Added: 4 years ago
From: tankpediaru
Views: 103,459
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (306)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • T-80 TANK...BECAUSE WE CAN!

  • I have seen these for sale on the net what would be the cost second hand

  • very impressive tank

  • Definitely one of the best tanks in the world today! Great video.

    @julnap1

    T-80Us 1A46 fire control system can engage and 100% hit a stationary target at 5000m (up to 5 targets IIRC) not only with 9M119 Refleks ATGM but also with 3BM46 HVAPFSDS 125mm rounds. Only the French L'Eclerc is better in this department with up to 7 targets engaged at 5000m. Although almost 20 years older, I see the T-80 superior to the T-90.

  • @feriekonto

    Apparently it performed terribly during the Chechen wars.

  • hi, does anyone know the effectiveness of the 1A33 fire control system on the T-80B pse? e.g., i've read an M60A3 has a 45% first round hit probability against a stationary target 3000m away. how does T-80B compare?

  • @julnap1

    I recall that it has a 100% hit rate on a stationary target at the range of 1,700m while tank is moving over rough terrain, I dont know anything for longer ranges, as for guided projectiles, I know hit rates are very high, 80% at 5km if I remember correctly.

  • @vtkrey hey thks!

  • it must be a painful experience being in that tank when it lands after catching some air

  • Good video. Лучший танк Т-80!

  • Newer T-90 HAS TO BE HEAVILY UPGRADED to counter western (especially those damn yanks) threats. Major ARMOR upgrades (not just ERA) and DESIGN changes should be done, ammo reposition to the back of the turret with blast doors (ammo below the turret is very dangerous), new POWERFUL engine with at least power to weight ratio of 27 bhp/t, new LONGER main gun (with at least 7,0 m barrel length), drastic IMPROVEMENT of autoloader to accept longer 125 mm rounds + faster rate of fire, new electronics.

  • @brox114 t-90m has addressed all of that and more

  • @shawnshawn426

    No, it hasn't.

    T-90M has electronics update, only slight armor update (ERA only), autoloader has been only marginally changed compared to T-90.

    Chelyabinsk tractor plant should start developing immediately new powerful engine with at least 1500 BHP (1103 KW). 1700 BHP (1250 KW) would BE EXCELLENT if possible. Imagine power to weight ratio with that engine, maneuvarability, acceleration and top speed (but tank MUST have at least 500 km operational range without barrels)...

  • @brox114 Maybe the T-90 Burlak will be more in line with your standard.

  • @shawnshawn426

    Not mine standard, but only suggestion. I wish I could have some influence on modernising Russian army and making it the most powerful and most advanced in the world, but I don't.

  • T-80 U was the best MBT in the 80's with absolutely no competitors whatsoever; and Soviet army was the most powerful and most technologicaly advanced in the world. But that was, unfortunately, past!

    Technology has been drasticaly changed since the 80's, and Russia must modernize it's army "big time".

    Corruption is HUUUUGE problem. Military budget should be increased to 10% of GDP (~ to 110 milion $). With growing economy, military budget should grow as well.

  • lol he split 1:28 "projectiles" into 2 words "project - tiles"

  • Can anyone tell me the main difference between a T80 and a T72 in appearance? When ever i see one i can't figure it out that which one is it because Russian tanks have a common design.

  • @fah369 Hard to explain in a youtube comment, if you are really interested, check on internet both, their history, technology etc... For me T64, 72, 80, 90 are very different in appearence, i can regognise either of them (and variants of each) at long distance, of course for average people it's the same kind of stuff. To answer quickly, main "appearence" diff are : style and space of the roads, place and suff of / around turret.

  • @PATRONSKiii Ok i will try to check on their technology.Wish me luck :)

  • ПОЧЕМУ , МНОГИЕ СЧИТАЮТ , ЧТО АБРАМС - ДЕРЬМО И КУРИТ В СТОРОНКЕ , А Т-90 И Т-80 - ЛУЧШИЕ В МИРЕ ТАНКИ ? На мой взгляд (на взгляд любителя , но не идиота) танк , созданный в высокоразвитой стране коей является сша в 80-е годы , не может быть хуже танков выпускаемых в России и Украине базой для которых был т-72 - созданный в конце 60-х в СССР.

    ХОЧЕТЬСЯ УЗНАТЬ МНЕНИЕ ПРОФЕССИОНАЛЬНЫХ ВОЕННЫХ , а не псевдо-патриотов !

  • @1975Vasiliy НЕпиздеть Т64 это харьковский танк, Т72 урал-завод Т80 ленинградец каждый со своими характеристиками.

  • @Biogem369 Концепция у них у всех одинаковая : это танки для массированного удара по-противнику . Но мы уже давно не стоим у берегов Эльбы и на вооружении тактической авиации -- высокоточное оружие .

  • @1975Vasiliy во всём мире в танках концепция одинаковая. 

  • Too many idiots here.

    This is not world war 2 where there was a majot differene between medium and heavy tanks. The differences between western and russian tanks are tiny, it will all depend on the tactical situation, as always: who sits in a minefield, who gets flanked, who sits waiting for a refuel etc.

  • Remember how this thing went in the First Chechen War?

    Yup, that's right folks.

    225 Russian T-80Us destroyed in the first month ALONE.

    And a hell of a lot more after this.

    That was against CHECHEN REBELS with shitty RPG-7s... imagine how this thing would get owned against an M1A2 SEP Abrams.

  • @ResiusOnline T-80's werent prepared in the siege of Grozny. They went into narrow streets(urban areas), which is obviously suicide. And dont underestimate RPG-7's against GAS TURBINE ENGINES. Its one of the worst engine you could come up with a tank. Even the Abrams suffered from this shit. Gas turbine engines have tendency to have high pressure gas injectors which is basically flammable, its easy with an RPG-7 plasma jet to cook it. One proof is that they use molotovs against Abrams.They burn!

  • @999cheetos999 The problem with the T-80's in Grozny was not the tank's fault, not even the turbine's fault. The problem was the tanks were isolated from screening infantry, and RPG teams firing from basements and 2nd story windows picked them off.

    If the T-80 has operated in mixed infantry/tanks teams, they would have done better...

  • @Waltham @ResiusOnline1892 Its also the tank in some cases. One is the strategy, its pretty obvious that tanks are rocket magnets in urban warfare, without infantry support, they are pretty much doomed. In other cases, IT IS THE TANK.T-80 B/V's werent equipped very well, they didnt have ERA and are relying on the composite armor to protect themselves (THEY DIDNT USE T-80U's in the Chechen war).

  • @ResiusOnline - Hmm, then imagine dumbass that these rebels was some former Army, and very well trained. Also concider that tanks was in urban area buildings where they fire on turret roof from 3 stories. And then manage to think with that small brain that in all case, it takes them over 6 RPG hits on ONE spot to destroy him. Then use what is left from your brain cells and remember that tactics on first chechnya war was horrible. Second Chechnya war one 1 tank is lost. So suck facts asswipe.

  • @bittemeinrammstein

    UH no.

    It took an average of 3 RPG shots to take out the T-80Us in Chechen War 1.

  • I have noticed the T-80U and the T-90 have similar turret systems including SHTORA, but the T-80U has the T-80 Hull and the T-90 has the T-72 hull. Makes me think the T-90 is the lower cost option of the T-80U?

  • I'll buy one!

  • when i looked up the t-80 i was expecting to see a tank, not a bunch of russian babies trying to convince themselves that russian tanks are better than american/german tanks

  • Russians tanks BEST of the BEST

  • Chechen were a REGULAR army force, diriged by EX afhanistan HERO Maskhadov, a general than inflamed all the caucasus. Russia let him do what he wanted, until 1994 where chechnya try to invade daghestan, ingushia and ossetia. Eltsine, this pathetic liar who was supporting maskhadov just before, throw the army in chechnya.

    BUT, and this but is a big BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT, chechen were ready for it.

  • fuck all of you American tanks are the best in armor and fire power russian weapons are shitty!

  • the russias , build hi tch but in small numbres , us buuild hi tech , and loads of them cus they hve the money , and thts why usa will always be bttr than russia

  • Ahh, the T80 is soo cool. Shame Russia decided to never develop another turbine powered tank ever again (Due to the fact that turbine engines are liable to explode).

    And to all of you who say the M1 Abrams is a piece of shit, it's not. It's one of the greatest MBT's of all time. Even the russian military will admit it's a fine piece of work.

  • @peepeevagi Well, they do use both T80 and T90. Both have multifuel engines. I must say that I am impressed. The Kontakt 5 armour, Arena active protection system (on both T80U and T90), the Shtora-1-system etc.

    The Abrams is a great tank with great armour but it lacks many features of the old T80 and T90, and it's slower. The tank itself (M1A2) is more high tech than the russian ones, but The T80/T90:s both have superb protection systems that are more high tech than the Abrams systems.

  • Well, the Abrams is due for upgrading like the T90 (It's supposed to be in service for a long while) and that means going untill A4 or A5. The A3 model should equal the T90 is all aspects, plus adding a grenade mg and minigun up top lol. If the T90 really is better, the M1Awhatever is certainly more than a equal match.

    I thought Russians vowed to only use t80's in open ground to support infantry, which is where a turbine engined tank belongs.

  • @peepeevagi They use two tanks, both T90 and T80, mostly T80. You should compare the tanks depending on the year they came about. T80U vs Abrams M1A1, however. Using the Kaktus ERA on the T80 along with Shtora and Arena APS this tank wont be easily defeated without tandem ammunition no matter what the competition is. Even compared with A2.

    I hope that Abrams A3 gets an APS, that would definitely set the standard, however... T80 does have some tricks up it's sleeve that are unmatched right now.

  • Russian tanks look so much more bad ass than those box-shaped Leopards and Abrams!

  • do this jumps 100 times and the tank is destroyed

  • @scheissaufGOOG2E like every good tank. It needs checkup and small repair after some jumps. A bad tank would be destroyed after only one jump.

  • Anyways, great tank. Thumbs up to Russia

  • call 1 -800-T80 tank for a risk free 30 day trial :P

  • Is able A-10 gau-8 cannon penetrate through T-80 tank armor ???

  • @Vykuk123 With enough volleys then im sure it could. I can imagine that 30mm rounds spat out at over 4000 rounds per minute can penetrate even the best of tanks. That includes the T80 as well as the abrams.

  • I hate you stupid Americans, get that poop out of your mouth you stupid american! We are arguing on youtube which some stupid americans invented, and using american technology, (the internet) to communicate world wide, but anyway your country is full of pigs and donkeys!

  • @cascinova the Internet...which you use every day to spew your filth...you stupid cunt.

  • @HawkStudio Apparently you fail at noticing sarcasm.

  • @cascinova Roger that...sorry

  • @HawkStudio Unless you didn't realize it, it was sarcasm.

  • @cascinova Your Dirt mouthed anti-americans sure have alot of fecal matter around your tongues too. We americans have alot to say about arrogant foreigners who hate the states with no clear reason as to why. But unlike you guys we dont waste our time with trivial idiots like yourselves. If anything, you bastards are worse then the evil you claim us to be. Hate comes in may forms. Yours is none the better

  • @XkriskrossX , hint hint....it was sarcasm.

  • @cascinova oops, alright alright i get it. Im tired of uninformed anti-americans thats all. Sorry bro haha xD

  • @XkriskrossX because most of you americants are pompous and arrogant, and think that they are the best thing since god thats happened to planet earth. When infact for the most YALL are a cancer!! Granted i have plenty of american friends that are not misguided but seriously man that was a dumb fuckin question, that you should have already known!!! personaly your a fuckin joke and i dont live in europe you stupid shit!!!

  • Wow, what a cool commercial... I think I'll buy one.

  • Awesome tank, has amazing defense, truly something amazing... This is not like the T-72, this is a true tank (T-72 was awesome but had little armor). T-80U = Amazing.

  • ah-64 apachi wifes :)

  • more american idiot......

  • You never give up do you?

  • @eee545

    well that russian junk makes a big burning hole into your abrams front

  • @eee545

    it makes a big difference if there is an iraqi using russian tech or an russian

    stupid american

    you compare again modern tech witch out dated...

    there are many M1A2 burning because of OLD OLD RPG7

    you and you unberleed advanced tech.. but you still die of an 7.62 full metal jacket round fired out of an over 60 years old ak47

    by the way.. there were also abrams burning because t72 hit them ^^

  • Какой он русский??? он харьковский,а харьков где????

  • Какой нахрен Харьковский? Его на Кировском заводе в Питере производили (пока производили), а сейчас приоритет отдан Т-90 производства Уралвагонзавод.

  • умиляют такие вот высеры хохлов а все хрущев виноват =) тварь такая =) любил он хохляндию =) да и власти хотелось ему еще до того как генсеком стал всея ссср =) танки создают ИНЖЕНЕРЫ а где они производятся да хоть в венесуэле от этого наш танк мексиканским не сделается

  • вот ещё одно дибиленькое,хохлосрач разводит

  • vtkrey,by the russians too are ignorant for fighting,in a wrong time,wrong place and wrong enemy,like russia support of egypt,jordan and syria against israel,in just 6 days soviet tank were sweep by m4 sherman tank w/c is world war2 tank,how much more if israel use advance tank...

  • First off Russia lost Afghan war bc their helicopters were getting shot down with American stingers. And second off the 6 day war was lost by egypt bc their air force was knocked out on the ground. Tanks had little to do with those defeats.

  • egyptian and sirian tank crew are farmers.good trained and educated east european crew and very good air defence in warsaw pact was a different enemy

  • cowboy, your ignorance of the Soviet-Afghan war is beyond measure, the use of tanks in the conflict was minimal moreover, tanks used performed well on their tasks, the Soviet Union left in the end because of the neverending militant activities (supported by western powers), not because of bad tank designs.

  • Idiot

  • АБРАМС КУРИТ В СТОРОНКЕ ,А Т80 ГОРДО ИДЕТ ПОСЕРЕДИНЕ УЛИЦЫ )))

  • It's impossible to find such video of an offroading Abrams. I think it's because Abrams breaks its suspension as soon as it leaves the road (and tries to go faster than a kid on a 3-wheeled bike).

  • No doubt, this is a great tank!

  • Really nice tank...on of the best tanks in world...

  • i love russian tanks fuck the american tanks abrams

  • @ibrahim888982 This is the attitude that allows you to get conquered by Israel!!! LOL

  • what a fantastic material. we can enjoy to kill each other

  • russia-vs-usa . ucoz . com

  • Russian T-80s suffered no losses in 2008 South Ossetia war against the Georgian T-72 tanks.

    not in like the desert storm, both tanks were in the kill-range (mountains, forests) where both T-72 and T-80 could penetrate each other's frontal armor. And T-72s were using modern tungsten penetrators whereas in desert storm iraqis used STEEL penetrators which had no THEORETICAL chance of penetrating any modern MBT. there are occasions where abrams had 3 steel penetrators stuck in its side.

    T-80 owns.

  • T-80 wasn't used very extensively in South Ossetian conflict. majority of russian armored forces still consisted of T-72s and frankly georgians weren't much of a soldiers neither

  • atleast they weren't 3rd world country men like middle east. AND were trained by NATO operators frankly.

  • BTW, georgia recently purchased a small number of T-84 Oplot tanks from Ukraine

  • recently?

    georgians had the ukranian T-84 tanks DURING the war. they showed it on russian news, captured T-84 tanks. the only producer of T-84 is ukraine. so ukranians must have sold the T-84 tanks to georgia to fight russia, but thats politics now. georgian army is crushed today.

  • well, I seriously doubt that. There was a press release at the beginning of THIS MONTH, that Georgia is going to receive first 12 T-84 Oplot tanks, a small quantiy of T-72, plus MANPADS and SAMs from Ukraine. Of course Ukraine supplied arms to Georgia earlier, but my point is that georgians didn't have Oplots during the war.

  • in the news report they said "newest versions of T-80 tanks which Russia had never supplied georgia with"

    i guess "newest" means ATLEAST the T-80U

  • dunno mate, I have to remark that during the conflict russian TV was untrustworthy. There were again reports about the "white tights"...

    Let's change the subject. Which tank you consider to be better: T 84 Oplot, T 90 or later versions of the T 80? It seems ur really fond of that kind of stuff. One of my friends used to serve on T 80 tank in East Germany, he sayed T80 was the state of the art killing machine back in the 80s

  • hard to say. its just that T-90 has less fuel consuption and easier maintenance and greater production rating.

    well, hell yeah the T-90 is better because "Shtora" jammers are standard equipment and sometimes fitted with Arena protection system, go check it. thermals, computers and GPS are found too. its the most mobile tank in the world to day, T-90 has beaten Leo2 world record for ACCURATE rate of fire.

    and dont give me that BS about "undemocratic/ propagandic" russian mass media.

  • lol, it's a pattern, ya know, when ever country is at war, its media isn't very "trustworthy" and russia was not an exception. It was a sample. same effect took place for example during the Gulf War, when "we" saw mostly "what" "they" wanted "us" to saw. no need to get excited, eventhough I see ur obviously russian

  • no i'm not russian. lol

    in ur face :D

  • ok. atsiprašau

  • oho čia buvo geras <_______<

  • Sveikinimas iš Talino;)

  • It were T-72s and T-72sim1(modernized by israel and ukraine ones).

    Georgia hadn't t-84...

  • i wonder how is that going to erase what i have seen with my own fuckin eyes? (DURING the war)

    next thing you'll say that the cold war is over and USA invaded iraq for weapons of mass destruction.

    propagandapropagandapropaganda­propagandapropagandapropaganda­propagandapropagandapropaganda­propagandapropagandapropaganda­propagandapropagandapropaganda

  • Didn't understand your sarcasm.

  • Maybe russians have better tanks but americans have chuck norris and rambo and you know how rambo blows russians tank easy with knife.

  • T-80 rulez

    abrams pieces of shit

  • yeah right this thing is garbage im with dude this thing would stand a chance agaist any allied tank the chlanger or the lepard or abrams plese i dont care how many rockets you shoot out the bore

  • HAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Abrams?

    ROTFL!

  • Not the tank would decimate the other one.

    Your forgotten the crew.

  • You're right! It won't be fair since the T-80 would obviously win.

  • Against an M1A2? Keep dreaming..

  • Yeah, the M1A2 would lose if put against the T-80.

  • Incorrect.

    Standard 125mm round has enough kilojoule kinetic force to go through more than a meter of conventional steel plate which far more than whatever NATO/US quality has for depleted uranium or chobham reactive armor plate.

    125mm if using AT-11 round shoots 5000m and the Abrams and all other NATO tanks only fire 3000m.

    Sorry if english bad at times I using online translator.

    why you think world mostly buy Russian tanks over US ones? Russian ones are usually BETTER and CHEAPER is WHY.

  • Well break out your translator again because all of what you said is stupid.

    The world mostly buy Russian tanks over US ones? Better and cheaper?

    T-90 = $7 million. only India has them beside Russia.

    M1A2 = $4.4 million. Australia, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and US use them.

    And what you said about 125mm rounds compared to all other NATO rounds, or it having more force to go through any armor is bullshit. lol

  • $7 million? no way, maybe for an expensive upgraded export version with some sort of "additions". Indians did not pay anything close to $7 million for their T-90 tanks, they paid around $2 - 3 million per tank, tanks for the Russian army come even cheaper, depending on version ofcoarse.

  • Maybe, but according to this site rianovisti about Venezuela buying T-72s from Russia it says price of T-90 $5-7 million and T-72 $1-2 million.

  • Yes, that is because this price is for the export deal and the information came from an analyst, not official I presume, the analyst could be wrong, $5-7 million is high price for a T-90. But looking at M1 Abrams deals - the Australians paid $550 million for 59 M1A1s, so that is over 9.3 million per tank, thats alot more expensive than the $4.4million per M1A2 tank you mentioned, same goes for the T-90, export prices are much higher then prices for domestic armies in my opinion.

  • Australians paid estimated $550 million for the 59 M1A1's, 7 M88A1 recovery vehicles, advanced gunnery and driver training simulators, training and other support equipment and a range of spares, tank transporters, refueling vehicles, and ammunition.

    Add all that up and get back at me :)

  • Hmm, where I read about the Australian arms deal they only mentioned the 59 MBTs, nothing else, if your right about the other things purchased, then my mistake, sorry, but yes I heard about price increases due to rise in material costs, must affect tank production as wel.

  • I think you're right though about T-90 cost, from what I read it depends on what comes with it but it can be from $2.5 - 5 million, and because cost of raw materials has raised in past few years it's more expensive than when first produced.

  • Venezuela's T-90 costs 5-7 million because there is training and spare parts etc.. stuff included.

  • Unlike US, Russian always operate 2 version of tanks. The high-tech, high quality tank like T-64 and T-80, operated in small numbers by elite divisions. and the low-tech mass produce like T-55 and T-72, that equipped the bulk of soviet army and open for export.

  • @phadil

    USA use old tech tanbks too

    they use M1, M1A1, M1A2

    it got upgrade 2 times

    Russia use 2 different plattforms

    T80 and T90 they have different origins

    main battle tank t90s origin = t72

    support battle tank t80s origin = t64

  • @phadil I would not say "low tech" ...just easier to mass produce.

  • @bittemeinrammstein apparently, mass production and high-tech aren't getting along pretty well. there's trade off where you get one by sacrificing another.

  • @phadil I agree with you, the only big problem is then asking yourself, When do these Low-Tech Tanks need replacing, before your tanks get taken out....

  • @phadil You know nothing. Yes, Russia operates with two versions of ALMOST every tank. They dont use the T-64 anymore, the only T-64 Russia had was in the USSR, and were handed to Ukraine. The T-80 was not a high-quality or high-tech tank, neither was the T-64. The T-80 proved vulnerable to Anti-Tank weapons such as the RPG-7's in Cheychna. The T-80UK is the only varaint in use by Russia now, and thats the command variant, Russia uses the T-90A and T-72M as their Main Battle Tanks.

  • @hellcatdave1 Hahaha blablablabla... I think its you who don't know anything. First : T64BV are still in service, but in lower number than before. Ukraine has not received ALL the T64, but 2000 of the 13 000 produced.

    I'll tell you the truth about T64/80 but before, i'll correct the end of your comment, which is of a great stupidity.

    T80U IS IS IS IS IS IS IS THE ABSOLUTE main tank of russian divisions. T80UK command variant is A COMMAND VARIANT, and are used in ration 1:31 and 4:94.

  • @hellcatdave1 , that is to say, a battalion of 31 T80 is commanded by one T80UK, and a regiment of 94 T80U (3x31 +1) by a colonnel grade T80UK.

    To say T90A and T72M are main armor of russia is a fail : T90 are rare, less than 400, and T72M was never used by russia, scince its an EXPORT variant of T72A (remeber, T72 first adoption : 1979). T72M is a steel armored, poorly equiped MONKEY MODEL of T72, as used by iraq which lost all of these.

  • @hellcatdave1 Russia uses T72B variants, (first appearence : 1985), They are modernized T72B with new gun (same as T80U), new FCS, some have thermal sight, new powerful motor, improved composite armor, covered with Kontact-1 ERA, and more and more are upgraded to T80U/T90 armor standard with Kontact-5, kontact-5M and Relikt ERA, these variants are named T-72BM.

    Russia fields less T72 because of enough number of EXELLENT T80U, but if big war, the T72B stock is enormous.

  • @hellcatdave1 Now, the bullshit about T64 and T80. First, the T64 was the BEST MBT ever, after hard begins, the final variants were perfect, T64B is BETTER THAN T80B which was made after. T64B and BV (k-1 era) were the main armor of USSR UP TO 1990. The tank could kill any MBT in the world, and was light, low, speed, powerful accurate, resistant AND IN BIG QUANTITY.

    T80 is nothing less than a T64A (and after, B) turret on a new jet engine powered Hull.

  • @PATRONSKiii the big difference between these tanks are T80 have a balance turret technoloy like all 4 generation tanks. allow you fire when you moving. All old ones, dont posses this ability. So you have to stop for fire. = to get owned by a T80 ask to georgies :) they cant stop t80s pass for a tunnel. that sucks :) because they passed the tunnel firing back with computer systems using xbox controllers. O.o

  • @xtasytube By the way, modernized russian T72BM, have a shot in move capability, as well as T90. All tanks can shoot on the move, some can do it in high speed and rough terrain, others can at slow speed on road. All turrets and guns are stabilized scince 1950's.

    The use of T80 in georgia is not sure, most of tanks used by russia were T72B, and T62 in rear lines. All the way, all the photos i saw of this war, no T80 spotted.

    But georgian tanks were mostly killed by air / artillery / rpg.

  • @hellcatdave1 It's ONLY T80U (1986) tank that is a brand new tank, with new better turret.

    So, continue with CHECHNYA. Do you know what happened there ? I guess no.

    To beggin with : russia was in terrible crisis. The corruption gained all the military, who made weapon trafic to SURVIVE because noone paid theyr salary, and noone controled the generals, who made what they wants in total impunity.

    You know who were chechen independentists ?

  • @hellcatdave1 Firts, chechen take on EPIC stock of modern armaments, abandoned by garnisons, when economic crisis litteraly kill the army. In these stocks, AK74 rifles, RPK74 and PKM machineguns, SVD, RPG of all kind (7,18,22,26,27,29) in numbers, with ENORMOUS amount of rockets, EVEN MANPANDS Igla, strella and some stingers ! and chiffred weapons : 50 T72 and T62, 50 BMp, 30 BTR, 20 BM21 GRAD, 30 122mm D30 howitzer, 650 grenade launchers (GP25 and AGS17), and more than 200,000 Hand grenades !

  • @hellcatdave1 More over, and this this the most important, chechen warrior were nearly all ex-soviet soldiers, licensed after collapse of USSR, some combated in afghanistan, some in yougoslavia, and moldova. Average age of chechen wariors : 30 years old !

    So, you have this mixed regular/gerrilla force of about 30 000 men, well equiped, experienced, and ON THEIR LAND.

    Eltsine threw an army of 20 000 men, most of them were 18-19 yo conscripts, half of them never trained.

  • @hellcatdave1 Their commandants were pigs, that tried to get monney by every way, and tey did. They sold weapons to chechen while their troops were combatting them, they sold young soldiers as slave, for some dollars, they threw tanks without the ERA protection, in urban zones... And to finish with the T-80 , yeah it was vulnerable because each destroyed MBT was shot by RPG and ATGM teams, from roofs, with multiple hits on turret and motor.

    Abrams, leo2 would have been the same.

  • @PATRONSKiii because all tanks are vulnerable from above attack. The armor is tick on sides only.

  • @xtasytube Western tanks with their large and plate turret roof are even more vulnerable.

    Russian tanks turrets are smaller, sloped, and covered with era bricks.

  • @hellcatdave1 During chechen war, the second, things were not the same, corruption down, and arrival of PUTIN and he's reforms changed a lot of things.

    Tactics were changed, tanks were fitted with their ERA, and the result is amazing : only ONE MBT destroyed (which was a T62), and 14 (T72 and T62) dammaged but repaired.

  • @phadil - well... correct and not correct... T-80U was designed 4,000+ ...not so small numbers. T-72B ofcourse is the less complex system of these two, in 9,000+ designed. however, Russian military never have "small" numbers of his tanks either advanced or less complex ones.

  • @phadil - That is actaully western myth...

  • Why do the Russians always store ammo in the crew compartment?

  • lol

  • Russian doctrine for the most part is the crew is expendable. Look at the death trap T-72's and older. Even the T-90 I believe holds its ammo in the crew compartment.

  • It doesn't matter how much armor modern tanks have because dual tandem rounds can easily penetrate their armor.

    Also, the cost of a T-72 is $1mil compared to $4.5mil for a M1.

  • Not to be an asshole but what does armor thickness have to do with my point?

  • @kcimb It's where the autoloader's located. Someone once told me that the tank can switch to manual loading in case of autoloader failure, though i never read it anywhere else.

  • I see they give you the manufacturers phone number and address at the end. I may give the a call next time I need a new tank.

  • Cool, is it possible to pull farming things, with tank?

  • xatelosby prakatitsa na takom :D

  • air conditioner...hahahahha....sir were under fire ....should we return fire...yes but first lets have the aircon on .....bit toasty in here

  • Special scopes and lights are way too exposed, a high shoot could disable Infra red, thermal signature and other instruments would be destroyed. They need to be more inside of the tank, instead of exposed.

  • Good idea.

    But the windows of all optical sights are exposed.

    No way.

  • i cant understand this english crap!!!

    i need it to be told in red neck!!!!

  • Damn! is this an awesome killing machine or some kind of a "Sport car" or racing rally machine! Probably all of the above? :-). Just awesome !!! looking at the super long 125 mm gun and the low profile of the tank are beautiful sights, knowing that whoever at the other end would never have a chance to know what hit them! and if somehow they surrive the blast. They would definitely have a lasting menories of a life time, indeed! and of course....WORLD PEACE !!! :-)

  • Maldita sea ...señor Antero Flores Araoz compremos estas bestias....un tanque moderno y economico...para q comprar los T 72 polacos o los T 72M1 caul sea la version modernizada del T 72 no sirve los Leopard 2a4 chilenos s los comeria sin embargo los T 80 son dignos rivales...ademas estos tanques es sinonimo de prosperidad capacidad y responsabilidad ..un solo gasto y nos olvidamos por otros 50 años del parque blindado del peru.

    Hagan algo responsable.

  • El T-80U posee motores de turbina, que son mucho más potentes pero a la vez más costosos de operar y mantener que los del T-90, que usa motor diesel convencional. Asi que el T-90 es más moderno y económico

  • best fucking tank eva

  • did ppl mention about russian tanks can go under water?

  • its common knowledge aint it??

  • well yeah

    havent seen the m1 going under water

  • would be awesome to see!!

  • what awesome to see how its gas turbine engine drown in water

  • haha even better!!

    maybe t-80 ud with amphibious capabilities!!

  • Further the frontal turret armor of the Abrams is estimated at 940 to 960mm from kinetic and the latest russain sabot only penetrates 600mm at 0 degress from 2000m So yeah, not quite gonna cut it. Maybe next year. Anyways enough of bickering that will lead no where, and prove nothing. I'm done wasting time with this. Let 'em duke it out on the battlefield and see who wins, if it ever even happens. Lets hope not. Peace out.

  • Front armor of abrams is exellent. But abrams has weak places too. Its sides and stern are weak. For example stern can be penetrated by javy mashine gun DSHK. RPG7 penetrates sides with probability - 56%.

  • Do you known why russian tank the best then any other? T-80,90 can launch ROCKETs range 5 km!Armor Abrams(A) it's 1600 mm in front,t-90-1300,but the area t-90 11m2! it's area only engine section on A. A. too weigh, bid, just like big target, no manevrability but fast. A. very comfortable but very costly.T-90 work in any region in the world, abrams much more capricious.And t-90 have not only reactiv armo,but SHTORA, and can use activ armo ARENA.But Arena cost0.5of cost t-90. What can you answer?

  • Personally I think British tankers are the best. They are a completely different breed. They train incredibly well, and take an huge amount of pride in their job, and their cannon is by far the most accurate. Hell a Challenger holds the record for longest kill. I try my best to be unbiased and I try not to let pride in my country cloud my judgement about equipment. It just makes you underestimate the other person. You need to look at real world results not just videos.

  • not british. German is the best by far. British tank is very close to US.