The hull didn’t get any upgrade whatsoever, any top tier shell can go through like butter.
None of the SEPs that got added did any good to the US tech tree, just more tank to waste time on grinding but in the end you find out that they’re worse than the previous ones.
I’d say the best Abrams is the M1A1.
Because US focused on Turret upgrades because the Abrams was made to defend the Fulda in prepared defensive positions, also the fact that they have been fighting insurgencies means they never had a reason to upgrade except improving durability (ergo multihit capabilities) of the DU inserts instead of actual armor value
Blame the US for not giving Abrams improved hull until the SEPV3
Ah yes, you’d know better than the country that spends 20mill dollars per tank, and billions on their ground units.
The armor that’s ingame is based on export models, non of them is the actual armor that’s in the actual tank, DU gets removed and anyother armor that’s classified just like the version that been sent to Ukraine not having the armor it should get, but that didn’t stop it from performing better than their counterparts.
You do know America guarantees the export composite is just as good as DU right? They only use DU because it’s cheap for the amount of protection it gives
If i may ask for the proof of your claims, because now you’re just coping.
watch out they are exactly the same missile in wt so we just say aim120 1991
Agreed, It’s just so stupid because Russia gets more of their modern vehicles such as the 2S38 when it’s not even in service.
I mean considering he claims that T-90M is just upgraded T-90 the amount of coping is quite big.
… what is it if not an upgraded T-90?
If you’re asking thing question then surely you also got not idea.
So explain??
None of them prove anything nor they mention composite armor being as good as DU.
Ofc, because aussies claim their is actually better
But idk how you missed GDLS rep themself claiming the export package from 2000 mind you offers similar levels of protection to DU.
Also proves my statement that DU was only used because it’s cheap
Let me use your logic to explain how wrong your claim is.
If T-90M is upgraded T-90 then all Abrams model are just upgraded base M1 which was entered service in 1980.
T-90 is quite new though? Relatively speaking. Also, yes all of the abrams models are upgrades from the original M1… that is literally true just as it’s true the T-90M is an upgrade of the T-90.
No its not.
Those Abrams models recieved significant upgrades that they became entirely new tank, the only thing they share with base M1 is general design and same engine, nothing more.
Same method also applies to T-90M, both tanks only share same hull design while T-90M offers superior:
-protection
-reaction time
-awareness
-mobility
-survivability
-new turret design
nah
This is the most circular thread ever
“Top tier US is pre 1995”
“Well actually this variant is from 200x”
“It’s only an upgrade to a 90s vehicle”
“Then this 2000s Russian vehicle is from 199x cause it’s also an upgrade”
“No these upgrades basically make it new vehicle”
“So do the upgrades in the 200x variant”
“No, they’re only X changes while that’s Y changes”
Blah blah blah blah blah
Blah blah blah blah blah
Repeat ad infinitum
Also why are you guys arguing with Russian vehicles when there’s every other nation which have completely new vehicles from like 2015.
