It's pretty easily going to come down to the Abrams, the Leopard, and the Challenger.

The Abrams and the Leopard are essentially twins ( both cooperatively developed) with a few differences- especially the A6 witch sports a heavier ( and higher velocity) L66 gun.

The M1A2 is marginally faster than the A5, but the A6 with it's L66 gun (25% heavier then the L55) is slightly slower- yet would in theory have better firepower. Though ive never seen the L66 fired in combat before.

The M1A2 has much more experienced crew than the Leopard as they have seen combat in Iraq and Afghanistan- as far as i know the Leopard 2 is a virgin in combat.


The Challenger 2 while much slower than both the Leopard 2 and the M1 has arguably better armor. While thickness can only be guessed, it sports the new generation of Chobham armor. It uses a rifled gun witch means it will wear out much more rapidly than a smooth bore- but it also mean it can claim the longest confirmed kill- and as everyone will say in a evenly matched battle' it depends who gets the first shot off'

The Merkava crews are the most experienced of the big guys, having seen combat at a near constancy as Arabic countries have ganged up on Israel non-stop throughout the latter half of the 20th century.

I admit i do not know nearly as much about the Merkava, witch prevents me from giving it a fair shot.

I go for the Merkava 4. Why? Although most say that there are reports of heavy casualties of merkava being hit by rpgs, esp tandem warheads, i bet leopards 2a6m, m1a2, and challenger 2 wouldnt be able to take such punishment and still stand either.

BTW, i read that a chally 2's front armor was penetrated by a single rpg-29 causing a crew to lose a leg.(correct me if im wrong).

Dont brag those m1's being hit by rpg and ied and still survive at iraq. iraqis are way less advanced/sophisticared and too poor to buy a metis and make a good ied.

Here's a catch. take those leo 2a6m , m1a2, or chally 2 to lebanon/gaza and let those hamas/hezbollas do some target practice on them. ill lay my vote on the last tank standing.

Originally Posted by scandinavian_armor

I go for the Merkava 4. Why? Although most say that there are reports of heavy casualties of merkava being hit by rpgs, esp tandem warheads, i bet leopards 2a6m, m1a2, and challenger 2 wouldnt be able to take such punishment and still stand either.

Did we read the same press?

Originally Posted by scandinavian_armor

BTW, i read that a chally 2's front armor was penetrated by a single rpg-29 causing a crew to lose a leg.(correct me if im wrong).

You're wrong.

Originally Posted by scandinavian_armor

Dont brag those m1's being hit by rpg and ied and still survive at iraq. iraqis are way less advanced/sophisticared and too poor to buy a metis and make a good ied.

Iraqis are not sophisticated enough to make a good IED? Will a picture of an M1 without its turret be enough to shut you up or will you just keep posting stupidity?

Originally Posted by scandinavian_armor

Here's a catch. take those leo 2a6m , m1a2, or chally 2 to lebanon/gaza and let those hamas/hezbollas do some target practice on them. ill lay my vote on the last tank standing.

Please just stop ... Its like this forum attracts random people, i think i'm gonna bail.

Originally Posted by Britney

It's pretty easily going to come down to the Abrams, the Leopard, and the Challenger.

The Abrams and the Leopard are essentially twins ( both cooperatively developed) with a few differences- especially the A6 witch sports a heavier ( and higher velocity) L66 gun.

L66? I was under the impression the L55 was the newest maingun for the Leo 2. Link please,

The M1A2 is marginally faster than the A5, but the A6 with it's L66 gun (25% heavier then the L55) is slightly slower- yet would in theory have better firepower. Though ive never seen the L66 fired in combat before.

You do realize the purpose for the L55 was to help increase velocity, the L44 on the M1 fires APFSDS-T, which does not require the excess barrel length of the L55 because it is made of DU, unlike the DM rounds the Bundeswehr uses.

The M1A2 has much more experienced crew than the Leopard as they have seen combat in Iraq and Afghanistan- as far as i know the Leopard 2 is a virgin in combat.

Actually the M1A1HA and M60A1 RISE have seen more combat.

The Challenger 2 while much slower than both the Leopard 2 and the M1 has arguably better armor. While thickness can only be guessed, it sports the new generation of Chobham armor.

Um pardon, but the M1 sports Chobham and Depleted Uranium armor, at a visible thinkness of 18 inches, I can only speculate how much further the armor continues beyond it's weld line.

It uses a rifled gun witch means it will wear out much more rapidly than a smooth bore- but it also mean it can claim the longest confirmed kill- and as everyone will say in a evenly matched battle' it depends who gets the first shot off'

The M1 can hit targets in excess of 2 1/2 miles, due particularly to it's amazing Gen. 3 Thermal Imaging. Lets not forget the way ammunition is designed for the L30A1, it requires bagged powder, as where M1 and Leo 2 shells are single piece, so time does factor into loading for the Chally 2.

The Merkava crews are the most experienced of the big guys, having seen combat at a near constancy as Arabic countries have ganged up on Israel non-stop throughout the latter half of the 20th century.

The Merkava is a beast, but it is designed to defend Israel, which it does damn well, and I don't judge the Merkava because I can assume it will probably never face any Western tank, and I highly doubt the Russian's are going to start exporting anything short of T-72M's.