Do you know where my confidence comes from? Yesterday, there was a discussion post about t72av on the Chinese social networking site Baidu Tieba. Most of the comments below expressed dissatisfaction with t72av. I think it’s time to come to the forum to reflect on the situation, although my comments do not represent anyone
I think the 600 times I used the T72AV back then can demonstrate my understanding of this vehicle
It’d be much easier if you pointed out that the Sabra is going to be 10.0 and is better.
And I’ll be the first Israeli main to admit it. The Turms-t isn’t very good. It lacks every fundamental principle of a good tank.
2 Likes
I just heard that Sabra is very strong, but I haven’t used it specifically
11.3 BR pen at 9.7 with one of the best platforms at its BR overall. The entire tank is a menace and, while I hate to see it brought up in BR, it’s healthy for it. The tank didn’t deserve being 9.7 lol
If that’s really the case, then Sabra is really too OP
And two of them have turrets that, when exposed, are nothing more than a spot where APFSDS can spall and subsequently do more damage. It’s also still horrible cherry picking.
Yes, but those vehicles can ONLY snipe. The T-72AV does fairly well in city combat, unlike these vehicles. It’s more of a Jack of ask trades master of none situation here with the T-72AV.
Mobility is hardly an insignificant advantage. Nor is an Autoloader. Nor is the Armor that the T-72AV has that the M60s and M1128 don’t. I’m not covering up the shortcomings of the T-72AV, more just suggesting that the T-72AV is way MORE than it’s shortcomings. Every vehicle has struggle points and problems; the T-72AV is no exception. You all for some reason seem to think however that it’s wholly incapable, which it is not.
1 Like
Are you saying that a tank with almost the same protection as the 8.0 M60 had excellent protection at it’s BR? Or better than the 9.3 T-72A?
I didn’t say it was great. I said it was better than. Which, objectively, is the truth. The T-72A is much better armored than the M60s. It’s much more suitable for shell confrontation than any of the vehicles you mentioned. As said in last thing, the Turms is more of a “Jack of ask trades, master of none” than the three vehicles previously mentioned.
1 Like
Kinda like t72av, but it can’t return into cover due to 4km/h reverse.
It does not due to very bad mobility, poor gun handling and no reverse gear.
1 Like
I didn’t say that the protection of the M60 is good, but according to what I said above, when the turret is exposed for shooting, the body is completely blocked by cover, so the turret protection of the T72AV is not as good as that of the 120S
The T-72AV does significantly better in Urban combats then these vehicles do.
The T-72AV has a Power/Weight ration of 18.1 HP/ton, while the 120S has a Power/Weight ratio of 13.3 HP/Ton. The max speed of the Turms is 60 km/h, while the 120S is 48. Yes the 120S reverses faster; by a whoping 7km/h, going from 4km/h to 11. That isn’t the Abrams Miracle Magic you all are suggesting it is, and is marginally better at best. I will give you that the T-72AV has worse gun handling, as vertical and horizontal traverse are slower; but that and its reloads are the only true disadvantage it has over the 120S.
The T-72AV is faster, better accelerating, better armored, and smaller. At the expense of worse gun handling as well as a better reload. So definitely deserving of the 10.3 BR, unless you think the 120S, M1128, and other compatriots at 10.3 also deserve to go down to 10.0.
1 Like
This is still debatable. The 120S has the same weakspots as the Turms turret does- the turret ring (Which on the 120S is MUCH larger) and the Breech area, which is also much larger. On paper statistics, the 120S has better armor, sure- but paper statistics cherry pick the strongest spot and go off of that. Placed in combat, the 120S has bigger weakspots, even around the turret area. As someone with experience in the Abrams series and the TURMS, I stand by the fact that the TURMS has better armor for sniping, even in the turret.
1 Like
If a vehicle cannot find any location that belongs to it and can only act as a landmine in street combat, does this not mean that the performance of the vehicle is insufficient? Since T72A can also be used as a landmine and T64A can also be used as a landmine, why is this landmine T72AV? The so-called street fighting squatting is just the last fig leaf of the T72AV
1 Like
The T72AV only has protection at the T72A level, but it faces opponents who are much more complex than the T72A. Almost any vehicle above 11.0 has the ability to penetrate the frontal armor of the T72AV. However, in front of them, the T72AV has no advantage, even the powerful firepower of the 120S is a luxury
120s can quickly withdraw cover after the turret is hit. However, the reverse of the T72AV does not allow it to do so. Even if we ignore the main armor area of the turret, the T72AV’s scalp is so fragile that it can easily penetrate even the DM23
Not only that, the excellent depression angle of 120s can help it find better cover and a safer position, while t72av cannot
1 Like
Fast acceleration does not necessarily mean good maneuverability, reversing is a very important condition, otherwise it is easy to miss the opportunity. Undoubtedly, 120s reversing is better than T72AV. And the maneuverability of the T72AV is not as good as the T72B with the same BR
1 Like
You mean like the Sherman? Can’t really snipe, can’t really street fight? Are the Shermans performances Insufficient? What about the M60? Or M48s? etc. etc. A lot of vehicles have this problem; its the fact that they are decent at everything and great at nothing that puts them where they are.
And opponents who are much less complex than the T-72A. Again. Average. The T-72AV is Average. Averagely armored for the BR.
And almost any vehicle above 11.0 has the ability to penetrate the frontal armor of the 120S, which is realistically currently the contemporary of the T-72AV. What you are describing is an issue of compression, not of the TURMS BR.
Do you know how fast 11 km/h is? I can run backwards faster than that. Yes; the reverse is faster, but when its still a snails place it isn’t advantageous in any regard.
No, its the fact that it is both fast accelerating and has a high top speed. The reverse is poor, but it can turn its body fast and get to places quick. So it has good, or at the very least decent, mobility.
1 Like
Sherman has a vertical stabilizer that can fire the first shot faster than others. My Sherman record is also good, with 5kd already, especially when facing the slower reaction and poorer protection of the No. 4 tank. Sherman’s advantage is particularly obvious
Due to the slow speed of the high-low and directional machines, the T72AV is always the one to be beaten in street battles. When you discover the enemy and slowly turn your turret, the enemy has already eliminated you
We both know that this is HUGE difference
However, a little more maneuverability is not very useful because the T72AV is already almost the slowest under the same BR, and good maneuverability can be used to seize advantageous positions. However, the T72AV is usually shot dead by other vehicles that arrive first before it enters the position
You only look at the forward speed, which is unfair to all T72s. In fact, reversing greatly improves survivability, but the T72 series happens to have none