• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Need help with argument! Best tank?

Need help with argument! Best tank?


  • Total voters
    150
I voted T-90.
Its munition can perforate M1A2, Leo 2 and Mk4 armour up front and its ATGM makes the T-90 an opponent even at 4 kilometers.
I have to take you to task over that. For those who don't know Trops and I have crossed swords before on these forums over this very question, BUT always with a smile. I respect his opinion and the fact hes polite. Anyway mate, Chally doesn't require a Guided weapon to kill a target at range it can just use a kinetic energy round. Longest range tank kill still, and with a 'dumb' round. I still have huge reservations about equipping a tank with a 'magic bullet', how do you decide what target warrants it and how much does it cost?
Chally does what it does by firing a big bit of heavy metal (literally in the case of a DU round) at huge velocity at a tank. No GW, just good crews and good gunnery.
Finally, I'd like to thank you for not lumping Chally 2 in with Leo or Abrams in the vulnerability stakes, front on side on or whatever you need to be bloody lucky to take one on, front on at range?, best option hide till it lumbers past you and try to get in in the ass..........but bear in mind its REAR armour is considerably better than Abrams which has been penetrated by 25 mm rounds.
 
Upvote 0
i would have to say its either the leopard or the chally 2. the leo bcause the germans have always had an affinity for tanks, and they make them with a "you will die so easily, it will be almost entertaining!" style. the chally 2 because of its nice chobbam armor and that hefty 120 gun that would make most people cringe if you knew it was aiming at you... but its the xzakt same gun from the leopard so no fun an games there.

realy though a tank is as good as its commader and crew. ive flanked and killed 6-8 german tanks at a time in my little humble ruskie t34/76, amongst that group was a tiger, a few p4s and the rest were either stugs or p3's (on bdj f-south flank). so where you can really judge how much better a tank is, is in its mobility, and how much training that country gives thier tanker lads...


EDIT:

oh and its not the good ol abrams, that things gettin a lil old itself, with only a 110 mm gun, (which dosent matter that much for a apds round), and as somone before me said, rear armor not good). and that blasted aircraft engine thats less gass efficient as some of them monster deisels, and its murdered by desert air, something which deisel engines dont have to worry bout...

2nd edit: the abrams has an older 120 mm, .. my bad .. why am i thinkin it had a 110 .. perhaps an older abrams had a 110..
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Anyway mate, Chally doesn't require a Guided weapon to kill a target at range it can just use a kinetic energy round. Longest range tank kill still, and with a 'dumb' round.

Against steel-hulled vehicle. I strongly doubt that CHARM could reliably penetrate modern MBT at 4 kilometres.

I still have huge reservations about equipping a tank with a 'magic bullet', how do you decide what target warrants it and how much does it cost?

Missile system for soviet tanks cost a lot less than any western tank and they give older equipment increased lifespan (NVA T-55s for example).


Chally does what it does by firing a big bit of heavy metal (literally in the case of a DU round) at huge velocity at a tank. No GW, just good crews and good gunnery.
Finally, I'd like to thank you for not lumping Chally 2 in with Leo or Abrams in the vulnerability stakes, front on side on or whatever you need to be bloody lucky to take one on, front on at range?, best option hide till it lumbers past you and try to get in in the ass..........but bear in mind its REAR armour is considerably better than Abrams which has been penetrated by 25 mm rounds.

Definitely. Chally 2 is a fine vehicle but far from invincible. Plus it's very expensive. It has main ammo storage in fighting compartment, so internal explosion is a very real risk in case of penetration. So far, only M1 has adressed this problem.

@Colt .45 Killer: M1 never had 110 millimeter gun. Only british designed 105 mm was used in earlier versions.
 
Upvote 0
Couple of points mate:
1.Its no longer charm, its charm3 which is an improved and more lethal version, which doesn't get blocked by ERA etc.
2.I don't doubt that the GW works but comparing cost against a 'dumb' round would be interesting and what cut off point is used when you say "Can't use a dumb round for this shot, we'll have to use a GW projectile instead. How many GW rounds are carrried? Like I said mate if you have a 'magic bullet' how do you decide when its used.
3.You're only half right with the point about ammo storage. The charge bags are housed in charge bin containers in the fighting compartment filled with pressurised water. The charge bags burn, they don't explode unless they're in an enclosed space (like the breech). The projectiles are housed in the turret. Projectiles are kinetic energy weapons and thus unlikely to explode. Point of fact a chally has NEVER brewed up from within. The Abrams storage is required 'cos it uses 1 piece ammo and is their method of minimising ammo fires. Chally doesn't require it so doesn't use it.

T90 and Chally2 are different beasts and each has its pro's and cons. T90 can 'punch above its weight' and is a very fine tank. I just think overall that Chally 2 is better (in that its weaknesse are FAR outweighed by its strengths). Apparently 2E was better still but too expensive for most peeps, besides which I only have personal experience with Chally 2 and so will stick with that.
 
Upvote 0
This one wins!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUsgZZeJqhE

OK it's not a tank it's a CV.
CV=more overall damage and effectiveness then any tank!

(my squad and me where in the back of one of thoes ;) )
Your vids state it themselves - between the lines - they are no match to tanks. It seems like it is simply an APC with a flexibel weapon-system. :p

On the "best crew wins"-point. That has been adressed several times before and is out of scope of this thread. It is clear that an illiterate won't write letters as fast as a literate would, rather interesting would be what pen is best, so to speak. ;)
 
Upvote 0
Voted T-90 because it can do this !!
T-90-2.jpg
 
Upvote 0
I have to take you to task over that. For those who don't know Trops and I have crossed swords before on these forums over this very question, BUT always with a smile. I respect his opinion and the fact hes polite. Anyway mate, Chally doesn't require a Guided weapon to kill a target at range it can just use a kinetic energy round. Longest range tank kill still, and with a 'dumb' round. I still have huge reservations about equipping a tank with a 'magic bullet', how do you decide what target warrants it and how much does it cost?
Chally does what it does by firing a big bit of heavy metal (literally in the case of a DU round) at huge velocity at a tank. No GW, just good crews and good gunnery.
Finally, I'd like to thank you for not lumping Chally 2 in with Leo or Abrams in the vulnerability stakes, front on side on or whatever you need to be bloody lucky to take one on, front on at range?, best option hide till it lumbers past you and try to get in in the ass..........but bear in mind its REAR armour is considerably better than Abrams which has been penetrated by 25 mm rounds.

Hi Rich :D
I'm sure Challenger can but an ATGM has greater hit probability at longer ranges. And new generation russian atgm can effectively destroy low fliers while other MBT's like Challenger use low caliber machine guns to guarantee safety against low flying aircraft. I don't think it will go very far with that.
 
Upvote 0
Hi matey, but tanks are just one instrument in the orchestra. They are used with others so to point out AA capabilities of tanks is a bit meaningless. A tank will never be a main AA weapon (unless its a gepard or similar), it relies on others to fulfil that role. At least thats the way the brits do it :) . Any MBT AA capability is strictly 'emergency' stuff. Again I stress thats the Brit way, not necessarily other Armies methods. That being the case we rely on attached hvm units and similar rather than dedicated AA built into our tanks.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
My vote is for the Leopard 2. Why? Because a) it has the same main gun as the M-1 Abrams (Rheinmetall manufactures them!), b) Deutschland in da haus, and c) the Leo 2 HAS been combat-tested in the Balkans in situations very much like what the M-1 is dealing with in Iraq. The fact that M-1's have shot live rounds at live tanks has no real bearing- much of that, in essence, is replicated on the gunnery range. The difference comes with all the other variables of combat- heat, noise, etc. but in the end the effect those have is up to the individual tank crews.

Also, the sad-but-true fact is that the M-1's service life is being rapidly depleted due to heavy overuse in the Middle East, and it's going to take literally billions to keep enough new ones in production to maintain current force levels. We see the news films in which M-1's 'prowl the streets of Bagdhad' sending everyone running from their mightiness- but how many films do we see of completely burned out M-1's in those same streets, knocked out by a $200 RPG in the engine compartment or ammo bin? A sad waste of an otherwise decent tank.

In the end, I'd stick to the Leo 2- it's got a long life ahead of it and Germany certainly knows it's business with building world-class tanks.

On the whole I'd say #1 Leopard 2, #2 LeClerc, and #3 Abrams.

Given their recent shoddy performance in Lebanon, I don't rate the Merkava at all, although this may be due to poor crew performance rather than the vehicle itself. Lumping the current crop of Russian-bis tanks into a group I wouldn't choose any individually as the best, but I certainly wouldn't want to tangle with a combat formation of them. Bang-Whiz-BOOM and a quick trip back to the spawn point.
 
Upvote 0
The best MBT does not rely on the beast but its crew. You could take the hottest off the shelf MBT and put a poorly trained crew against a 1st or 2nd generation MBT and it would be smoking in a minute. Crew Training is what it is all about, with out it, is only a piece of metal.

On the off hand I prefer the M1A2 SEP with near equal to the Leo A5 (A6 not worth the cost), Though the CITV (not sure what the germans call it) for the Leo had the M1 in terms of this difference till the A2 came out. And yes love the gunnery drills with the BW at Graf & Baumholder to see the differences.
 
Upvote 0