Rank the Tank!

Right i was thinking about this and i came to the conclusion that ther is no one best tank,different tanks have different strenghts eg challenger armour and abraham m1 fire power and so on. :tank:
 
ill be damed if i know said:
Right i was thinking about this and i came to the conclusion that ther is no one best tank,different tanks have different strenghts eg challenger armour and abraham m1 fire power and so on. :tank:

The Challenger and M1 have the same armor and same gun caliber.

Well the M1 was made for long range, heavy tank battles.

M1 has apeed, armor, and fire power.
 
It should be remembered that the only thing that has knocked a Challenger 2 is another Challenger 2. This happened in a fire fight in Iraq during a dust storm.
 
LeEnfield said:
It should be remembered that the only thing that has knocked a Challenger 2 is another Challenger 2. This happened in a fire fight in Iraq during a dust storm.

Ya, no M1A1/A2 has ever been totally knocked out, only damaged. Only time I heard on an M1 being totally destroyed was by another M1A1/A2.

Question, how did the dust affect the tanks sight? The M1 uses thermal sights.
 
Cadet Seamen Have you ever been in one of those giant dust storms you can get the desert, you are looking at a solid wall of dirt flying around, even the thermal sights are blocked, the dam stuff can even remove the paint from vehicle. On this occasion the tank went of course and appeared right in front of the another Challenger and gunner let him have it, no one was killed but the tank was knocked but later recovered and repaired
 
LeEnfield said:
Cadet Seamen Have you ever been in one of those giant dust storms you can get the desert, you are looking at a solid wall of dirt flying around, even the thermal sights are blocked, the dam stuff can even remove the paint from vehicle. On this occasion the tank went of course and appeared right in front of the another Challenger and gunner let him have it, no one was killed but the tank was knocked but later recovered and repaired

No haven't been caught in Iraqm but I have in Texas. Strange, the 2 Gen. TIS on the M1 isn't effected by dust, smoke, or anything of the like.
 
LeEnfield said:
It should be remembered that the only thing that has knocked a Challenger 2 is another Challenger 2. This happened in a fire fight in Iraq during a dust storm.

I think with todays armor it is hard for one shot to take out a modern tank, especially not from a Western tank which seems to rely more on speed and maneuvariblity to out flank the enemy and get them from the side or rear where the armor is thinner. Some of the later Sovier tanks and newer Chinese tanks may have large enough guns to hit an Abrams or Challenger at long range and penetrate the frontal armor.

Weren't the Challenger and Abrams products of many years of cooperation between the British and American tank designers? The Chavin armor (Code named Burlington while in developement, right?) was discovered by the British, correct? And didn't the US have some breakthroughs in the design of the turret and cannon stabilizer? Am I just rambling because I am tired but can not fall asleep? Do you wear pink socks? I don't anymore.
 
Damien435 said:
LeEnfield said:
It should be remembered that the only thing that has knocked a Challenger 2 is another Challenger 2. This happened in a fire fight in Iraq during a dust storm.

I think with todays armor it is hard for one shot to take out a modern tank, especially not from a Western tank which seems to rely more on speed and maneuvariblity to out flank the enemy and get them from the side or rear where the armor is thinner. Some of the later Sovier tanks and newer Chinese tanks may have large enough guns to hit an Abrams or Challenger at long range and penetrate the frontal armor.

Weren't the Challenger and Abrams products of many years of cooperation between the British and American tank designers? The Chavin armor (Code named Burlington while in developement, right?) was discovered by the British, correct? And didn't the US have some breakthroughs in the design of the turret and cannon stabilizer? Am I just rambling because I am tired but can not fall asleep? Do you wear pink socks? I don't anymore.

The M1 was a product of the MBT-70, a join venture between Gernamy and the U.S., the armor Chobham was a British discovery. The U.S. now has about four inches of depleted urainum add onto the Chobham armor.

The cannon stabilizer was due to the Navy trying to keeping the deck guns on the horizion.

Its a horizontal stabilizer, keeping the M256 alined with the horizion. The turret has a ammo stowage compartment that has blow-off panels and a Halon system to extinguish any fires in the stowage compartment within 2.5 seconds of any sence of extreme heat.

The M1 was first developed in 1978, but had been on the drawing board since 1972. The whole basis of the M1 was on speed, firepower and armor. Its main mission was long range, heavy tank battles against the Soviet's.

Every Soviet tank the M1 and Challenger have come across is a burning pile of junk. The lastest T-80 doesn't stand a chance. The T-90 is more or less a copy of the Leo 2A4.

The T-80 uses an auto-loader, its 125mm isn't much. It fires so very rudimentary Sabot's, unlike the U.S. M829E3.

In the Israel they had the M48's and M60's against the T-62 and T-72 and both where beat down.

Trust me, British and American tanks are the world's best.
 
Best protected tank: Challenger II
Faster MBT: LeClerc
Best design/shape (IMHO): Merkava

Best all around: Tie between Merkava Mk4 and Leopard 2a6. M1 A2 comes close to making it a threeway tie, but not quite, lacking some anti-mine protection in the comparison. Challenger 2 comes a ways down because of its lack of speed, but it's survivability is unsurpassed. I'd rank it right below the M1 for overall. The T-95, LeClerc and a number of others are well worth mentioning and I don't know what order I'd put them in.
 
godofthunder9010 said:
Best protected tank: Challenger II
Faster MBT: LeClerc
Best design/shape (IMHO): Merkava

Best all around: Tie between Merkava Mk4 and Leopard 2a6. M1 A2 comes close to making it a threeway tie, but not quite, lacking some anti-mine protection in the comparison. Challenger 2 comes a ways down because of its lack of speed, but it's survivability is unsurpassed. I'd rank it right below the M1 for overall. The T-95, LeClerc and a number of others are well worth mentioning and I don't know what order I'd put them in.

Your comparing the LeClerc with the CH2 and M1A2?

The M1 without it's governer hits 60MPH, and on the Detroit test track it hit 90MPH without it's turret.

The CH2 and M1A2 are at a tie for protection, but the CH2 has it's AMP.

Comparing Armor (That has seen combat).

Best Protected: CH2 & M1A2

Fastest: M1A2

Best Designed for it's mission: Merkava, CH2, M1A2

Over All veiw of armor:

Fastest: M1A2 and LeClerc

Best Protected: CH2, M1A2, and Leo 2A6

Best Designed for it's mission: Merkava, CH2, M1A2, and Leo 2A6
 
You cant say the M1A2 is a fast tank if you to class it as that your taking the turret and governor off as it wont be going into combat without the governor and can you see a tank going into combat without a turret?

Leclercs cross country is 50km/h = 31.25mph
M1A1 " 30mph
CH2 40km/h 25mph
Merkava 4 55km/h 34.3 mph

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/#Main_Battle_Tanks

From reading that and getting those stats the merkava can go up to 55km/h off road so it is actually the fastest!
 
why cant it go into combat without a governor? is there some practical reason, or just because the commanders say so? i dont see how not having a governor could pose a problem, so i think the fastest should be rated without a governor, but with a turret. thats my opinion.
 
Many of the Engines are installed with far greater power than required, this is to give far greater torque to the drive and not for hurtling around the place at a break neck speed.
 
Back
Top