, mind you this was back in '85. Seems like yesterday. Semper Fi
rlhmarines 1 year ago
it gas a big fun
musardus 1 year ago
my ass you can fit 6 scouts in the back, all we could fit inside were 4 tightly packed scouts. still remember when we first got them in 1st LAI Batallion. I do love the vehicles and were an asset in desert shield/desert storm.
noktturnal 1 year ago
@noktturnal They did not mean American sized scouts. This country should go on a diet.
IVANGROZNEY 1 year ago
my ass you can fit 6 scouts in the back, all we could fit inside were 4 tightly packed scouts. still remember when we first got them in 1st Lai bn. I do love th evehicles and were an asset in desert shield/desert storm.
noktturnal 1 year ago
I got all the the sleep in the back of the LAV...I swear the damn crewman would forget us scouts were even back there
biguglymouth76 1 year ago
Tracked vehicles have to be chased by mechanics in soft vehicles, in todays wars thats not a good way to fight. The worst weapon on a modern battlefield is infantry thats why canada nearly gave up using main battle tanks. USA created the stryker army the stryker doesnt need to rely on soft vehicles to chase it to keep it running.
NielsShoe 1 year ago
@NielsShoe I thought Canada was still using the German Leopard 2A4s? I do know they do use the "Mobile Gun System" variant of the Styker (105mm gun variant)
Tyco200 1 year ago
Lav can swim and doesnt break down as much or need as much fuel in a modern war the wheeled armoured vehicles win.
NielsShoe 1 year ago
that guy is badass
vroomba03 1 year ago
The LAV has several platforms, the LAV-25 is just one. There is the LAV-AT, a tow missle mounted platform. There is a platform that has 81mm mortors fired from the back. The LAV-C2, which is the communication platform. The LAV-LOG, or logistics platform. A recovery platform with mechs. aboard. In the LAR Bn. all of these LAV's work together to make a very impressive force. Not to mention the Marine in the back of the LAV-25 who are a weapon all there own. Semper FI
fletchsnyder 1 year ago
A swiss invention!!! i have to say that cuz im swiss....xD
1993heavenshallburn 1 year ago
CANADIAN VEHICLE,NOT AMERICAN!!!
TeamGhostX 1 year ago 25
Comment removed
Tyco200 1 year ago
@Tyco200 that;s just your opinion
MrEhFromCanada 1 year ago
@Tyco200 oh yeah... well this LAV can drive even if its missing most of its wheels or has a chunk blown out of it.... a bradley loses its tracks and its done... loses its drivetrain and its done... this can take way more of a beating and continue to operate... and it can be repaired on the fly much easyer... not 2 mention you can buy 3 of them for less then the price of 1 m3a3... im not sayin a LAV3 or 25 will win in a 1 on 1 fight with a m3a3... im jus sayin that they have there advantages 2
101andrewj 1 year ago
@101andrewj Well, I can agree with that. But having a chunk blown out of the vehicle? I doubt it could take that much punishment. However, it is true that wheels are better than tracks.
Tyco200 1 year ago
@Tyco200 look up... lav 3 mobility test.. it explains it all
101andrewj 1 year ago
@Tyco200 You're right. There might have been minimal improvements to this vehicle, but look up Gustafsen Lake. It was a conflict between RCMP and First Nations going back about 15 yrs., and a LAV was disabled by a single rifle bullet (Not kidding. Look it up, if the article hasn't been censored). I assume the drivetrain or a CV joint was damaged. Those wheels are fairly exposed. And we all know now what a POS the Strykers proved to be in Iraq.
bluecollarcanuck 1 year ago
@TeamGhostX uummm duuhhhhh!!!!!...trying to sound smart when the description states its built by GDLS Canada used by the USMC....idiot
2jzgteSupraJZA80 1 year ago
@TeamGhostX
Well it's based on the Mowag Piranha family witch was made by the swiss, as is the LAV III. They all look alike on the outside but not on the inside^^
snipio 1 year ago
@TeamGhostX The American military started using them before the Canadian Forces did. They have always been made in Canada though.
Maus46 1 year ago
@TeamGhostX American vehicle Made by an AMERICAN company assembled in canada.
robschroeder365247 1 year ago 57
@robschroeder365247 So they cut armor for the LAV-25 in Canada for what reason ?? Its not American made..
OmniPresent 1 year ago
@robschroeder365247 Canadian Vehicle Made by a Canadian, Assembeled in Idaho.
Tehpolev 11 months ago
@Tehpolev Canadian vehicle made by a Canadian assembleled in london ont
BaconTV123 11 months ago
@BaconTV123 I Dont care about the american version, The Can-Australian version (ASLAV) Designed in Canada, Made by a Australian and Canadian, Assembled in Sydney, Australia.
Tehpolev 11 months ago
@Tehpolev i dont care about the lav-25 anyway
BaconTV123 11 months ago
@Tehpolev Its Built in canada By an American Company. Its American get over it.
robschroeder365247 10 months ago
@robschroeder365247 in the video a swiss design assembled in canada so how is it american???
Fiend2011 10 months ago
@Fiend2011 General Motors is the company that owns the factories. It is also an American company meaning their products are made by an American company. Therefore it is an American Product. Just Like the AK-47 is made everywhere its still a Russian Gun. As for Sweeden they can claim the LAV-25 as much as Lockheed Martin can claim the Pak-50.
robschroeder365247 10 months ago
@robschroeder365247 Hey cockhead. I know you want to say everything is American,but the LAV series was made BY CANADIANS,and it was a CANADIAN design The funding was American.
25Milimeter 9 months ago
@robschroeder365247 1 model american, 2 models canadian, it's mostly a canadian vehicle
Superchickenman159 9 months ago
@robschroeder365247 canadian company canadian made american bought.... nice try
lilrichie582 8 months ago
@robschroeder365247 Designed by Canadians, built by Canadians, used by Canadians, Americans and some others... Pretty much nothing american in it.
Aaidas2 8 months ago
@robschroeder365247 That's not true...it's is invented by the Candian the design was given to GM(American) then parts are built and assembled in Canada...oh and Canada already has a better version called LAV-III
HeadSHOT604 5 months ago
@robschroeder365247
Why is it built in Canada?
JustAnotherYtuber 3 months ago
@JustAnotherYtuber cheaper exported labor? gives Canada something to brag about? tested on curling rinks?
wikieditspam 2 months ago
@robschroeder365247 Swiss design, which actually reinforces the point that it's American, it's got multiple heritages but is American at heart.
wikieditspam 2 months ago
@robschroeder365247 Canadian vehicle designed and produced in Canada. Same as the stryker. I cant figure out why you guys are so xenophobic, its not like anyone said they were made by china.
Ralroost 2 months ago
@robschroeder365247 You couldn't be more wrong it's made by GM Canada; the Canadian branch of a US company.
HeadSHOT604 1 month ago
American Soldiers, American Accent, The Stryker Is The American Version, Its A Modified LAV II
MapleBalls 10 months ago
@TeamGhostX Swiss, actually.
SAsgarters 9 months ago
@SAsgarters The Swiss only helped designing a particular part to this vehicle,not the entire thing.
25Milimeter 9 months ago
@25Milimeter MOWAG designed the Piranha, which the LAV and the Stryker are based on. No matter how much of the vehicle is manufactured or modified elsewhere, it will always be a Swiss vehicle.
SAsgarters 9 months ago
@TeamGhostX Canada. lol
Blakwall 8 months ago
who cares the vehicles arent all the great anyway
TheThreeDudes0 8 months ago
"Cant penetrate tank Armour" Except all the new ones with tow missiles on them...
cchanderson 1 year ago
looks just like my Stryker
Jackofalltrades16 1 year ago
except smaller and slower. Its just a Coyote... I would much rather be in a LAV then that vehicles... but hey im a Bison driver (Variant of the Coyote)
~Thanato
Thanato26 1 year ago
this seems like it has a limited use considering it cant engage tanks, is used mainly for engaging troop transports, and we already have the bradley for transporting troops.
allthegundams 1 year ago
@allthegundams in the canadian millitary, we basically use these instead of a humvee, most of the american versions only have a 50 cal also.
Relyt345 1 year ago
but Rosomak is better ^^
Steadtler91 1 year ago
Yeah, good finnish technology ;). Have you ever thought about it? Lots of good military hardware come from nordic countries. Norwegian AA missiles, Swedish Saab airplanes, bazookas and Bofors' countless large caliber guns, Finnish Patria vehicles, like that Rosomak of yours, and Sako's sniper rifles that are used by 29 countries law enforcement and/or militaries.
Zombibombi62 1 year ago
bradley rules but this thing is awsome
Revenstorm29 1 year ago
Eh, I'd rather have a Brad.
Bleachxlr 2 years ago
how many countries operate the stryker??
Js00312 2 years ago
the stryker was developed in mah hometown
C4ONACOW 2 years ago
Stryker is based on LAV, that was made in Canada. LAV was based on Piranha that was made in Switzerland. So, I don't know about that :(
Zombibombi62 1 year ago
maybe it was a different one it was a tank on future weapons tested in YPG
C4ONACOW 1 year ago
Yeah, but it Stryker was based on european design, that comes from Switzerland. Mowag Piranha, put it on youtube and you might find and see it. Seeing them leaves no room for doubt.
Zombibombi62 1 year ago
"Yeah, but it Stryker was...". It? Wtf, well obviously you got my point.
Zombibombi62 1 year ago
NLOS-C
C4ONACOW 1 year ago
@Js00312
At the moment just the US Army, but the Stryker based on the Mowag Piranha 3, wich is used in different country's.
12Schmedi91 2 years ago
thanx!
Js00312 2 years ago
I work at GD in London, Ontario, Only the U.S have the stryker, but other countries have different models (Australia, New Zealand, Canada.
roblickman 1 year ago
Mowag Piranha is the same type of vehicle, just 100 times better.
paddykkk 2 years ago
what is this ?
TheMASVA 2 years ago
BTR80A forever!
TheHunsoldier 2 years ago
don't you guys get scared if a muslim hides with a missle launcher that will prob blow you away.
or will it???
killingman22 2 years ago
nah RPG wont do shit to these things
the ones in country are up armored.
Along highway 1 during the invasion of Iraq, these things, equipped with night vision sights mowed down alot of RPG gunner way before they could get in range.
Sturmmann 2 years ago
idiot. Huge giant idiot
Frozenmonkey2 2 years ago
eh?
Sturmmann 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I can engage Tiger tank with is vechcle, LOL.
FeelFree3 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
just a massive BRDM-2
patrikasLTL 2 years ago
Comment removed
patrikasLTL 2 years ago
lav 25 говно ебучее
TheAGeNt2212 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
American BTR cool, the Soviet Union was well taught America
Biogem369 2 years ago
not a fuckin APC.....Recon!
Kolonesian 2 years ago
The Coyote Recce vehicle is one of the best Armoured Recce Vehicles around... the Coyote is the only reason the US has the LAV-25 because they were impressed with the vehicle when the Canadians used it. Same thing with the Stryker.
~Thanato
Thanato26 1 year ago
Thank you. Could an additional removable mine protection be mounted at the front of the vehicle? I am considering this for patrols through cities like Kaboul. Would you, if realizable, consider it as an advantage, or does the existing protection give full satisfaction?
ALB437 2 years ago
yeah canada... we build some kickass vehicles
TheGatman101 2 years ago
Part*
popemobile12 2 years ago
Is the LAV-25 mine resistant?
ALB437 2 years ago
Kind of,its the shockwave that kills not the explosion itself.But yea the coyote mine resitant.
popemobile12 2 years ago
This is what your life has come down to.. Arguing on youtube with people you never met... Loser.
riceUSMC 2 years ago
same crap as bmp 3, badly armored, not right used
95predator 2 years ago
Looks very fuckable girl for Russian BTR 90 and BMP 3. Americans, please come up with something that not so funny. Russian weapons ROKS, US weapons SUCKS:
mikeplay007 2 years ago
Even russian dont like BMP-3. Whats wrong with this weapon system? USA weapons suck? .... i disagree. BTR-80 is so unsafe that crew prefers to ride in the roof instead inside it.
MokomaSusi 2 years ago
In the war nothing is safe, but have to be usefull.
BMP 3 is light weight tank, wich can also sweem and even have WC inside. It has also very good weapons. It can carrye 10 solders and 1000kg weapons. It looks very usefull for me in the war.
mikeplay007 2 years ago
So is that why russia lost in afghanistan? because the russians have such great equipment that they lost in afghanistan! but... if you say US equipment sucks then why are we winning?
archiethepoo 2 years ago
In wich war you USA "winning"? In Korea, In Vietnam or in Iryq and Afganistan? You should check in Wikipedia Russian thechnology losies in Afgan war and compare with US loses in Vietnam or in Korea. Check in Iraq and in Afganistan too, and that's without Russian help, if Russia would have helped Iraq and Afganistan now with weapons USA wouldn't even been there so long. Since WW2 USA lost every war where they faced Russian weapons. Korea MIG 15. VIETNAM AK 47 and MIG 21. That's fact
mikeplay007 2 years ago
maybe you should get YOUR facts right. We won korea and we won the military battles in vietnam. do something useful and read up on the wars because your obviously dont know shit.
archiethepoo 2 years ago
You kill lots of Vietnamis woman and children, but they kill 50000 US military for it, that's not winning, that's means you got fucked in Vietnam and in Korea.
mikeplay007 2 years ago
we may have lost 50,000 troops but the NVA lost 520,000. not only did we win but we owned the skies which the NVA had RUSSIAN pilots flyin for them. the russians couldnt do shit and still cant. they dont have enough money for a war because they are poor.
archiethepoo 2 years ago
Bla, bla, bla, I'm not arguing wich brainwashed IDIOTS!
mikeplay007 2 years ago
you just know im right and want to act immature about it.
archiethepoo 2 years ago
How you can be right, are you fucked up in your head? USA lost war militarally with Vietnam and with Korea. that's fact. Just becouse of USA have great propaganda, brainwashing sistem wich can only shows US advantige, dosn't changes the fact that Americans got fucked in Vietnam and in Korea with Russian weapons. It was humilating fuck, but you think you are heros anyway don't you? "freedome loving people" in my ass USA is evel country in this planet.
mikeplay007 2 years ago
nah dude ur country got the shit kicked out of it in vietnam,,,u didnt win
cokey88 2 years ago
"Korea MIG 15."
North-Korea attacked to South and tried to conquer it... did they do it? no. How can you declare that a victory?
MokomaSusi 2 years ago
And you think Americans won in Korea? Americans never won anything, just destroy and kill woman and children. Militarally USA suckes, especially when it's faced Russian weapons. FACT!!! You can argue teoretically, but fact it's fact, Russian weapons always on winning side.
mikeplay007 2 years ago
what u mean ur winning against terrorism?? cuz ur not...and compare the casualties...america has lost 4000 troops, australia has lost 11..enuf said.
cokey88 2 years ago
yeah Australia lost 11 because they aren't doing shit in Afghanistan... who's doing the most? US and UK. how much troops do you even have in Afghanistan? like 300?? and we didn't lose Vietnam, just look at the battles.. khe sahn, hue, etc. you say you like American history but you don't know shit.
archiethepoo 2 years ago
Hey I know Americans are doing there and the Brits too but the Canadians as well.
popemobile12 2 years ago
nah dont worry i dont like american history...and well u went to iraq cuz of weapons of mass destruction but as soon as korea drops a shit load of nukes america dusnt see that....PUSSIES...PUSSIES, george bush was doin fukn nothin over there, and muthafuka 11 of our troops die cuz there sas not just grunts, so they got skillz unlike ur army...wake up
cokey88 2 years ago
lol do realize how retarded you sound? you obviously dont know anything about the American military operations...
Americans are doing all the real fighting dumb asss!! and the Brits are doing their part, are you fucking retarded??....You dont even know your countries role in the war! your not even worth this comment, thanks for wasting my time cocksucker, go fuck a kangaroo
buttlord123 2 years ago
u cant answer to any shit i say, thats funny...americas pretty good at dying too, but i guess it wud b unamerican to not put ur army in someone elses country...np wastin ur time lol...not like u got anythin else else to while ur child porn downloads..bye bye bitch
cokey88 2 years ago
You wake up... are you really that stupid?
beno420 2 years ago
not as stupid as u my small retard frend...
cokey88 2 years ago
No I'm sorry your mistaken, Your retarded, and I'm not your friend
beno420 2 years ago
lol nice come back retard, fuck off dickhead...better?
cokey88 2 years ago
lol fuck off cockersuck
beno420 2 years ago
fukn dead shit...y r u even talkin to me. go away ya peasent
cokey88 2 years ago
More like the crapAV. One RPG grenade and the Bradley is knocked out. The BTR-90 is far better in combat and is far more reliable.
isamarine 2 years ago
on an LAV, an RPG hit will be less likely because of the sloped armor. more likely than not the round will ricochet and fly off elsewhere. also mind you the LAV is constantly improving in terms of reliability, sighting systems and survivability. yes the main gun on the LAV remains the same (albiet with an improved internals and barrell), but the sighting system is FAR improved from when it was first introduced
moelll 2 years ago
doesn;t the lav have 2 soldiers in the back of the turret?
Studjeff4 2 years ago
3rd LAR B co
holymarine 2 years ago
all Canada baby, the took swiss designs and put em on the board and improved them gott love the LAV
yahmahadrummer 2 years ago
Comment removed
kmhberg 2 years ago
it is a cool post. its amazing how the LAV advanced throughout the years. now its more powerful, much improved sighting system, improved turret and much easier to maintain and repair
moelll 2 years ago
screened tiger brigade's left flank during the push into kuwait really miss blowing shit up 2nd LAI
DrStrangelove451 2 years ago
Bush master HAAAAAAAAA!
Spelunker0211 3 years ago
3rd LAR D Co
3trdmarine 3 years ago