The information is sourced from the following website：
The article explicitly mentions：
The MPF vehicle has been called a light tank by some sources,[5] which is incorrect according to some Army officials.[3][6] It will weigh about 42 short tons (38 t).[7] MPF is similar in purpose to the M8 Armored Gun System light tank, the intended replacement for the M551 Sheridan, which the Army canceled due to budget considerations in 1996. The last user of M551 Sheridans, the 3/73rd Armor of the 82nd Airborne Division, was subsequently inactivated starting in 1996.
Therefore, in the game, the weight of 42 tons for the m10 booker is incorrect, and its actual weight should be 38 tons
Wikipedia isn’t a source but a nice place to gather sources, people should stop this discrimination with Wikipedia but at the same time put the brain to work and use the references section. Regarding the topic, the M10 Booker should weight between 42 tons to ~30 tons (not specified), this is the main point why I don’t like these newer vehicles, because there’s fewer information available, see Leopard 2A8 pre-series suggestion post where all sources is news articles with little technical information.
The Army’s M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams tank weighs nearly 74 tons and the M10 will weigh about 42 tons, the service said.
The new MPF, recently awarded to General Dynamics Land Systems in a production contract, not only fires a smaller 105mm cannon, is more than 30-tons lighter than an Abrams tank, much much faster than an Abrams and, perhaps most of all, air deployable aboard a C-17.
38 tons was its stripped down air portable configuration. With actual armor array and combat loading, it was 42 tons.
It also is not a replacement for the Sheridan or M8 and not a “light tank” according to the US Army. It was intended to replace the AGS Strykers. It was to be an infantry support assault gun that just happened to look like a light tank. Though at 40 odd tons, its definitely not.
It definitely is considering how much double standards have been applied in the past when it comes to interviews and manufacturer / gov websites.
Using this argument we also have quite decent technical data on the 2A7V, yet Gaijin decided to pull out data from the early 90s and even compared to that the Leo is noticeably underperforming.
