Because it’s huge and heavy and has a bunch of weird equipment on the turret that makes it stand out and it has no spall liners and a huge turret ring weakspot and no hull armor and no turret armor.
The M1A2 was able to lose over three tons without getting into the new gun tubes, electric turret, or fiber optics.
Don’t forget larger use of titanium and changes to the engine.
I would expect the M1E3 to get into some of the radical weight reduction technologies proposed for the Abrams Lightweight Tank Variant from the 90s. M1E3 to M1A2 will be like Leclerc SXXI to Leclerc S2. Barely comparable to each other.
Didn’t that one get massacred from a protection point of view?
For the turret, yes.
Hull was A2 level. Turret protection was deemed only needed to resist 30mm AP (no clarification if this is AP, APDS or APFSDS) as the turret crew are all below the turret ring. Sorta like a M1A2 crossed with the Teledyne Expeditionary tank or M1128.
T-90M and T-80BVM are too modern we need that compared to Leo2A8 and M1A2 SEP V3
It was still used and that’s all that matters. If the T-80B can get thermals for “balance”, then M1A2 can get spall liners.
I totaly support you when it comes to the Leo 2A7 and 122B+, but the T-90M is equal to the SEP V2 in my eyes - sure, it has better armor, but worse mobility (-4 kph reverse speed at top tier HURTS, you are literally not allowed to make any mistakes) and worse armament + reaction times (reload is 2.1 seconds longer, which at top tier is a lot, the targeting speeds are worse and the top round is inferior to the M829A2). But yeah, I can understand why you feel like that. However, Merkava and Ariete are in a far worse situation.
Fair enough. I’ve made the same argument with the Depleted Uranium.
Date of introduction is not a valid argument. DOI has no direct bearing on the effectiveness of a vehicle.
T-90M is circa 2017.
T-72B3 is circa 2016.
T-80BVM is circa 2017.
Leopard 2A7V is circa 2020.
Leopard 2A7HU is circa 2023.
SEP v3 should’ve indeed been added already.
SEP V2 2006 so old