Power Zone: Top 10 Tanks
-
Based on Firepower,Armour, Mobility, Production Rating, Fear Factor
10th Place: M-4 Sherman (American Made)
Highest rating for Production , Poor rating for Armour
9th Place: Merkava (Israeli Made)
Highest rating for Armour , Poor rating for Mobility
8th Place: T54/T55 (Russian Made)
Highest rating for Production, Poor rating for Fear Factor
7th Place: Challenger (British Made)
Highest rating for Armour,Firepower , Poor rating for Mobility and Production
**Top Secret Armour?**
**Rifled Gun?**
6th Place: MK IV Panzer (German Made)
Highest rating for Armour,Firepower, Fear Factor, Poor rating for Production -
5th Place: Centurion (British Made)
Highest rating for Firepower,Armour , Poor rating for Fear Factor
4th Place: WW1 Tank (British Made)
Highest rating for Armour,Mobility,Fear Factor, Poor rating for Production
1st Tank in the world -
Lolx. I watch this now
-
Watch before...
No.2 - American M1A2 tank.
No.1 - Russian T34. -
wat u mean by fear factor?
-
Rear factor is the amount of fear it inflicted on the public and enemy troops alike. Its like you stand on an open field and you see a Tyrannasaurus Rex RUNNING towards you. Feel the fear?Originally posted by Xtrider:wat u mean by fear factor? -
3rd Place: Tiger Tank (German Made)
Highest rating for Firepower,Armour,Fear Factor, Poor rating for Production,
2nd Place: M1 Abrams Tank (American Tank)
Highest rating for Armour, Firepower, Poor rating for Production
**Armour Thickness Classified**
**Fully-Digital** -
Firepower,Armour, Mobility, Production Rating, Fear Factor:
I agree the T-34 has all factors. It was one big, big shock to all German tankees during Operation Barbarossa. One of the most frightening aspects of the T-34 was its sloped armour. It must have unnerved many a German tankee as they witnessed many of they shots literally getting deflected off the armour.
That said, it was not without its faults. Its sloped armour gave it good protection, but at the cost of a smaller turret space such that only two men could fit in. The commander thus had to be the gunner and the shell loader as well.
Also, the Soviets couldn't afford to outfit all tanks with radios. Only the company commander's tank and above had a radio, which translates to about one in ten tanks only. -
This tank production machiam you play C&C... produce liao instant out fresh from da factory and go war...Originally posted by fudgester:Firepower,Armour, Mobility, Production Rating, Fear Factor:
I agree the T-34 has all factors. It was one big, big shock to all German tankees during Operation Barbarossa. One of the most frightening aspects of the T-34 was its sloped armour. It must have unnerved many a German tankee as they witnessed many of they shots literally getting deflected off the armour.
That said, it was not without its faults. Its sloped armour gave it good protection, but at the cost of a smaller turret space such that only two men could fit in. The commander thus had to be the gunner and the shell loader as well.
Also, the Soviets couldn't afford to outfit all tanks with radios. Only the company commander's tank and above had a radio, which translates to about one in ten tanks only. -
Yeah... I remember reading that during the siege of Stalingrad, they literally drove the tanks off the factory line into the battlefield. They didn't bother painting it or putting in gunsights.Originally posted by Bontakun:This tank production machiam you play C&C... produce liao instant out fresh from da factory and go war...
The logic was that at such close quarters combat in Stalingrad, you didn't really need a lot of skill to aim. So they saved on a lot of production time and cost by not putting in sights. -
Ya loh! Really... Russians have very innovative ideas.Originally posted by fudgester:Yeah... I remember reading that during the siege of Stalingrad, they literally drove the tanks off the factory line into the battlefield. They didn't bother painting it or putting in gunsights.
The logic was that at such close quarters combat in Stalingrad, you didn't really need a lot of skill to aim. So they saved on a lot of production time and cost by not putting in sights. -
1st Place: T34
Highest rating for Firepower,Mobility,Armour,Production, Poor rating for Fear Factor
**Sloped Armour** -
Poor rating for Fear Factor? Why?Originally posted by SpecOps87:1st Place: T34
Highest rating for Firepower,Mobility,Armour,Production, Poor rating for Fear Factor
**Sloped Armour**
I thought the T-34 was a really rude shock for the Germans. Surely having their rounds literally get deflected off the T-34 ought to have unnerved the Germans quite a bit. -
Can somebody share...what's the use of Challenger using Rifled 120mm while M1 uses Smoothbore 120mm? Isn't rifled better for accuracy?
-
You look at ONE T-34 compared to ONE Tiger tank. Obviously the Tiger tank registers more fear to the person one on one.Originally posted by fudgester:Poor rating for Fear Factor? Why?
I thought the T-34 was a really rude shock for the Germans. Surely having their rounds literally get deflected off the T-34 ought to have unnerved the Germans quite a bit.
BUT it is the numeric advantage of the T-34 and other factors that won the battle. -
ah, desperate times call for desperate measures..Originally posted by fudgester:Yeah... I remember reading that during the siege of Stalingrad, they literally drove the tanks off the factory line into the battlefield. They didn't bother painting it or putting in gunsights.
The logic was that at such close quarters combat in Stalingrad, you didn't really need a lot of skill to aim. So they saved on a lot of production time and cost by not putting in sights. -
M1A1 abrams is best tank in the past and now.They are the key to why the US won the first gulf war against iraq and the recent capturing of saddam.If you read the news analysis of the war carefully you would see M1 abrams always at the frontline.After all ,all the iraqis could do is to send their T-72s/T-62s for a battering by a far superior foreign tank that could enage them a few hundred metres furthur.Even if they do manage to fire first most likely the abrams would sustain little damage which explain why only 4 out of 2000 abrams were disabled during the gulf war.
Second best tank is the British army's Challenger 2.The tak possess incredibly strong armour called Chobham armour.Its composition remains a secret allthough rumors has it that it was made by special ceramics joined together.It role in the gulf war was vital as it ripped iraq's republican guard on less tha 100 hours.Armed with a 120mms turret it could destroy any known russian built tank.
Third best tank the german built tiger ?? Heard it was so had so heavy an armour it moved quite slowly but other then that had superior fire power and could destroy ANYTHING.However it was too costly that germany could only afford to make 100 plus (I think). -
Where's the missile tank?
-
Advise me if you beg to differ.Thanks
-
M1 Abrams though mighty and strong, against T72s and T62s...its a turkey shoot. And thankfully the US had the resource to back them up. Also it uses Gasoline ie.Petrol instead of Diesel. That's a big nono for me man. Diesel is less flammable as compared to petrol which burns very readily.Originally posted by spawnoflight:M1A1 abrams is best tank in the past and now.They are the key to why the US won the first gulf war against iraq and the recent capturing of saddam.If you read the news analysis of the war carefully you would see M1 abrams always at the frontline.After all ,all the iraqis could do is to send their T-72s/T-62s for a battering by a far superior foreign tank that could enage them a few hundred metres furthur.Even if they do manage to fire first most likely the abrams would sustain little damage which explain why only 4 out of 2000 abrams were disabled during the gulf war. -
Actually, from what I've read, it can burn either kerosene, petrol, or diesel. Quoting from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_AbramsOriginally posted by SpecOps87:M1 Abrams though mighty and strong, against T72s and T62s...its a turkey shoot. And thankfully the US had the resource to back them up. Also it uses Gasoline ie.Petrol instead of Diesel. That's a big nono for me man. Diesel is less flammable as compared to petrol which burns very readily.The tank can be fueled with diesel fuel, kerosene, any grade of MOGAS (motor gasoline), or JP-4 or JP-8 jet fuel; the U.S. Army uses JP-8 jet fuel in order to simplify logistics.
That said, the biggest issue that the Abrams has is definitely its gas turbine. It high-temperature exhaust makes it difficult for infantry to run behind it for protection in urban areas.
It also has a high rate of fuel consumption. Heck, you need 40 liters of fuel just to start up the turbine. -
Yikes...40L just to get it running? OMFG...Originally posted by fudgester:\
It also has a high rate of fuel consumption. Heck, you need 40 liters of fuel just to start up the turbine. -
The M1 Abrams gas turbine is designed primarily to use diesel or kerosene -based fuel and only use petrol fuel during an emergency.Originally posted by SpecOps87:M1 Abrams though mighty and strong, against T72s and T62s...its a turkey shoot. And thankfully the US had the resource to back them up. Also it uses Gasoline ie.Petrol instead of Diesel. That's a big nono for me man. Diesel is less flammable as compared to petrol which burns very readily.
I think you are wrong.A first hand account by witness Lieutenant Mike Drury ,Platoon leader,1st armoured division says that they could take out the T-62s and T-72s even when they were shooting right at them.And that the M1 could outdistance the T-72s by 1000m(3280ft) (I said hundred in a previous post). -
M1A1 rank so highly? American propaganda at work again.. Please,Please... don't believe American media. Those Iraq Army are not even fit fighting. Use them as example of M1A1 supremacy is absurd!
-
Then which tank you thing should be the best ??