Teledyne Continental High Performance "Super" M60

Would you like to see the Super M60 in-game?
  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

Hello, and welcome to the suggestion for the Teledyne Continental High Performance M60, also known as Super M60 and M60AX. For the sake of brevity, we’ll be calling it the Super M60 for the most part in this post. I feel like this would be an excellent addition to the American M60 family, allowing US tank commanders to have greater mobility and protection, while still using a familiar chassis.

History

Spoiler

M60A1s of Company F, 40th Armor, Berlin Brigade undergo dry firing proficiency training at Tempelhof Central Airport in West-Berlin, December 17th, 1980.

Throughout much of the Cold War, the M60 main battle tank remained a staple of the United States Army and other militaries around the world, but by the 1980s, it was beginning to age poorly. With the future M1 Abrams in development, and the Soviet Union building advanced tanks of its own, the basic M60 seemed a poor choice for the future. However, as part of a private venture, the General Products Division of Teledyne Continental Motors offered an upgrade to the M60.

Some of the improvements done to the vehicle.

The Teledyne Continental High Performance “Super M60” prototype during trials at The Basic School in Quantico, Virginia, October 1981.

Teledyne Continental Motors had begun development of the upgrade package in 1978, when it leased an M60A1 from the US Army. Two main aspects were focused on for improvement, protection and mobility. Instead of the standard Continental AVDS-1790-2 producing 750 hp, the Super M60 as it was named, used a Continental AVCR-1790-1B, which produced an estimated 1,200 hp. This engine was also coupled to a Renk RK-304 transmission with four forward gears and four reverse gears. The torsion bar suspension was replaced with a National Waterlift Company hydropneumatic suspension, the same that would be used on the General Motors XM-1. All of this increased the power-to-weight ratio despite the the 4.75 ton increase, going to 23.1 hp/t. The tank’s cross-country speed also went from 14 km/h cross-country, to 38 km/h, vastly improving its ability to navigate rough terrain.

Details of the armor from Patton A History of The American Main Battle Tank, page 217.

The extra weight was in large part due to the add-on armor, intended to protect the tank against more modern anti-tank rounds. This consisted of appliqué armor on the turret and hull’s front and sides, as well as side skirts to aid in protection against HEAT projectiles. According to details of the armor, the turret had around 406mm of RHA at a 30 degree slope, while the hull had around 368mm of RHA at a slope of 73 degrees, while the lower front plate sloped at about 45 degrees.

Another aspect of protection was the replacement of the M19 cupola with a lower profile one, which still had a pintle mount for a 12.7 mm / .50 caliber machine gun if desired. As something of a carryover from the M60A3, the Super M60 kept the AN/VVS-2 thermal imaging system and AN/VVG-2 laser rangefinder.

A frontal view of the Super M60, the applique armor can be clearly seen here.

Testing of the vehicle commenced through the early 1980s, including at Fort Knox and The Basic School. After the addition of appliqué armor, further tests showed that the new suspension made for a much smoother ride, and also handle well, despite its weight increase. Unfortunately for its designers, neither the US military or any international customers took any interest in the vehicle, resulting in only one prototype being built.

Specifications

Spoiler
  • Crew: 4
  • Length: 9.5 m
  • Width: 7.09 m
  • Height: 4.19 m
  • Main armament: 105mm M68A1E2 (63 rounds)
  • Secondary armament: 7.62mm M240C (6,000 rounds) & optional pintle mounted 12.7mm M2 (600 rounds)
  • Elevation: -10° / 20°
  • Engine: Teledyne Continental AVCR-1790-1B diesel, 1,180 - 1,200 hp
  • Maximum speed on road: 72 km/h - 74 km/h
  • Maximum range: 500 km

Sources

Spoiler

Gallery

Spoiler

aab3d739ad167cd1eaf35ac36312057d

5 Likes

+1 at 9.7 with M900 and 5s reload as tech tree alternative to M60 AMBT

Also has a spall liner, would be funny to see if its gets it before the Abrams variants

2 Likes

+1, a must have for sure

M833, but yes.
Would be a nice 9.3 with M833 after M60A3 TTS.

1 Like

Love the M60s, +1

m60a1 rise m60a3 M900A1

M60s can fire M900(A1), so I think it should get it, as US is far too neglected with shitty ammo choices, with only 10.3 vehicles getting M833 (!!!), but other nations gets DM63 like a full BR lower.

2 Likes

Can fire doesn’t mean will.
DM63 is a far inferior round to M900, and M833 is equivalent to DM33.

I prefer this Turkish modified ones
image
image
image
Somehow looks a bit like T-90M, LOL

1 Like

+1. It looks great

Desperately needed for the much neglected M60 line.

This and the M60-2000!!

3 Likes

Yes plsss, as a additional vehicle under M60 (8.0)

Nope, It would be the best m60 besides AMBT, so after the A3 at 9.3-9.7

It’d be more 9.7 with M833
It’s got much better armour (especially on the hull) than the 9.3 M48 Super and a bit better mobility, much better mobility and armor than the 9.3 CM11 though worse firepower, and better mobility and a bit better armour than the 9.3 Magach 7C. It’s definitely overall the best of the 4.
Alternatively, 10.3 with M900 as essentially a faster-firing, better protected AMBT. But that would make the vehicle less versatile and more restricted to sniping so I’d prefer the 9.7 option.

2 Likes

This is a must have for American ground forces!

1 Like

Considering the CM11 got a 5 second reload entirely based on the cannon being an M68A1, this one would/should also have a 5 second reload.

And it would fit perfectly fine at 9.7 with M900, having pretty decent armor but relatively mediocre mobility, with (probably) very poor reaction times such as turret traverse and elevation speed, which I believe where not upgraded. It also doesn’t have any smoke grenades, and the thermals would be only gen 1.

Compared to the M60 AMBT at 9.7, it would have better armor, reload speed, a spall liner, better reverse, but vastly worse traverse rates, no smokes, worse damage, worse penetration, much worse optics and thermals, worse .50 cal and no 25 mm. A very good sidegrade at that BR with M900.

1 Like

True, but isn’t 9.3 going to make this tank uptier more often? Also, it’s hard to make a lineup, so…

9.3 would fit well. XM-1, MBT-70, and more vehicles we have yet to come such as LAV-105