Sorry for the delay.

See here for details.

Well, I must admit I was surprised by how well the Merkava did, can the Merkava keep its momentum going into Round 2 when it faces off against the Challenger 2? Whom many consider to be the greatest tank in the world today. You decide, the fate of millions is in your hands, you hold in your hands your own destiny, now come forth young lad and let your voice be heard!

Tough, tough choice, but I'm going with the Merkava for faster speed and mobility.

I know people rave about the Merkava, but isn't there a rather large shot-trap at the front of the turret ????

Very tough choice. I also went with the Merkava for its greater mobility and its emphasis on crew protection. Frankly though, I'd be happy with either of these tanks in my arsenal. The 'weakness' of the Challenger II is its relative lack of mobility compared to its rivals. Plus the Merkava has seen more evolution and is a more mature design.

really hard to choose! Interesting topic to search about!

Challenger was very successful during the Persian Gulf war of 1991 and Chieftan also saw extensive combat during Iran-Iraq war and deployed by the Iranians.

But Merkava is a great tank and has seen close quarter combat by the Israeli forces. And it has a better ranking in terms of protecting its crew.

I'll vote later then. Need to read more of members' posts and learn a bit more as well

Challenger 2

Originally Posted by redcoat

I know people rave about the Merkava, but isn't there a rather large shot-trap at the front of the turret ????

No, there isn't.

but for choosing, I choose the Merkava.

This is a tough one. The two tanks pretty evenly matched. The Challenger is better armored but slower. That trade off, I'm not crazy about unless I had both. Both have seen a lot of time on the field of battle. But one beautiful thing that the Merkava brings to your arsenal that the Challenger either hasn't got or hasn't proven:
1.) Superb Urban combat ability -- Any tank can do well out in the open, but doing well in a city is something else. Most tanks aren't too good at that. The Merkava is about as good at Urban fighting as a MBT is going to give you.
2.) Speed -- Being able to move fast is more than huge. Getting there first in battle or outflanking an opponent are often as big or bigger than the battle itself.
3.) More years of proven battlefield service. The Challenger has a couple of Wars under its belt. The Merkava has developed through several and every single day in the Holy Land is a day that a Merkava crew might expect to be fired upon at any moment.
4.) Merkava has better anti-mine protection.

On the other hand, the Challenger is a tough nut to crack and very hard to kill, with the toughest armor of any MBT that I am aware of.

Both these tanks were designed for different purposes in mind.

The Challenger 2 was designed for fighting in open terrain in Europe. Made for covering long distances (supensionwise not fuel consumption) and long range fighting.

The Merkava was design by Israel for fighting on their terrain specificly. More heavily armored for closed-in and urban areas.

Possibly the terrain would be a factor too.

Originally Posted by gladius

Both these tanks were designed for different purposes in mind.

The Challenger 2 was designed for fighting in open terrain in Europe. Made for covering long distances (supensionwise not fuel consumption) and long range fighting.

The Merkava was design by Israel for fighting on their terrain specificly. More heavily armored for closed-in and urban areas.

Possibly the terrain would be a factor too.

Yes. They have been designed with 2 different roles in mind so that needs to be taken into consideration.