Best MBT in Service

Best MBT service? READ BELOW BEFORE VOTING

  • Merkava IV [Israel]

    Votes: 10 13.3%

  • T-90 [Russian Federation]

    Votes: 7 9.3%

  • Leclerc [France]

    Votes: 1 1.3%

  • Leopard 2 [Germany]

    Votes: 29 38.7%

  • M1 Abrams [United States]

    Votes: 18 24.0%

  • Challenger 2 [United Kingdom]

    Votes: 8 10.7%

  • Type 99 [PR China]

    Votes: 1 1.3%

  • P'okpoong-Ho [North Korea]

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Total voters
    75
Wasn't a Challenger 2 lost when the lower front hull was penetrated by a RPG of some type. About 3 years ago in Iraq. IIRC the driver lost a leg.

I have always liked the Challenger but think the designers got it wrong retaining the rifled 120mm gun. With so few in service it means the UK ammo technology will stay still, can't see this government investing in new designs of APDSFS. The rounds in service now are no doubt up to the job but what will they be like in 5 or 10 years.

Apart from the smootbore gun, the ammo blow out panels give the M1 the edge to me.
 
Sherman, our Israeli tanker and Moderator once stated that Merkava was a very good Isreali tank. And what we meant by that was: It was a brilliant tank for defending the geography of Israel - that it was purpose built for that role.

However, he did not think it would be a very good tank OUTSIDE of Israel in other environments. Other Tanks on that list were better at being a general tank whereas the Merkava was really designed for use within Israel and used by IDF troops.
 
The only Challenger to be badly damaged was in Iraq when they put in an attack during a sand storm and a challenger got out of line and was shot at by another Challenger. No challenger has been lost due to enemy action
 
Le, I know about the blue on blue in GW 1 when a HESH went through the comanders hatch, is that the incident you are refering to? I will see if I can find details about the incident I am thinking off, im sure it was in Basra. The driver lost a leg and the tank may not have been lost but I am sure it was penetrated much to everyones surprise. The RPG penetrated the lower front hull which has since had an add on armour pack.
 
Last edited:
Simple answer - the CHALLENGER II Main Battle Tank!

Made by the people who actually invented the battle tank - The British.

They invented the thing and the rest of the world followed.
 
A HESH round will knock out any tank.
And once you make a correction, any half decent gunner, will be able to hit every time after that.
Pretty nasty to Infantry not dug in too.
Apparently the smoke round is filled with nasty phosphorous , as well.
 
Merkava 4 With Mla"ar system.
But im paid by the evil zionists.
:tank:

But seriously,the most important part of the tank is the crew.
 
Last edited:
Something was forgeten on the vote. Missing the two 4th generation operational MBT: the K2 Black Panther and the Type-10. With the Leclerc they are the only 4th Gen MBT operational at this date more advanced technologicaly than the leo2 and the Abrams.

My 5 favorites tanks are:

The Type-10 has the advantage to have a very good mobility in urban combat, it has a speed of around 70 km/h on backward and it can turn very quicly like when it firing.
His main problem is his main gun who seems to be a L44

The K2 Black Panther has a better gun. This is a L55 who is very efficiency with the good FCS featured, the K2 has also a good protection and mobility. It has also a good auto-reloading system similar of the Leclerc's one.
I heard that the program took late because of some problems of reliability.

The Leclerc has also a very good electronics and a very good mobility. His Battle Management system is compatible with a french battlefield network system and it has one of the best electronic gyro-stabilisation. And it has also a polyvalant protection with a lot of properties similar of the leo2's protection. The Leclerc has the luck to be oldest 4th generation tank so it had the time to have "post-production" upgrades necessary for usual problems of reliability.
But this is the most expensive tank of the world, with not a good quality/price, France considered it as a money pit.

The M1A2 had greatly improved his electronics and protection. His FCS is very reputate, and his protection in Uranium seems to be very good. Australia (a great ally of USA who bought previous versions of Abrams) wanted to have this kind of armour, USA refused to export it, I think that it's a good one. The M1A2 has also the experience of Iraq with an urban kit the TUSK who inspired british and french on their tanks.
It has the same problem of the Type-10: a small canon L44 and a not exceptional mobility.

The Leopard 2 has the particularity to be excelent in all domains, it is very polyvalant. Great mobility, a great canon with new rounds in titanium very efficiency. A good polyvalant protection.
Maybe his only problems is his age, the leo2 A7+ is maybe one the last version so the tank has may be no future.
 
Just a small note here about the Australian Army's Abrams tanks. As far as I recall, one of the main reasons we didn't get the depleted uranium armour was because the Australian government didn't want it - they're not happy about used up radioactive material trundling around the place no matter how good it may be in terms of protection.
 
KevinTheCynic said:
Just a small note here about the Australian Army's Abrams tanks. As far as I recall, one of the main reasons we didn't get the depleted uranium armour was because the Australian government didn't want it - they're not happy about used up radioactive material trundling around the place no matter how good it may be in terms of protection.
Click to expand...

Typical, its not their lives they are playing with. Tie a few of the buggers to the turret, maybe they might change their minds.
 
Personally I wouldnt want to live and breathe in a depleted uranium box.
Doesnt survival depend on seeing the oher tank first regardless of armour?
The aussies run big diesel motors instead of the turbines, maybe weight was a factor as well.
 
headwards said:
Personally I wouldnt want to live and breathe in a depleted uranium box.
Doesnt survival depend on seeing the oher tank first regardless of armour?
The aussies run big diesel motors instead of the turbines, maybe weight was a factor as well.
Click to expand...

I think that the uranium armor is studied to don't expose the crew to raddiations, if not they would never feature it, mainly during there are no war.
 
As far as I understand it, the depleted uranium (DU) armour is a sandwich of various metals and ceramics with the DU portion in the middle. Nobody will ever be exposed to it unless the armour plate itself is damaged - the rationale being that in war, a little bit of exposure to a low count radiation source is preferable to having your tank pierced and you splashed around the turret.

We're still using the turbine engines in the Abrams but we're running them on diesel instead of AvGas. Unfortunately the turbine is a real gas guzzler and the operational range is only around 430km - not really a big issue for Europe or North America but a real pain for Australia where the distance between rural towns in some states may be 200 to 400 klicks.
 
A platoon of MBT's could reliably drive 200-400k across the outback? I would expect all sorts to go wrong over that kind of distance, especially with the tracks.
 
The answer to the question must vary with the conditions the tank is to be used under. Terrain and climate are major limiting factors. For instance, the Israeli or European or American Abram will not work in the humid tropics with very soft soil. Desert imposes its limitations.
 
rocky71 said:
The answer to the question must vary with the conditions the tank is to be used under. Terrain and climate are major limiting factors. For instance, the Israeli or European or American Abram will not work in the humid tropics with very soft soil. Desert imposes its limitations.
Click to expand...

How does the turbine cool itself does anyone know?
Can you combat soft soil with wider tracks?
 
The Abrams doesn't work in tropical conditions on soft soil? Some one better tell the boys at 1st armoured regiment RAAC... They don't seem to have noticed .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top