Topic: Merkava Mk 4 -VS- Leopard 2A6

Yossarian · July 31st, 2008

Well, It's hard to answer questions like these. I have seen endless questions on gear vs. gear. Sukhoi 35 BM Vs. F 22A, AK 47 Vs. M 16, M 16 Vs. L 85 (I am guilty of the latter one.) But I have learned that you can only look at paper facts. I mean , look at the situations that this question would require to learn the answer to your comparison.

The facts would be to hard to compare. I mean, as I far as you can take it is paper figures, performance readings, and that's about it, plus, even if a enemy of Germany for instance, got a highly advanced Merkava and went toe to toe, there are factors like crew experience and the amount of logistics that the opposing armies put into the deployment and upkeep of their tanks. It's all politics, in meaning that for these two pieces of hardware to be gunning at one another means, that two modern 1st world nations are not getting along. In today's world , you can pretty much tell a lot about a enemy by his gear. And if he is sporting highly advanced tanks like a Leopard, or Merkava, then he has slightly deeper pockets than some unstable state, or rebel or insurgent group. This also gives some facts on how he will handle his gear. All this stuff is factors.

No matter how you look at it, the best you can do is find answers for "what if ?" Scenarios. And in invention "what if?" scenarios, the factors are up to you, and thus, you are God of the factors. And being God, the answer to your question? Is all up to you and which piece you like better for whatever reason.

There are some members on the forums that serve in armored units, they could probably tell you a whole lot more about this match up than I can, and about the factors that you must consider.

July 31st, 2008
Yossarian	Well, It's hard to answer questions like these. I have seen endless questions on gear vs. gear. Sukhoi 35 BM Vs. F 22A, AK 47 Vs. M 16, M 16 Vs. L 85 (I am guilty of the latter one.) But I have learned that you can only look at paper facts. I mean , look at the situations that this question would require to learn the answer to your comparison. The facts would be to hard to compare. I mean, as I far as you can take it is paper figures, performance readings, and that's about it, plus, even if a enemy of Germany for instance, got a highly advanced Merkava and went toe to toe, there are factors like crew experience and the amount of logistics that the opposing armies put into the deployment and upkeep of their tanks. It's all politics, in meaning that for these two pieces of hardware to be gunning at one another means, that two modern 1st world nations are not getting along. In today's world , you can pretty much tell a lot about a enemy by his gear. And if he is sporting highly advanced tanks like a Leopard, or Merkava, then he has slightly deeper pockets than some unstable state, or rebel or insurgent group. This also gives some facts on how he will handle his gear. All this stuff is factors. No matter how you look at it, the best you can do is find answers for "what if ?" Scenarios. And in invention "what if?" scenarios, the factors are up to you, and thus, you are God of the factors. And being God, the answer to your question? Is all up to you and which piece you like better for whatever reason. There are some members on the forums that serve in armored units, they could probably tell you a whole lot more about this match up than I can, and about the factors that you must consider. "This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience"- Dwight D. Eisenhower , Jan 17,1961. Last edited by Yossarian; July 31st, 2008 at 20:37..