Hull Armor of the M1 Abrams

We’ve seen a lot of topics regarding the armor of the Abrams series of tanks, more specifically the presence of DU (depleted uranium) armor, and so we’d like to share our data on the subject.

Most sources on radiation safety clarify that the only threat to personnel is posed from armor packages in the cheeks of the turret. The M1A2 Abrams in War Thunder has uranium armor in the turret cheeks.

We’re aware that several experimental vehicles of an unspecified modification of the Abrams were equipped with reinforced DU armor in the hull. However, even though armor was reinforced on these experimental variants, we have no sources that clarify which specific versions of the Abrams these were, and as such can’t confidently state that any of the Abrams versions we have in War Thunder received this specific hull armor reinforcement.

A section from a document describing the use of DU in five machines located in army schools.
Source: Nuclear regulatory commission renewal license application for DU armor.

The documents presented in the reports we currently have don’t provide clear evidence of DU armor being present on the M1A2 SEP V1 or M1A2 SEP V2 modifications. A significant increase in mass which would accompany strengthening the armor with high-density fillers is also not observed in the SEP V1 or SEP V2 versions.

Additionally, a significant weight increase from such an armor package would lead to overloading the first pair of torsion bars, which already are under an increased load on the M1 series due to the placement of the frontal armor being positioned significantly far towards the front of the hull, as well as the large armored fuel tanks either side of the driver.

The implementation of low-density mass-efficient fillers would inevitably require an increase in size, which is not observed on the serial modifications of the M1 Abrams.

An M1 Abrams series hull armor package demonstration with an additional armor screen that greatly increases the armor’s resistance.
Source: “Svenskt pansar igår, idag och imorgon” by Rickard O. Lindström.

We’d also like to leave a comment on the sources that players cite as evidence about the use of depleted uranium for the M1A2 SEP.

Боевые машины Уралвагонзавода. Танк Т-72 (Combat vehicles of Uralvagonzavod. Tank T-72)

This book cannot be considered a reliable source, especially for modern Western vehicles. The authors wrote this book shortly after the SEP came into service, the written information is more speculation and guesses on their part. This book also contains errors for the characteristics of Soviet tanks in comparison to other open source data available.


Licenses to work with depleted uranium in the hull of the M1 Abrams series of tanks may apply to those experimental vehicles, for example 5 vehicles located at the tank school. These documents do not describe whether there was depleted uranium in a particular modification of the tank.

M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank, Owners' Workshop Manual

This publication does not directly indicate that the M1A2 SEP or M1A2 SEP V2 had depleted uranium armor added to the hull. Only general words that the changes achieved on the M1A1SA were implemented on the M1A2 SEP V2. In addition, this source is secondary; other independent secondary sources are also needed.

The Army's Future Combat Systems Program and Alternatives

Only the use of third-generation uranium armor is mentioned, but there’s no confirmation that this armor was located in the body of the M1A2 SEP, and what exactly the “third generation” consisted of.

Main changes with the M1A2 SEP modification.

If we consider other projections, possible changes to the armor of the Abrams over its various modifications may not have directly resulted in an increase in the actual protection of the armor itself. These changes could rather have been aimed at increasing the armor filler’s survivability upon impact (which is an element not currently modeled in the game). Because of this, without hard numbers and solid facts confirming a tangible increase in protection, we can’t alter the protection currently offered by the armor on the M1 series.

However, this is not the end of our attention on the Abrams, as we’ll continue to look at all declassified and publicly available information we can regarding its protection — we fully appreciate the discussion. If in the future an increase in protection can be validated and corroborated from available sources, we’ll take action on it.

Thank you to everyone in our community for your attention on this topic and for all of the discussions you’ve brought forward, we hope that this devblog has managed to provide useful information and clarify our outlook on the Abrams currently.


Then I translate: “Only Russian tanks can have good armour in the game”


There are pictures of M1s with huge steel plates welded to the hull and turret of the tank to simulate extra weight of the new armor packages. There’s no way engineers wouldn’t bother with upgrading the suspension of the tank.

Also the NRC license is later amended to “AS NEEDED” meaning UNLIMITED. The 5 tanks located in the school house was only there for research into radiation exposure for the crew. Hence, why the limitation was amended after research was completed.

“may not have directly resulted in an increase in the actual protection of the armor itself. These changes could rather have been aimed at increasing the armor filler’s survivability upon impact”

“MAY” and “COULD” you guys are clearly speculating at this point. Where’s the sources for this information?

Part of the NRC “The two most recent Abrams programs are the M1A2 SEP, which involves reworking existing M1 MBT hulls, adding a new turret assembly, and completely refitting the entire vehicle, and the AIM program, which will produce a better than original production tank.”


“ - Solid Slabs encased in stainless steel packages (This is called “DU Packages”). Radiation readings are no higher than 0.5 mrkr or 0.005 mSv/hr on the external surfaces of turrets containing DU packages in the M1 series tanks. The DU packages in the turret and hull become the DU Armor for the turret and hull.”

I don’t know how much more specific does it need to be to indicate that there is DU in the Hull. DU has been added to the turrets to increase protection in game why can’t it be the same for the HULL?


Will there be a post similar to this about the armor of the leopard 2A7V as well?


Sweden and China exists, bro.

1 Like

What about this report?
Leclerc MBT ( All Variants ) incorrect rate of fire // // Issues

My previous report, was refused based off 1 (one) secondary source: Leclerc ( All Variants ) wrong rate of fire // // Issues

I better hope this one will not refused again, since there is also a brochure directly from GIAT.


The armour of the Swedish tanks is pretty much nothing compared to the Russian tanks, at the moment the current gameplay favours the Chinese and Russian armour the most!

1 Like

This is topic on M1 Abrams, please focus on it.

There is already ongoing topic on other vehicles here:


After giving you all the reasons why they will not add the uranium armor to the chassis, showing you the sources that they have access to, and still citing the sources that the players say and giving reasons to each of them, AND YOU STILL say that you have a problem…


Any answers for the additional sources for the L2A7V given in that thread would be appreciated, the only source cited in that post is to old to be reliable and is referencing a different tank (Leopard 2 improved). That document was written before the 2A7V was even designed.


Could we get answers for all the other sources given as well?
Like the ones removing the limit of DU for those 5 hulls.
Or the publications stating DU in the hull?


While I agree with your sentiment, there are even more sources they have yet to answer to.
They even talk about the limit of 5 hulls but no comment on the removal of that limit for future installs.


This is not a thread about Abrams its about how purposely denying Abrams armor increase with lame excuses, after the mess you caused on yesterday im surprised you guys have nerve to publish this thread.

İts clear that Devs are purposely Gaslighting their community base, this Abrams hull armor and Leopard2A7V armor situation is nothing but a mess.


Where’s its spall liners


Naturally the US never upgraded the hull armor of its workhorse vehicle for the past 40 years, of course.


Only russian vehicles allowed to have experimental features(thermal) of limited(1-2 tanks) series
NATO vehicles cannot
Continue to showing your true face to players, and the best idea for roadmap would be deleting the game


To be honest with you, I don’t really care about their sources, just like they don’t care about the sources that the players bring up! The top tier is unplayable because of their bias!


The whole point of the SEP program was to increase survivability while maintaining weight…and Gaijin used weight as a reason the armor cannot possibly be better


We literally commented in the article on some of the sources players provided.


Congressional Boss: What changes did you make to the M1A2 with all this money?
Gajin Employee: We’ve improved the front armor of the hull to improve the armor’s impact resistance.