Cadillac Gage V-600 Commando

[CADILLACGAGEV600]

NOW THAT IS A MONSTER TRUCK NOT BUT A STEAL MONSTER!!!!

[CadillacGageTextron]

i love it

[darthbandon10]

300s were used as AA platforms in Central\South America.

[bangalaheng]

Looks kinda out of proportion huh...

[NationalSniper]

If I would buy an AFV from this company it would not be this vehicle but the Stingray II.

[NationalSniper]

Definetly better then the Stryker. It can fire on the move and the gun is protected in a turret.

[BitnikGr]

"Which allows it to fire while on the move" - CUT!

-

Show it firing on the move!!!

[J3rEmY17]

I don't know much about this vehicle, but saying that the vehicle can fire while on the move and then only showing the vehicle firing while stationary sends alarm bells to my head.

[IKEELYOUNOW]

wow this is old isnt it. well at least they catn claim that they have the same power as the M1 anymore, its been upgunned to 120 milimeters. Not to mention it has THE best fire control systems in the world. and, if you take off the speed break(most crews do) you can go up to 60 miles per hour. Not to mention you got a foot of chobham to protect you which i highly doubt this has. meh the new Stryker is better anyway than this but no use comparing even the stryker to the abrams let alone this

[NationalSniper]

They say M1 Abrams (the original with 105mm) not M1A1 or M1A2.

Not saying they should get V600 but its better then Stryker which can't fire on the move. Go to 1:13 to see V600 fire on the move.

Every true combat vehicle can fire on the move (its standard on AFVs).

Stryker is not a combat vehicle: only usefull for peacekeeping.

They should get Stingray or M8 Thunderbolt.

If they want wheels: get Centauro 120.

Or better: buy more C-17 so they can fly Abrams everywhere.

[kullas924]

lazy basterds mounted a stingeray turret on a wheeled plateform

[Splifferrific]

The only problem with them is they can not travel the same terrain as tanks. Canada is looking at tracked IFV to keep up with its leapord 1's and 2's. the Lav's/mowag chassis have problems in loose terrain like snow and sand when trying to traverse these conditions at max speed.

[flamedrag18]

wow, this must be old, the 105mm gun was phased out in the early 90s.

[sakoshooter48]

@flamedrag18 Actually the Striker gun vehicles are armed with the 105mm and they are brand spanking new!

[flamedrag18]

@sakoshooter48 but the striker isn't a tank, it's a AFV.

[NationalSniper]

@sakoshooter48

Actually the design is not. It is a variant of the Piranha, which is a vehicle from the 1970s.

[wwaalltthheerr]

105mm on abrams? riiiiiight

[flamedrag18]

@wwaalltthheerr well, they were equipped with 105mm guns before 1992, then they switched to the 120mm cannon for the M1A2 Abrams.

[sakoshooter48]

@flamedrag18 I didn't see any 105mm guns on the Abrams in Desert Storm. Most of those tank hulls had been given to the Marines and their M-60's were being phased out, although many were in the Gulf. The 105mm high velocity gun still could kick some ass, it was scary accurate even with optical sights, and had a much broader selection of ammunition when compared to the Rheinmetal 120mm gun. I'd take a wheeled vehicle with a 105 over a tracked vehicle with a 120 in certain terrain, like Africa!

[flamedrag18]

@sakoshooter48 they had them, the advantage of the 120mm cannon is the ability to use the penetrator dart since the rifling on the 105mm gun doesn't work well with them.

[sakoshooter48]

@flamedrag18 Agreed.

[NationalSniper]

@sakoshooter48

Tracks offer better mobility as they allow you to go to places you can't go with wheels. They also allow the vehicle to be heavier (so have more armor). Wheels only perform better on paved roads with no obstacles (and in war there would be stuff like roadblocks). Africa has poor roads.

Would you dare to take on an M1A2 of Leo 2 A6 with a 105mm wheeled vehicle? That would be suicide.

BTW more 120mm rounds are available these days including flechette and HE.

[sakoshooter48]

@NationalSniper Really, maybe you ought to go get in touch with your feminine side as the "SOUTH AFRICANS" pretty much only employ WHEELED vehicles in their military. I believe the South Africans understand the advantages of mobility over broken terrain and find the wheeled vehicles to be better suited for combat on the continent! Please see all of their mobile artillery, APC's, and sundry other vehicles, they are wheeled!

[NationalSniper]

@sakoshooter48

Just that SA does doesn't mean they are right. SA doesn't have a modern military. They use obsolete Centurion. The reason probably has to do with costs (wheeled vehicles are cheaper). It is a fact that tracks allow you to reach places you can't go with wheels. On average tracks reach 70% of all terrain and wheels 40%. In war you need flexibility so the more places you can go the better. If you have just wheels it is more predictible to enemy where you come from.

[binaway]

@NationalSniper Also until the end of apartheid nobody would sell them tracked vehicles so the old white government had to develop it's own military vehicles based on available commercial vehicles which all had wheels. They did upgraded their old centurions into the elephant tank with Israeli help, which isn't totally obsolete. Since the end of apartheid there hasn't been a requirement to buy new military vehicles or waste money on such purchases.

[NationalSniper]

@binaway

Yes Centurion is upgrades but still it is an upgraded old tank.

They did buy Gripen fighters and MEKO A200 frigates so it would make sense to update the Army as well. For instance with modern MBTs, IFVs and self propelled guns.

[NationalSniper]

@sakoshooter48

Wheeled vehicles are also higher then comparable tracked. Not only does this mean they will more likely tilt over but they are also bigger targets. Wheels are also more vulnerable to small arms fire.

I have a Jeep Wrangler one of the best 4x4s. Its fun off-road but any tracked vehicle can reach places my Jeep can't. I can't see any reason to use wheeled vehicles except if you choose low costs over the lives of your soldiers (they are more survivable in a tracked vehicle).

[NationalSniper]

@sakoshooter48

If there was fight between a tank and a 105mm wheeled vehicle. Which vehicle would you rather be in?

Some examples:

Centauro 120 VS Leo 2 / Abrams / Chal

Centauro 120 VS M8 Thunderbolt / CV90120T

Stryker MGS / V-600 / Rooikat 105 VS M8 AGS / Stingray II

In each of these fights I would pick the tracked as it offers better protection, mobility and in many cases also firepower.

Wheeled armor is only usefull for peacekeeping or security operations behind freindly lines.

[VickersIndependent]

@NationalSniper Don't forget about the K-series--the K1, K1A1, or the K-2 Black Panther. Though with any choice you'll be getting a better deal then any Stryker, MRAP, or the similar.

[NationalSniper]

@VickersIndependent

Agreed. K1 series is based on Abrams but lighter. Often called a baby Abrams. :)

But could take on anything N. Korean or Chinese.

The K2 specially is really interesting. From what I've read it has similar armor as Abrams but at lower weight.

Only problem is that its the most expensive MBT ever. North Koreans are fucked if they try anything. :)

Onlhy thing missing so far with K2 is an urban warfare kit like TUSK or PSO.

[NationalSniper]

@sakoshooter48

Canada wanted to replace their Leo1 with Stryker (well politics wanted, the Army didn't). But experience in fighting in Afghanistan changed their mind and they cancelled Stryker in favor of Leopard 2 A6M as there was no substitute for protection.

Now they are looking for a new tracked IFV which can keep up with the Leo 2, which their Piranha can't. CV90 is a candidate.

So Canadian Army almost went to be a glorified police force but now retains to be an Army.

[astrialkil]

@NationalSniper They have brought back there M113 APC's back in to service too. I forget what they call them, buffalo or something.

[BirgirZ]

@wwaalltthheerr

Lulz M1 abrams had 105 to begin with.

[luckyday465768]

Shit i love american weapons.

[zgot4325]

shit look at those beautiful canons! wow,

[Viper194]

look at the fuckin cannon on that thing, one hit from it and its over i bet

[3452te]

still to this day the army uses it. including places like iraq

[BlacktailDefense]

@3452te

The V-600 and the M1128 Stryker MGS aren't the same vehicles.

The former is a 6x6 and has a turret, while the latter is an 8x8 and has an overhead external gun mount --- they even use different guns (the M35 on the V-600, and the M68E1 on the M1128).

There costs are quite different, too;

V-600: $253000

M1128: ~$10 million

[sakoshooter48]

@BlacktailDefense BULLSHIT! A full up Stryker, ready for combat costs $1.41 million!!!!! $10 million, get off of the crack pipe!

[BlacktailDefense]

@sakoshooter48 You're talking about the Marginal Cost of the M1126 Stryker ICV, not the Unit Cost of the Stryker FOV.

Project Cost / Units = Unit Cost.

The Stryker Project is so far in excess of $45 Billion, and 3117 vehicles are authorized by Congress. Divide $45 Billion by 3117, and you get $11.5 Million/unit.

[BlacktailFA]

V-600?

I thought Textron Marine called it the LAV-600...