The t90 is better than the LEO2a7v

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
1

The T-90 is a highly advanced Russian main battle tank that has several advantages over the Leopard 2A7V. One of its greatest strengths is its protection system, which combines traditional armor, explosive reactive armor (ERA), and active protection systems (APS).

The T-90M can be equipped with Relikt ERA , one of Russia’s most advanced reactive armor systems. Unlike older ERA designs, Relikt is designed to provide better protection against modern APFSDS kinetic penetrators and tandem-charge shaped warheads. It works by using explosive elements that disrupt the incoming projectile, reducing its ability to penetrate the main armor.

The T-90 can also be equipped with the Shtora-1 soft-kill APS and, on newer variants, the Arena-M hard-kill APS . These systems improve survivability by detecting and confusing or intercepting incoming anti-tank missiles and guided weapons before they reach the tank. This gives the T-90 an additional layer of defense beyond its physical armor.

The T-90 also has powerful ammunition options. Its 125mm 2A46M smoothbore cannon can fire modern APFSDS rounds designed to defeat heavily armored targets, as well as high-explosive and guided missile ammunition. The ability to launch anti-tank guided missiles through the main gun gives it an advantage at long ranges, allowing it to engage targets beyond normal tank combat distances.

Another advantage is the tank’s compact design. The T-90 has a lower profile than the Leopard 2A7V, making it harder to detect and hit. Its autoloader reduces the crew size to three people and allows a consistent reload speed without needing a human loader.

While the Leopard 2A7V has excellent armor, sensors, and crew protection, the T-90 focuses on combining strong firepower, advanced defensive systems, mobility, and lower production costs. Its combination of ERA, APS, powerful ammunition, and compact design makes it one of the most capable modern tanks in service.

2

1: Lmao, no.
2: If you’re going to write a cope post, don’t use Ai to barf out random BS.

9 Likes
3

Honestly I was drafting a response to this but, it was so surface level and dull I just didn’t even bother.

4 Likes
4

raf,360x360,075,t,fafafa_ca443f4786
OpenAI please make ChatGPT refuse to write stuff like this.

8 Likes
5

Jarvis generate me reasons why the T-90M is better than the 2A7V ahhh post
4XlqCCkJ

6 Likes
6

Claude Fable counter this argument go!

Summary: The text claims the T-90 outperforms the Leopard 2A7V through layered protection (Relikt ERA, Shtora-1 soft-kill APS, Arena-M hard-kill APS), a 125mm gun firing APFSDS rounds and gun-launched guided missiles, a low profile that reduces detectability, an autoloader enabling a three-man crew, and lower production cost.

Counterargument:

  1. Combat record contradicts the claims. Ukraine demonstrated that T-90M variants with Relikt ERA are routinely destroyed by Javelins, NLAWs, artillery, and FPV drones. Relikt provides limited coverage, and top-attack munitions bypass it entirely. Arena-M has seen minimal confirmed operational deployment; the advertised APS advantage is largely theoretical.

  2. The autoloader is a survivability liability. Carousel-stored ammunition sits in the crew compartment beneath the turret. Penetrating hits frequently cause catastrophic ammunition detonation and turret ejection (“jack-in-the-box” effect). The Leopard 2 stores most ammunition in a bustle compartment with blowout panels, giving crews far higher survival rates.

  3. Firepower comparison is overstated. The 2A46M gun and its ammunition suffer from lower barrel life and inferior penetrator quality versus the Rheinmetall L55A1 firing DM73 rounds. Gun-launched missiles (Refleks) are slow, dependent on laser guidance that modern countermeasures degrade, and rarely decisive in practice.

  4. Sensors and fire control favor the Leopard decisively. The 2A7V’s thermal imagers, stabilization, and hunter-killer capability enable faster target acquisition and higher first-hit probability at range — historically the dominant factor in tank-on-tank engagements.

  5. Low profile is a marginal benefit in the drone era. Thermal optics and aerial surveillance negate silhouette advantages, while the T-90’s cramped interior reduces crew endurance and ergonomics.

  6. Lower cost reflects lower capability, not efficiency. Cheaper tanks lost at higher rates are not economical.

Net assessment: the T-90’s advantages are mostly on paper; the Leopard 2A7V’s survivability, optics, and ammunition quality give it the edge in most realistic engagements. The strongest points remaining in the T-90’s favor are logistics simplicity, weight (easier bridging and transport), and procurement scale.

3 Likes
7

We all know the best NATO tank is the Leclerc

Zusammenfassung

8

Skill issue.

9

bruuuuuuuh
Thats a game forum not a school presentation

10

Both vehicles are highly advanced. With around one to two years of first day service date apart (2019 and 2021 respectively for T-90M and Leopard 2A7V). Both vehicles represent a major step into improving a long living machine.

T-90M can be equipped with soft-kill laser active protection system but that feature is not in-game, Shtora-1 is a basic soft-kill active protection system. It does look cool but most vehicles with missiles at battle rating 11.0 will have in its missile infra-red counter-countermeasure which renders Shtora-1 completely useless.

Arena-M in other hand is indeed useful and it’s, in War Thunder, a major step into a ‘new’ top tier environment with recent additions of new vehicles with Trophy, Arena-E and Arena-M. Germany is to recieve, same as France, Italy, Japan and Sweden. T-90M does have a powerful gun, so does Leopard 2A7V, not only that but also has a better APDS-FS penetrator and fast firerate.

Leopard 2A7V has everything better than T-90M which means different play style required, though that don’t really matter in War Thunder once you can penetrate a tank, lead the guns in a airplane and understand the weakspots in a vessel, you can probably destroy it so “play style” is a complex thing to set. Don’t use AI overview because mostly of the boogaloo you said doesn’t apply in-game like silhouette and production costs because in-game tanks fight in distances less than one kilometer and maintenence costs are determined by a fictional currency.

Because it is! 🫡🇫🇷

11

The best NATO tank is the tank fighting Russia. If it ain’t on the front line it’s not fulfilling its main purpose.

12

No it doesn’t make any sense.

Because if you base it on simply combat record.

Ukrain leo2a4 did more damages and kills than any other tank.

13

Middest NATO mbt btw

14

Boom! And what was the greatest tank of WW2?

15

We all know its the t34

2 Likes
16

Lol what in the “Ghatgpt generate me some reasons to whine Russian bias” ahh

and the best NATO MBT is the L3/33 CC, as it’s a small main battle tankette

17

Its not even close.
Imgur

Imgur

18

you must read the AI slop to understand the context, he is not even talking about ingame

1 Like
19

he Leopard 2A7 is widely considered superior to the T-90 due to its design philosophy prioritizing crew survivability, advanced technology, and tactical flexibility over the Russian emphasis on low weight and mass production.

In protection, the Leopard uses state-of-the-art modular composite armor with estimated frontal protection of 900mm against APFSDS rounds, compared to 800mm for the T-90. Critically, it stores ammunition in a separate blow-out protected turret compartment, which greatly reduces catastrophic explosion risk if hit. The T-90’s vulnerable carousel autoloader in the hull offers no such safety, making crew loss more likely upon penetration. The Leopard also features improved mine protection and anti-IED hull reinforcement.

For firepower, the 2A7 mounts a 120mm L/55 smoothbore gun capable of firing programmable HE ammunition for versatile engagement. Its third-generation thermal imagers and advanced fire control system enable superior hunt-kill capabilities and situational awareness at extended ranges. The four-person crew with manual loading ensures steady fire and redundancy, avoiding the mechanical failures common in the T-90’s autoloader.

Mobility favors the Leopard with a 1500 hp engine providing excellent acceleration across terrains, despite its 67-ton weight. Its 31 km/h reverse speed enables effective shoot-and-scoot tactics, a critical advantage over the T-90’s sluggish 4 km/h reverse.

This superiority comes at a steep price: the Leopard 2A7 costs roughly 25-27 million dollars per unit, while the T-90MS is priced at 7-10 million. In essence, the Leopard is built to win through technology and crew protection, while the T-90 is an evolution of Soviet quantity-over-quality doctrine. In direct combat with well-trained crews, the Leopard’s optics, ergonomics, and armor give it a decisive edge.

trollface_PNG11-1545658261
trollface_PNG11-15456582611341×1358 541 KB

20

The Ariete is Better Than the Leopard 2A7V

People keep acting like the Leopard 2A7V is Europe’s greatest tank.

They’re forgetting one thing.

The Ariete.

1. Weight doesn’t win wars.

The Leopard 2A7V weighs around 67 tons.

The Ariete weighs roughly 54 tons.

Who’s going to cross more bridges?

Who’s going to sink into less mud?

Exactly.

2. Mobility isn’t just horsepower.

Everyone loves talking about horsepower.

Nobody talks about logistics.

A lighter tank is easier to transport, easier to recover, easier to maintain, and easier to deploy.

You can’t win battles if your tank is still waiting for the heavy transporter.

3. Simplicity wins.

The Leopard has layer upon layer of advanced electronics, armor modules, and expensive upgrades.

The Ariete says:

“Here’s a 120 mm gun. Go do tank things.”

Less complexity means fewer things to break.

4. Every Ariete crew is automatically better.

Nobody joins the Italian Army expecting to have the “best tank.”

If you’re still driving an Ariete, you’re relying on tactics—not on thousands of kilograms of extra composite armor.

That’s called confidence.

5. Italy understands maintenance.

Germany builds engineering masterpieces.

Italy builds things mechanics can actually fix.

One tank spends six hours in a workshop.

The other spends six hours drinking espresso while waiting for spare parts.

6. Cost-effectiveness.

For the price of one heavily upgraded Leopard, Italy probably bought enough espresso for the entire armored corps.

That’s fiscal responsibility.

7. Psychological warfare.

Destroying an Ariete?

Expected.

Getting destroyed by an Ariete?

Career-ending embarrassment.

No one remembers the Leopard that won.

Everyone remembers the Ariete that somehow did.

8. The ultimate test.

If you can dominate in an Ariete, imagine what you’d do in a Leopard.

If you dominate in a Leopard…

…people just assume the tank did most of the work.

Conclusion

The Leopard 2A7V is for people who trust technology.

The Ariete is for people who trust themselves.

One is protected by armor.

The other is protected by Italian confidence.

Case closed.