This is not a 'my tank beats your tank' thread. This thread is to celebrate two of the most awesome combat machines in existance today. They're arguably the two best MBT's in service today, and it doesn't matter which one is 'better' - both the US and Europe should be glad that we're allies instead of enemies. Because both these machines are awesome in their own right.
So can we end the whole 'my tank beats up your tank' e-peen comparing now?
Leopard 2 and Abrams
Started by
Lert
, Jan 20 2012 - 03:00
18 replies to this topic
#1 Posted Jan 20 2012 - 03:00
-
- Community Contributor
- 21645 battles
-
15,626
-
Member since:
09-02-2010
Major
#3 Posted Jan 20 2012 - 13:53
-
- Players
- 8216 battles
-
888
-
Member since:
02-21-2011
First lieutenant
My country plan to buy 100 Leopard 2A6 which I oppose since our infrastructure cant even support small-medium sized truck full of sands. Which is about 10-20 tons in weight.
Can you add overweight as option?
Can you add overweight as option?
#4 Posted Jan 20 2012 - 14:03
-
- Community Contributor
- 21645 battles
-
15,626
-
Member since:
09-02-2010
Major
Actually, I think small/medium sized sand-loaded trucks have higher ground pressure than modern MBT's. They're only 1/3 the weight, yes, but with 1/10 the surface-area actually touching the ground.
#5 Posted Jan 20 2012 - 14:56
-
- Players
- 4344 battles
-
330
-
Member since:
04-20-2011
Staff sergeant
An Abrams exerts the same PSI on the ground as your average size woman.
#6 Posted Jan 20 2012 - 14:58
-
- Players
- 8216 battles
-
888
-
Member since:
02-21-2011
First lieutenant
Sorry, just afraid we loosing more bridges. We already lose one this morning.
#7 Posted Jan 21 2012 - 12:08
-
- Beta Testers
- 1877 battles
-
472
-
Member since:
01-18-2011
Staff sergeant
Nodbugger, on Jan 20 2012 - 14:56, said:
An Abrams exerts the same PSI on the ground as your average size woman.
Average American woman maybe
#8 Posted Jan 21 2012 - 16:37
-
- Beta Testers
- 14734 battles
-
3,897
-
Member since:
07-15-2010
Major
IronsightSniper, on Jan 21 2012 - 12:08, said:
Average American woman maybe
#9 Posted May 04 2012 - 10:27
-
- Players
- 6525 battles
-
811
-
Member since:
05-23-2011
First lieutenant
Their never going to stop the Epeen contest even though no NATO tank is likely to fight another and their all more or less equvilant.
And most MBT's can ford pretty decent sized bodies of water so the bridges that weak should be safe.
And most MBT's can ford pretty decent sized bodies of water so the bridges that weak should be safe.
#10 Posted May 04 2012 - 10:47
-
- Players
- 412 battles
-
565
-
Member since:
12-12-2011
First lieutenant
Lert, on Jan 20 2012 - 14:03, said:
Actually, I think small/medium sized sand-loaded trucks have higher ground pressure than modern MBT's. They're only 1/3 the weight, yes, but with 1/10 the surface-area actually touching the ground.
Depending on the type of bridge (many arches/piers or single span) though the tank no matter what its ground pressure is will be heavier than a truck and if the span is not designed to take 60+ ton it will stand a good chance of coming down.
Its total weight on a bridge span not ground pressure (plus vibrational movement).
#11 Posted Jun 19 2012 - 07:03
-
- Beta Testers
- 5255 battles
-
1,687
-
Member since:
10-12-2010
Captain
Can someone explain to me why the Leopard has rivets? I was under the impression these things are health hazards for the crew when the tank is struck.
#12 Posted Jun 19 2012 - 07:11
-
- Players
- 14923 battles
-
5,482
-
Member since:
03-26-2011
Major
Expensive,me likey de leopard II better.
#13 Posted Jun 19 2012 - 11:05
-
- Beta Testers
- 8656 battles
-
11
-
Member since:
09-14-2010
Corporal
we love our leopard 2's they are way better then the leopards we were issued with before
#14 Posted Jun 19 2012 - 11:59
-
- Players
- 1374 battles
-
79
-
Member since:
05-09-2012
Corporal
sweet Jesus those tanks are sexy.
#15 Posted Jun 20 2012 - 18:38
-
- Community Contributor
- 21645 battles
-
15,626
-
Member since:
09-02-2010
Major
Teddy_Bear, on Jun 19 2012 - 07:03, said:
Can someone explain to me why the Leopard has rivets? I was under the impression these things are health hazards for the crew when the tank is struck.
http://www.tamiya.co...d/leopard_2.jpg
AFAIK they're bolts to hold on applique armor. Underneath the wedge-shaped spaced armor is still the ye olde Leopard 2A4 turret:
http://www.fprado.co...o2A4-KMW-01.jpg
Ziggy_lol, on Jun 19 2012 - 11:59, said:
sweet Jesus those tanks are sexy.
#16 Posted Jun 20 2012 - 19:17
-
- Players
- 10090 battles
-
1,691
-
Member since:
05-21-2011
Captain
Anyone noticed that the Leo 2's turret looks like Tiger's turret with those vertical surfaces?
#17 Posted Jun 21 2012 - 12:46
-
- Beta Testers
- 5255 battles
-
1,687
-
Member since:
10-12-2010
Captain
Lert, on Jun 20 2012 - 18:38, said:
You mean these?
http://www.tamiya.co...d/leopard_2.jpg
AFAIK they're bolts to hold on applique armor. Underneath the wedge-shaped spaced armor is still the ye olde Leopard 2A4 turret:
http://www.fprado.co...o2A4-KMW-01.jpg
Yes. Yes they are.
http://www.tamiya.co...d/leopard_2.jpg
AFAIK they're bolts to hold on applique armor. Underneath the wedge-shaped spaced armor is still the ye olde Leopard 2A4 turret:
http://www.fprado.co...o2A4-KMW-01.jpg
Yes. Yes they are.
Huh...never knew that... o.o;
#18 Posted Jun 30 2012 - 04:34
-
- Players
- 8216 battles
-
888
-
Member since:
02-21-2011
First lieutenant
blurr91, on Jun 20 2012 - 19:17, said:
Anyone noticed that the Leo 2's turret looks like Tiger's turret with those vertical surfaces?
Angled to the side. M1 angled to the sky.
#19 Posted Jul 01 2012 - 16:34
-
- Players
- 14813 battles
-
136
-
Member since:
05-14-2011
Sergeant
What are the production numbers?
