1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Best Tank

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Zardnaar, Oct 21, 2019.

  1. Zardnaar

    Zardnaar Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    5,958
    Location:
    Dunedin, New Zealand
    Here's something to argue erm I mean debate about.

    What's the best tank in the world?

    Now for me I would pick the Abrams with the Challenger in 2nd place.

    The Abrams is fast, one of the best guns and best armor except maybe the Challenger. It also has the safest internal protections IMHO if it's penetrated. In Iraq the tank was penetrated but only one was written off so it's a fairly safe tank. Gas guzzler but not a major problem in the American forces. Also heavy due to armor generally 20 tons heavier than Russian/German/French tanks.

    Anything Russian that's not a T-14 Armata

    Russian tanks more or less all have the same problems. They are reasonably light and they get that via being cramped, weak armor (average from the front). The autoloader also results in bad ammunition storage. There's a wide variety of quality even in the T72 models (export ones are rubbish) and the T-90 is a glorified T-72 with T-80 turret.

    T-90s have been shown to survive hits from anti tank rockets launched by infantry in Syria and Yemen but that won't help vs a Abrams main gun. Abrams gave no trouble hitting Russian tanks and an Abrams in Gulf War I knocked out 3 T72s in 10 seconds. And that was 30 years ago.

    If Russian tanks are penetrated they tend to explode at least relative to the Abrams. Generally weak side armor, top, bottom relative to other tanks.

    T-14 Armata

    The new Russian wondertank. There's a lot of hype around this one but it has not seen combat and there's a lot of doubt if it works as advertised. It has active countermeasures vs rockets and reactive armor and has a decent gun.

    However once again it's not going to protect it from ye old Abrams main gun. If penetrated however it's safer than all the other Russian tanks and crew safety is a big thing. The turret has no crew in it and it has thin armor but it won't matter to much if penetrated at least in terms of crew safety.

    Might be a better tank in real situations of modern warfare where IEDs and infantry weapons are more dangerous than other tanks. Has not seen any battle. Production has also been cut to less than 100 so the tank either doesn't work as advertised or the Russians can't afford to build them.

    So most Russian tanks are upgraded T72s +squishy) and T90's with lots of obsolete Soviet tanks in reserve (un upgraded coffins on modern battlefield). Generally inferior armor and gun, only the Armata might be on par with NATO tanks.

    Leopard 2.

    A German tanks that has seen limited deployment. Good gun and fire control systems but not as safe as say as a late model Abrams. Due to budget cuts not many are probably available. Dangerous but reasonably cheap to aquire, maintain and operate.

    Challenger 2.
    The only other tank I would consider best in world. Arguably best armor the Abrams afaik has a better gun. Has seen limited combat but not as much as the Abrams.
    Passes the Zards best chance if survival test if getting shot at though.

    Other stuff

    French Tanks
    Light armor, expensive, NATO levels of kill ability. Leclerc is very expensive more than Abrams iirc.

    Ukrainian
    Similar to Russian tanks, may have inferior shells however. They use ex Soviets stuff and upgraded T80s and T64's so most if the drawbacks as the Russian stuff.

    Various new tanks
    A lot of other countries such as Turkey, Korea, India are working on new tanks . At best I think most of them will end up similar to older model NATO tanks.

    So obviously I lean towards Challenger and Abrams.

    T 14 Armata
    The great unknown. Best Russians can make but untested. At best might be comparable or slightly better than NATO stuff but it's not a wonder tank or invincible assuming it works something close to the hype.

    T-90 is acceptable due to price as long as youre not planning in fighting NATO or the Americans but would prefer to use them for training, tank force in being, or vs nation's with older T-72s or worse.

    Leopard 2 is also reasonably cheap and the Germans got rid of a few. How upgraded they are varies though. Tanking on a budget though this might be an option.

    T-72
    These vary but even the best Russian ones are not great. Older models and export models are garbage vs anything decent. Good enough if you need to crush unarmed protesters.
     
  2. Timsup2nothin

    Timsup2nothin Veteran of 1000 psycic wars

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2013
    Messages:
    36,494
    Location:
    Where the winds of limbo roar
    I have a three gallon tank on my compressor. I like it okay, but wouldn't argue for it being "the best."
     
  3. EnglishEdward

    EnglishEdward Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Messages:
    3,462
    Location:
    England
    Must be Tank Girl

    external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg
     
    Socrates99 and AmazonQueen like this.
  4. Lillefix

    Lillefix I'm serious. You can.

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2003
    Messages:
    5,672
    Abrams? It drinks twice as much as any other tank. That's got to be a serious detriment in the long run. And I think you're underestimating the Leopard 2. There must be a good reason so many nations use it.
     
  5. red_elk

    red_elk Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    11,612
    Latest versions (T-90M, T-90MS) have Relikt ERA, particularly effective against APFSDS.
    I doubt T-90 were ever used in Yemen, BTW.
     
  6. Zardnaar

    Zardnaar Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    5,958
    Location:
    Dunedin, New Zealand
    Syria they were. One soaked several RPGs to the turret and it worked.

    Relikt just reduces the impact vs apfsds the Abrams penetration is probably turned high enough to punch through regardless.

    Would you gamble your life in an upgraded T72 or T90 with it's superior fire control and gun?
     
  7. Zardnaar

    Zardnaar Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    5,958
    Location:
    Dunedin, New Zealand
    Leopard 2 us comparatively cheap the main draw back is the armor.

    It would be very good at knocking out say Russia tanks but it's a lot more vulnerable than the Abrams both if it gets penetrated and getting penetrated.

    It's pretty much best tank you can get and run at a price that doesn't require oodles of money and a lot were sold when the Germans downsized
     
  8. Broken_Erika

    Broken_Erika Nothing

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    7,680
    Location:
    Glasgnopolis, Grottland
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  9. innonimatu

    innonimatu Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,170
    The germans got rid of nearly all Leopards. Which was a smart move. They want influence but at least they dropped the military path, two wars did made them learn something!

    The MBT is as obsolete as the battleship. Good for colonial duty. Excuse me, ant-insurrection duty. Good for repressing rebels at home too. Good perhaps for fights between tinpot dictators. Not good for any war between major powers with an air force and missiles, except in a mop-up stage after winning. Which, when it comes to nuclear-armed countries, does not happen - everyone loses.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
    cardgame likes this.
  10. red_elk

    red_elk Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    11,612
    T-34 FTW!
     
  11. Hygro

    Hygro soundcloud.com/hygro/

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2002
    Messages:
    22,571
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    The abrams shoots so fast the ordnance fires as a bolt of plasma that penetrates completely the other tank with such force the entire crew inside gets sucked out an exit wound smaller than a person in a spray of gaseous giblets.
     
    El_Machinae and Bugfatty300 like this.
  12. Zardnaar

    Zardnaar Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    5,958
    Location:
    Dunedin, New Zealand
    There's pictures online of Abrams getting penetrated. Wholes usually not that big.
     
  13. Bugfatty300

    Bugfatty300 Buddha Squirrel

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,837
    Location:
    Mexico
    After multiple Abrams kills the blood and viscera from the enemy tanks actually seeds the atmosphere and the next morning there will be a fine bloody dew coating everything. This is where the movie title Red Dawn comes from.
     
    El_Machinae, Hygro and cardgame like this.
  14. cardgame

    cardgame Sensual Kitten

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    12,765
    Location:
    Misery
    Challenger 2 has the best crew survivability - one soaked up like 40-50 RPGs in Iraq (iirc) and was just fine. Abrams can and have been destroyed by hits to the rear/engine roof area
     
  15. AdamCrock

    AdamCrock Polish Pudding

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2012
    Messages:
    4,188
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Aimee's closet :)
    hmm.... Leopard 2 !! IIRC it can ride with a glass of beer on his barrel gun over a rough terrain and do not spill a drop :)

    edit: ahh now , here it is :)

     
    Hygro likes this.
  16. Zardnaar

    Zardnaar Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    5,958
    Location:
    Dunedin, New Zealand
    Depends where they get hit.

    I think the Abrams has the better gun.

    There's a reason I put both at the top.
     
  17. cardgame

    cardgame Sensual Kitten

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    12,765
    Location:
    Misery
    Since when has the gun been the most important part of a tank, though? Korea?
     
    AdamCrock likes this.
  18. Zardnaar

    Zardnaar Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    5,958
    Location:
    Dunedin, New Zealand
    You can say the same thing about armor.

    It's armor, mobility, firepower there's usually a trade off. Not so much on the Abrams it's got all 3. Every tank on this list has been penetrated except ones who haven't seen combat.

    Abrams gun is important because it can penetrated every known tank design that it's likely to face.

    Any future design is also vulnerable. There's a lot of countermeasures used on things like the T-14. None of them do much to ye old big gun although the front armor of a T-14 might be able to soak it at least some if the time.

    Russians obviously believe RPGs are more if a threat than another tank. They're probably not wrong. I don't think Putin expects NATO tanks to be rolling into Moscow anytime soon.

    Abrams can be penetrated from the side but almost any tank can. Not to many people have died in Abrams getting penetrated though and they've been used a lot more than anything else so there's more data.

    Either way Challenger 2 and Abrams are my picks.
     
  19. cardgame

    cardgame Sensual Kitten

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    12,765
    Location:
    Misery
    T-14 has ~50 production models in existence with the rest of the line being cancelled, I'm not sure it's even valid to compare :hmm:

    Firepower doesn't really matter because tanks don't fight other tanks and haven't since the 80s (Iran-Iraq). Hence why armor is the most important. Mobility is great to have, too, but you're not going to be outrunning a TOW or worse, a fire-and-forget missile system. Armor or other survivability countermeasures have to be #1 consideration for the modern tank.
     
  20. abradley

    abradley Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2015
    Messages:
    2,020
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Thailand
    Want a little info, sometime ago China had an arms review where they're latest tank design went wobble while passing in review, there was a video on the net, can't find it now.
     

Share This Page