💥 Abrams vs T-72A / War Thunder

[@Lait_De_Brebis]

The Abrams does have an autoloader. It's just different kind. Its name is "organic autoloader" or more often called "crew member"

[@onlinebean9813]

Not funny did not laugh

[@Lait_De_Brebis]

@@onlinebean9813 Understandable, have a great day.

[@umbananaqualquer4052]

I am so sorry to get it to work tomorrow

[@BYRDE1917]

@@onlinebean9813 it is not meant to be funny

[@diligentone-six2688]

It's called Effort and Exercise with little complaints nor any disadvantages.

[@YuriYoshiosan]

"No Retreat." - Stalin That's why Soviets can't reverse their tanks.

[@blueberry2335]

Ha good one I get the joke

[@cinaraktas9351]

Underrated comment

[@aeruxgt]

but not for IS HTs lol

[@racelkatyusha403]

IS-2: *observe*

[@ArctrooperHavoc]

This is why m1 a2 kills all of you and m1 flanks you to hell

[@siddhanttambe4066]

Wait what? Abrams has autoloader Gaijin is high on snails...

[@mindfreak078589]

Nah they just don't bother to even play what they've created. They just want you to shower them with schmeckles and leave so you don't over use their underpowered engine and servers.

[@samuelmerrill7661]

The Abrahams actually doesn't have an automatic loader

[@callmejoejoe6516]

The Abrams new version that coming out will have a autoloader but there no abrams in series at the moment that have one

[@Thegaming_husky]

Lol

[@excalibur_maga6188]

@@callmejoejoe6516 No it won't. Stop spouting BS.

[@bryannrisse3852]

5:07 The M1 Abram does not have a auto loader. What the Hell

[@sarttee]

They don't even

[@user-anon]

Russian bias

[@senpaiyaju5351]

They think people can do it better(well)

[@codymortero2944]

M1 Abrams has 4 crew

[@Regular93]

There was a prototype abrams with a russian autoloader

[@CathFawr]

Uh.. Abrams autoloader?

[@Pulkz]

About to say

[@spacialsonic7779]

Abrams not autoloader because need loader for reload skill :Kappa:

[@mindfreak078589]

Just go to show that these people don't even play the gamr.

[@sarttee]

you would think that gaijin would atleast do research before makign a video.... but w/e

[@sovietred7371]

Slip of the tongue maybe?

[@phippsies001]

Once again proof the dev's dont actually play the game at top tier

[@murphym3755]

r Phippsies Or care about America... 😢😢😢

[@lorddeathofmurdermountain76]

The t-72 should have been blown up they were not using heat rounds just apfsds rounds

[@maxim6088]

Abrams is much better then the t72a both irl and in game, but the t80 is an equally good vehicle irl, but in game it is better, that is a it unfair, although it is what it is, and for me an American top tier player it does not make a difference, I think it's ok

[@OscarDirlwood]

@@lorddeathofmurdermountain76 APFSDS is better than HEAT in the game, because the latter ignores the angle of armour when you penn something.

[@mr.stealyourgirl1104]

Fr fr, the whole game is rigged in high tier

[@almaandreucci6746]

If the abrams is worse than the T80B why is it that its repair cost is 17k sl compared to 5k sl of the T80B???

[@almaandreucci6746]

@IS 2 mod.1944 the rep costs in the game aren t based on historical data but supposed gameplay balance

[@fsxlover2maumauthelink5]

Gaijin still thinks its 1.77 when the abrams clubbed everything.

[@PAUL-ESNEED]

It's Gaijin lmao. I'd take the T-80B over the Abrams any day, the only good thing about US 10.0 is the AH1Z.

[@Loki1701e]

If it iwas historical the t eries would be pluaged with engine problems, ammo problems, armour quality problems(ie the armour is not the best quality). But it is supposed to be balance. Supposedly, to all the whiners(slavs and wheabos) the abrams is "op" so it is got the high repair cost, while every other thanks is cheap. If t80 is better than abrams then why is abrams 10 times more expensive. And abrams irl with m833 would bash t80.

[@Thegaming_husky]

Russian bias.

[@Citizen_Snips1]

2:04 *Notices a lack of ammo in the turret carousel, the LFP shot would of likely set off any ammo stored there*

[@MaskFky]

Ngl nobody cares, it doesn't matter anyway

[@wacky_duck1095]

@@MaskFky yeah the whole turret being blown sky high because of the ammo doesnt matter

[@ptv222]

@@wacky_duck1095 usually when im playing t72 only my driver dies cuz the abrams is a lot taller and doesnt hit the ammo with the angle

[@BarManFesteiro]

Somethings they say in this video makes me think the devs dont play the game

[@andromeda4047]

Я пытался играть на ваших танках они дерьмовые

[@andromeda4047]

I tried to play on your tanks, they're shitty. Hello from Russia

[@andromeda4047]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jHS8Y5Z3hpJ0b6s

[@majk5995]

@@andromeda4047 you know War Thunder was made by Russians right?

[@Rguhbuh]

@@majk5995 so?

[@HEATSEEKR]

If it's worse than the T-80, then why does it cost so much

[@flash98449]

Thats how capitalism works

[@provision9495]

Actually no, uranium was not in the Abrams chassis until the m1a1 HA, watch the Scottish koala

[@voltagedrop5899]

+ HEATSEEKER3227 because they don't want you to research it since you'll realize how laughably underpowered it is compared to its real-life counterparts that you'll realize russian bias was a thing all along.

[@maxim6088]

@@voltagedrop5899 well, not true the m1 variant of the Abrams is not that good irl, and the t80 is as good or better irl

[@cursedcliff7562]

@@voltagedrop5899 yeah sure russian bias... Sure there is buddy

[@steventapper4866]

Gaijin casually ignoring the huge turret ring on the abrams and the ammo carrousel on the t-72 And t-80b

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

M1A2 is coming I guess.

[@swt_purged132]

It better

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@swt_purged132 Only the Chally 2 and Leo 2A5 have been confirmed up until now right?

[@swt_purged132]

@@imnotusingmyrealname4566 i rly hope they add the M1A2 or atleast the M1A1 mod with the 120 . But idk they may not

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@swt_purged132 I don't know how great the 105 is but they should add the M1A1 because the Leo 2A5 seems pretty powerful. Then there's also the T-90A from the April fool's joke which will come 100%. I'm just waiting for the Rh-120 L/55 on the 2A6 and 2A7.

[@swt_purged132]

@@imnotusingmyrealname4566 the 105 is decient right now but if they add the M1A1 or the M1A2 they need to give it a 120.

[@sirilluminarthevaliant2895]

Abrams : hey t-72 T-72 : yes Abrams: -*dreamily* remember the good ole days. The gulf war T-72: *flashback to screams of terror and Abrams tanks rolling unharmed right past a line of destroyed t-72s as he hid in a shed* T-72: *shudders* y-yeah whatever you say

[@command_unit7792]

Abrams tanks are burning in yemen while you have multiple videos of T72's surviving heavy atgm shoots easily!

[@sirilluminarthevaliant2895]

Command_Unit That was the result of very poor use.

[@command_unit7792]

@@sirilluminarthevaliant2895 The Abrams where used by the saudis they have a bigger military budget then Russia against rebles...While the T72s in Iraq where used by mostly somewhat capable crews against the US army with clear air superiority...

[@Weltenbastler2000]

@@sirilluminarthevaliant2895 same story with the Iraqi M1s or T72s. These comparisons are useless in reality and can be only used in game. Anything else is nonsense. As long as you are not a country buying tanks but these decisions are mostly made in a political context anyways. I don't think Iraq replaces its M1s because of their performance but due to a bad US Government.

[@sirilluminarthevaliant2895]

Max B. Those t-72s couldn’t kill a single one. The best troops in one of the most powerful armies at the time. That’s pretty solid proof. The saudis sending out an unsupported tank then leaving it in the open is pure idiocy

[@grom884]

2:02 too easy, try not to remove all the ammo.

[@F_lynx]

if it had ammo the lowerplate show would have 1 shotted it

[@TheAlexn2]

@@F_lynx its like in game u have ammo so they compare a tank without ammo vs a M1 loaded full of ammo what is this unfair comparisoin

[@sethl6626]

M1A1 and M1A1HA are added into the game: Russians: *dear Neptune*

[@Graczent.D]

*T-80U Joins the Game*

[@Citizen_Snips1]

@@Graczent.D *M829 Depleted Uranium Sabot designed to counter Konkat-5 has joined the match*

[@elroynathanael6535]

T-90A Joined

[@Citizen_Snips1]

@@elroynathanael6535 *M1A2 SEPv4 has entered the arena*

[@sethl6626]

Citizen Snips *God has left the room* 😂😂😂

[@rn-zu5ld]

Now do roblox vs Minecraft

[@henriquepedrazzi9008]

two immortal legends shall not confront eachother, it will only bring armagedom

[@rn-zu5ld]

@@henriquepedrazzi9008 true

[@mcchickenbaptistchurch.org2]

Boi this war already happened and it just resulted with bolth games losing more then half they'rr players bruh wdym

[@rn-zu5ld]

@@mcchickenbaptistchurch.org2 I did it as a joke

[@Real_Claudy_Focan]

1:05 Calling T-72 a heavy tank 2:00 shooting at an empty T-72 to prove its strength and durabilty 5:00 Abrams autoloader

[@bourbon2605]

Suprised they didn't show the weak spot for spot for the abrams

[@siem3113]

You said the M1 Abrams has an Autoloader, this is incorrect, Russian tanks use them tho

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Organic autoloader

[@Market-Motivation]

M1 Abrams: We need backup! (M1A2 has joined the chat)

[@sp4c33]

And bias banned them with a one-shot doublekill.

[@panzerkampfwagenviiimaus3976]

T80bvm

[@xXMaverick56Xx]

You forgot to mention that the repair cost of the M1 Abrams is x2/x3 higher than the Russian one...bias?

[@arkaiko5401]

Bias, or is a very expensive tank in real life??? Soviet/russian are the best in cost/quality

[@xXMaverick56Xx]

Sordo Mudo the game does not keep into account real costs of production but somehow some weird stats that inefficiently reflect the effectiveness of a vehicle

[@maxim6088]

Not bias... You're just a twat m8, the Abrams m1 was very expensive (and trash compared to the new Abrams varients which most people think of when they hear Abrams), the t80 is cheap, and essentially the best price/quality mbt ever built

[@Storlans]

@@maxim6088 underperforming 105mm ammo and overperforming ufp tells you something different...... The m1 does not need new ammo the game just needs to be fixed the 105 should be able to pen the T-72 and the T-64 ingame.

[@deltacharlieromeo8252]

But who created War Thunder 😂

[@Henry-uq1hl]

How about T-54 (1951) VS M60?

[@swt_purged132]

M60 will win . The M60 is a faster tank. Armour t54 probably win but speed gun and stuff M60

[@Henry-uq1hl]

@@swt_purged132 Not really.

[@nekilik4352]

@@Henry-uq1hl roki vulović?

[@swt_purged132]

I was right. I checked it on the stats here are the things T54 is better on (Armour "Highway speed" and weight and hp) ( m60- Speed offroad better pen better reload vetter gun depression ) like said T54 would win on some things but M60 probably win as far as gun and stuff

[@Henry-uq1hl]

@@swt_purged132 You forgot that T-54 has Shells with HE filler that can easily one shot anything it faces.

[@mr.abrams9885]

You all know very well that I'm better

[@swt_purged132]

Amen!!

[@cptpoell9113]

But you are M1A1 wtf

[@CaptPatrick01]

Game don't have the A1 yet.

[@rickdubbink]

Leopard 2A7: *Am I a joke to you?*

[@chatbannednosse]

U free?

[@sincereeastman6972]

Leopard 2A4 vs Type 90 next?

[@Asgar1205]

type 90 wins, same tank with smaller cross section, better ammo and higher RoF ... oh and it's transmission isn't artificially fucked

[@sincereeastman6972]

@@Asgar1205 haha yeah, just wanted to see Werhaboos whine in the comment section XD

[@Asgar1205]

Not sure why legitimate complaints about a vehicle are whining, but okay

[@marcelojoelpaolin5683]

@@Asgar1205 its canadian u expect something good from them ?

[@AnnatarCarvour]

Better survivability in game in the 2A4 over the 90 all day

[@Alpakinator]

T72 has been shot with empty ammo racks. With them it woud immediately die when hit in LFP.

[@kevlarburrito6693]

Hold up...the Abrams does not have an autoloader....also several hundred burnt up T-72's in the Iraqi desert would beg to differ with these "findings"....

[@nuckerball1259]

This is the pre production abrams. The gulf war abrams were mostly m1a1 and up.

The Iraqis were using 3rd class export models that didn't even have the modern ammunition developed in the 80s by the Soviets.

[@yrkjrk2972]

@@emperorjorge5596 The Republic Guard was a feared armed force until it was dismantled in 3 weeks

[@maxim6088]

Pls, could you first fact check yourself before you comment? The m1 was not in the Iraqi wars, the t72's there where not even remotely comparable to new Russian T80's, plus the people using them where not as good at using them as the Russians.

[@kevlarburrito6693]

Maxim ...what are you talking about? The Abrams was in both Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. I can personally attest to it being there during OIF as I served IN Iraq for 3 years.

[@versatile_yt4838]

The Abrams may have less Armour but it is survivabillity that matters not Armour.

[@andreypolyakov1593]

Versatile_YT actually , armor is ( for me ) à part of survivability : it’s one thing to get your mega ultra over OP armor pierced by APFSDS and get little to no damage , it’s another to get your paper armor pierced by a simple HE round ! Survivability is good on a long period , but if your tank can’t stand one hit , then you’re pretty much fucked

[@dennysusanto5673]

Mig-19 vs super sabre please

[@polaskatyu9368]

Denny Susanto which mig19, Germany is getting the S variant now )))))

[@ЛукаЖивановић-ч2х]

@@polaskatyu9368 Not any Germany, East Germany )))

[@polaskatyu9368]

Лука Живановић ))))))

[@NZobservatory]

"We only hit the transmission and the driver." - Bruce Grant "Comrade, a word if you please..." - T-72A driver

[@madtatrfart1437]

They called them heavies when they’re classified as mediums in the game

[@mr.vuchuchel3619]

Because they are heavy as heavy tanks but arent heavy tanks

[@M4A1BestGirl]

I think it's because of the Abrams' speed

[@thelegodude2595]

So how about trying the weapons test with the M833 round, because the m774 was never actually used. Also the m1a1 variant absolutely destroyed the t72s in the gulf war. And the Abrams has no auto loader. Thanks for making a great game Gaijan!

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Didnt help those were export variant T-72s without armor inserts or fire control packages, loaded with mild steel training rounds instead of tungsten APFSDS in order to save money

[@oliverhobbs2231]

Bob simple tank when? .-.

[@rn-zu5ld]

It would be too op and be at BR 900000000000000000.786889

[@statesecurityserviceoflith4783]

@@oliverhobbs2231 you crazy bob could destroy every tank in game one shot it needs to be in 99999999999999999999999.9br even in that br it would be to op

[@tigersympathiser2265]

Those machineguns have too much pen, probably couldn't be put in game.

[@Sebastian-yl7nq]

T-72 wins, because you actually earn Silver Lions with it ;)

[@Henry-uq1hl]

If you aren't using the 3BM15. You get ~1000 Silver Lions for killing other MBT,and the shell costs 900. Not to mention you aren't always gonna kill everything with one shot. It is easier to earn SL with T-72A than with M1 Abrams,but it's still not a very good money maker.

[@OmarSlloum]

If we had bigger maps the T-72 would be a much better adversary to the Abroomz than it is now. I swear to god every time I play sim battles and get a map like Italy I just want to play another game, but there ISN'T another game I can play that is realistic like War Thunder, so I'm stuck playing these call of duty maps in my modern mbt, which needs to pay 900 sl for each shot just to penetrate the tank it will face the most!

[@XpunisherX8152]

Seriously. All i want is Italy and Vietnam to be reworked or removed and i really want balanced long range engagements

[@OmarSlloum]

@@XpunisherX8152 people should be able to choose which maps they want to play, that's the one thing from CoD that War Thunder SHOULD copy! Also we need maps that allow you to shoot for more than 1.5km. Maybe something like 2.5 to 4 km would make the game much more enjoyable for top tier.

[@XpunisherX8152]

@@OmarSlloum im all for the 2nd part of that reply. But if we have a voting system , then ppl will vote for the most favorable map and always leave out the least popular maps. It has to come down to the lesser of two evil maps

[@omnipotank]

If we had bigger maps, the challenger would actually be worth playing and practically invulnerable hull down from range. (If HE nukes were modeled correctly) With the upcoming challenger 2 and more modern MBTs, they better add huge maps.

[@Szpareq]

Long range engagements are very unlikely. I think the game stops showing tanks after 1km, 2 if another tank in your team is within 1km (I'm not sure though).

[@mikolajkowalski1220]

I want you to do a match up with mouse and the IS-7.

[@wangxrtom]

Still no comparison about the survivability of the tanks when a shell did manage penetrate the armor. The Abrams shines in this category as it often takes more than 2 shots to kill it, while the stronk turret ejection system on the T-80 means any shot that penetrates the armor will most likely result in a big boom. Considering this the Abrams is actually on-par with the T-80 or arguably better than the T-80 since it is much more forgiving and gives you a better chance to retreat and reengage at another angle even if you got hit(let's face it lol, no matter how good you are, you are going to get hit anyways)

[@sexyitalian891]

Might be more forgiving but the T80B on the other hand has an absolute beast of a gun, and good armor. Your talking about a good amount of survivability and a minor increase in mobility, compared to much more firepower and armor on the T80. The T80 is the superior tank imo. It takes me half a second to aim for that gun breach or turret ring and completely disable its ability to fire back. Abrams can't do the same to the T80 as quickly.

[@s0me1up]

i have given up to argue about this aspect of the gameplay long ago. it seems only people with above average IQ actually realise the importance of survivability. everyone else keeps ignoring it since it's not even a visible stat. M1 is so much more forgiving and allows a player to stay in battle longer, thereby giving more chances to inflict damage and have an impact on the battle. it's like the old argument between t-34-76 and pz.4 or t-34-85 and panther. although the t-34s may have a stronger post-penetration effect, the german counterparts can simply outlive them and oneshot the russians in return. the current damage model needs to be reworked in total. most vehicles in game survive way too much.

[@andreypolyakov1593]

s0me1up actually survivability is important , but the t80 can cripple the abrams of almost everyone in one good shot ! Survivability is good on a long period , but if you can’t stay alive in 1 on 1 fights , then it’s pretty much useless as you can’t fight back if half of your tank is torn apart in one hit ! One last thing : survivability or not , ATGM’s aren’t merciful

[@s0me1up]

@@andreypolyakov1593 simple scenario: an enemy sneaks up on you and shoots you in the side. if you are in a t80, you die 99.9% of the time. if you are in an abrams, you lose a crewman and a few modules, pop smoke and drive away into safety. nothing that you said discredited my argument. abrams (and all the other non-russian modern MBTs) is simply very forgiving and comfortable to play. in a t80 (t72, t64) you need much more luck and much more skill. even if we imagine a fair stand off where both tanks notice each other at the same time, the t80 needs 2-3 accurate hits. this is a waste of time. the abrams needs only 1 center mass hit on a t80. the entire high tier rank for the russians is screwed over. they get slower, less comfortable, fragile tanks that require luck and skill. this started with the introduction of MBT-70 vs t-64 and nothing has changed so far. btw no need for a discussion, i played the game long enough to make up my mind and nothing you say could change my opinion, because i saw with my own eyes what is happening in the game and the russians are at a severe disadvantage.

[@x7shadow429]

5:02 Don’t talk to me or my son again T-72 on the right

[@Shank039]

Abrams doesnt have an autoloader.

[@Warbeaver]

Are they just guessing for thr Abrams armor thickness? I dont see how they coukd actually know.

[@isabelle2670]

There's not a SINGLE comparisson video in which there's not a russian vehicle

[@deltacharlieromeo8252]

Because Russia is Russia. With every military hardware the West makes, the Russians have a counter. Sometimes even better.

[@possum456]

@@deltacharlieromeo8252 In this scenario the Abrams should of easily defeated the T-72

[@zeffy._440]

@@possum456 not really

[@darthsnader8911]

The Abrams repair cost makes it worse than the T-72A

[@Ccofi123]

T72 is more enjoyable becouse it's cheaper

[@darthsnader8911]

@@Ccofi123 Exactly

[@joeblowe3180]

Russian bias: The game

[@Farmuhan]

is this the first bait title for War Thunder KZbin?

[@raizencore]

The M1 Abrams should be put on 9.7, it's a good MBT but the competition it faces is so much stronger that it's unfair.

[@carkawalakhatulistiwa]

M1 is 1980 is vs t80 not t72

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Comparing the incoming M1 clone to the T-72AV TURMS is a head scratcher, with the russian prem having better ammo, better sights, better armor, and only slightly worse mobility than the new american prem, but being a LOWER br

[@Cruor34]

Glad the people who make the game admit the T80 is better if you don't show side armor. Yes, the Abrams does not have an auto loader, clearly a mis understanding, it was meant to say the Abrams loads shells faster. Won't stop the idiots screaming Abrams is OP and to nerf it more than it already is.

[@boneless_.]

How about this? Panzer III B vs. T-26.

[@bullreeves1109]

So... the 10.0 Abrams is “Equal” to the 9.7 T-72, and is completely inferior to the 10.0 T-80... why is it 10.0 and cost 3 times more then every other rank again?

[@dopplerapples7307]

Well as of now its been confirmed a Abrahams tank got destroyed by a t72 in Ukraine.

[@MythWarpathIX]

The T-72A has the same mobility like my Grandma.

[@bourbon2605]

And has the same enough of your grandmas firepower too make you an obese child in under a week

[@MrAlpal]

1:54 the transmission is in the rear behind the engine, a lower plate shot almost always kills in one shot. 5:08 already been said, but the Abrams has no autoloader. do you guys even play your game?

[@rn-zu5ld]

Read the pinned comment

[@slouchygames1923]

This should be a rematch at some point

[@bishop51807]

Still waiting on Gaijin to add the M833 and M900 rounds to the Abrams otherwise I call Russian bias.

[@GOD719]

That would justify the cost. If not. It needs to be dropped lower than the A4 and type 90

[@Berserker3062]

I'm glad you admit the 105 equipped M1 and MiP are not worthy of 10.0 BR. A few other US tanks are higher BR than they should be. M60 series for example.

[@legogenius1667]

So you literally admit that the T-72 is equal and the T-80 is blatantly better, and you refuse to balance them?? WHY? Why can't you just raise the Abrams to 11.0 or 12.0, buff it to historical standards (DP shells, realistic armor values, and so on) and go from there?

[@BEAR-lw6mh]

If the T-80 were blatantly better than the Abrams in the game and the T-72A were equal then the Soviets wouldn’t be having so much trouble winning at top tier

[@5pu7nik]

Side shots are much more common that frontal!

[@MiguelCastro-ow5ho]

So it's a combative draw. Two minutes later, silver for the Abrams and bronze for the T-72!

[@shuffler1577]

A T80 can destroy the abrams by sneezing in its general direction yet they’re in the same BR

[@mathiasenevoldsen3583]

Why arent you using the IPM1?

[@KICKASSoBASSIST]

SuperSovsen because we don’t complain as much as the others do lol. Jokes aside the IP would only add 20mm extra in kinetic protection so it’s a tad irrelevant

[@mathiasenevoldsen3583]

@@KICKASSoBASSIST Its something

[@mathiasenevoldsen3583]

@@KICKASSoBASSIST Wait what, Theyve made me research and buy anotehr tank, for 20 mm protection? And I thought Rep cost was bad

[@KICKASSoBASSIST]

SuperSovsen chemical protection is 200mm more but yea it doesn’t stack much for kinetic. So yea your grinding out another Abrams for overall minimal benefits

[@JamesVDBosch]

@@KICKASSoBASSIST Extra turret armour cuts about 400m fromt he distance at which 3BM-22 can pen it as well as making it entirely DM23 proof. No, it's not irrelevant.

[@tripping-sh3wk]

In real life, the the T80 crew wouldnt be good enough to prevent the sides from showing

[@justanander]

I want email changing

[@fsxlover2maumauthelink5]

Abrams was able to go through the UFP before the retarded ammo changes

[@TheRedMartian]

Lmao. LFP is an instant kill, if you actually put ammo in the turret. And why not also put them against the M1IP??

[@michaeliannucci8853]

If they're saying the Abrams can't win a fight with a T-80, then give it the M833 or M900

[@ashati3176]

Noochmaster dont wanna make the russians cry.

[@zeffy._440]

won't make a difference it was a shell that used the 105mm gun I believe Russian armour should be strong enough to withstand the hit

[@PAUL-ESNEED]

WHY IS THE REPAIR COST 15K FOR AN INFERIOR VEHICLE WHILE THE RUSSIAN COUNTERPARTS ARE ALL AT AROUND 3K REEEEEEEEEEEEE

[@maxim6088]

It's expensive irl, and in game it is as good or sometimes better then the t80

[@therd2127]

If only they didn't nerf the M774, the Abrams would've had a better chance.

[@e500coupe]

Give the m833 or m900 and the abrams will rekt those two tank

[@Trainnerd-qw1vj]

We need a rematch

[@bruh_7695]

Well...

[@whoknows475]

Plz do a Flakpanzer gepard vs the otomatic

[@snonsig2688]

Oto wins

[@polaskatyu9368]

snonsig nein, flakpanzer

[@ethandearman3965]

Unless the spaas are trying to kill each other the OTOMATIC is better

[@ethandearman3965]

@blue's hunter I don't think they added the version that had them. Anyway I have both and I have used the Gepard since it came out OTOMATIC with it's MOM shells is much better vs air that the Gepard and better for killing tanks. In a 1v1 of the Gepard and the OTOMATIC the Gepard wins because of the massive breach not that they would every really fight out side of a CB

[@ethandearman3965]

@blue's hunter if you don't play why are you here? We are talking about in game performance. The OTOMATIC was designed to replace SPAAs like the Gepard and was proven better and longer range. SAMs are irrelevant if anything defeats the point of the Gepard as well.

[@bluefoxy6478]

Hey Gijan! I found 2 things that isnt realistic about the Abrams! The spot between the turret and hull is way to big, IRL a shell from any modern mbt wont be able to get in between cause the gap is too small, and you miscalculated it and made it too big, furthermore, you didn't use the more uparmored Abrams which is unfair cause your useing a newer tank, verses the exact same vehicle as last time, also the lower plate of the up armored one even though its the exact same as the old one, its somehow weaker!

[@nattly6340]

One interesting comparison could be all the very fast light tanks. Eg.. ru 251 Vs amx 13

[@night2957]

m18?

[@nattly6340]

@@night2957 yea those types of tanks

[@danielr.l.mccullough600]

T50

[@GoodLordInternetCafeGenMdse]

the answer to kill the T70 and T80 is the jagdpanzer

[@marcu_wojac2237]

Oh yeah, another nice video from my favorite video game

[@AnnatarCarvour]

Alot needs fixed, but it's my favorite game as well

[@crnorizechrabar4879]

I cannot wait for the M1A2 Abrams, and certainly for the t-90 and the T-14 Armata, they must be added! I know you will do that Gaijin.

[@zacharyslover9365]

I have an Idea! Abrams vs. Maus!!!

[@marcbirchen9484]

Divini Fulminis Abrams wil win

[@swt_purged132]

Abrams will mop the floor with the Maus

[@lpflore]

I actually once killed an Abrams with my Maus. I also once bounced 20 shots in a 10.0 Game. Those Freeaboos needed a Heli to kill me

[@swt_purged132]

@@lpflore i killed a Abrams in a T34-85 because GaGjin dosent know how to put realistic armour. But the abrams eould come out on top if they know where to shoot

[@cadewoolley1827]

@@swt_purged132 but the maus is also missing an extra 200mm on the turret and another 100mm covering the hull.

[@TC-yv3ud]

Lfp: *exists* Damage is far from critical Meanwhile the turret: hello im on the moon

[@Sturmv0gel]

Please do a T-62 vs. Leopard A1A1 Attempt no.5 or Leopard 2A4 vs. Abrams or Type 90 or some tank else

[@tomic0046]

Great idea

[@tigersympathiser2265]

@@tomic0046 Good ideas*

[@tomic0046]

@@tigersympathiser2265 lol im saying about the t62

[@phased-arraych.9150]

There’s a reason why we developed M900 shells you know.

[@warfaremessiah2929]

T-72 has better armour and Firepower? Yet the Abrams and their Challenger 1 allies wiped the floor with them in reality

[@t1e6x12]

This is the first version of the Abrams they are comparing it to as well as giving this first version outdated rounds. Now in the Gulf War, America was using the M1A1HA with a 120mm gun instead of a 105mm gun, depleted uranium armor, and a much more armored turret.

[@zeffy._440]

oh you mean they wiped the floor with the export variants fielded by the inept Iraqi's which also lacked composite armour? what a shocker!

[@barbarapitenthusiast7103]

The iraqis were using ammunition which became obsolete in the mid 70s and in some cases even training ammo, they were also buried into the ground in static positions and because The US had total air superiority they knew exactly where they were

[@SuperMiiBrother]

2:14 No! I don't want to get shot at!

[@G007-j1j]

This is the most incorrect comparison I've seen on this channel, the Abrams will just flex and 8 of it's friends will pop out of the corner and one shot any Russian tank in front of it

[@basedjorts]

During the first Iraq War, US forces tested the M774, M833 and M900 APFSDS rounds against Iraqi T72s. All three rounds could pen the T72s out to 3000 yards. Gaijin should stop nerfing stuff, hoping to achieve balance.

[@avaolivia6839]

its M1A1 abrams, not M1 abrams

[@basedjorts]

What are you talking about? The 105mm Abrams was still used in Desert Storm. Also, the M60A1 Rise Passive was being used as well.

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Export T-72s with steel armor instead of the standard composite inserts and no fire control systems. Fun to laugh at, especially when iraqis load mild steel sabot instead of tungsten sabot in order to save a buck, but not quite representative

[@henriquepedrazzi9008]

Or the heavy turtles like the tortoise, t28, jagdtiger, etc

[@Asgar1205]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJeUioqPm6mSp80

[@cityfans5723]

Abrams needs M833, IPM1 needs M900

[@Nimori]

Lets seee A tank that never has been destroyed in combat VS a tank that has countlessly been destroyed in combat, AGAINST the tank that never got destroyed in combat. Brussian Rias

[@elliottbaker4415]

I don't think you've seen how the Iraqi M1's fair

[@rayhan_2k841]

M1 abrams have been destroyed in combat. M1a1 and a2

[@Nimori]

Challenger2 Black night Link? Source?

[@Nimori]

Forever Renamed Abrams has been hit by mines, tow missiles, rpg’s in the engine, and keep rolling. I’d like some sources please.

[@Nimori]

Bleagle Not destroyed by combat. Notice all the burn marks and melted... everything. An RPG and or AGTM TOW’s can’t do that damage, not at that tempature. Clearly a demo. Furthermore paint reveals its not owned by the US military. M1 Abrams are for countries other than the US. Spaded immensely. M1A1 is for US M1A2 is for US Again, looks like a demo. Probably tracks got blown off or engine died and they couldnt haul it back due to it being in enemy territory.

[@archblue9355]

Challenger 2 vs M1A2

[@mr.z2269]

Can you make a video on leopard 2a4 vs m1 abrams

[@Function.displayName]

Hey look! Its a coffin Vs a M1!!!!

[@darkfunewolfcoop6768]

Ok so now there's no more subtitle .... Nicee

[@STGN01]

Its a shame that warthunder so incorrectly decided to make the abrams gunshield so weak so it would have the same weakspot as russian tanks. From the released CIA drawings the armor should be atleaset as strong as the front hull so a lower bound of 350mm probably more like 400 given its 6-20 cm deeper LOS and additional armor: 5mm thicker backing plate, 33 mm aditional plate behind a 13mm deeper NERA array and a 10mm thicker front plate. Unlike the current ingame Abrams the real one had a strong gunshield.

[@STGN01]

@@sdasdadasda2460 From the information released we know that the front armor of the M1 is at least 350mm at 25-30 degrees to either side. The US Army said to the press back in 1976 or 78 that the armor can not be defeated by a projectile capable of piercing 380mm. If you search hard enough you can find official external dimensions of the pilot M1 vehicles which didn't change much for the actual M1. Then you can scale the released CIA drawings combine it with released information of external plate thickness of M1A1 hull. Using the 25-30 degree protection ranges you find that the basic armor to achieve that is a 1,5-2 inches LOS thickness front plate with a 5,8"(hull) to 6"(gun shield) backing plate and with a 12" LOS NERA array in the middle and off cause the additional 33 LOS plate on the fun shield.

[@vincea1830]

Uhm did you forget to mention its game over if at any point there's a side shot on a t80 where there's little chance of survival from a carousel cookoff while the abrams can usually take 2-3 shots from the side and live? Lol this bias runs deep

[@engineermerasmus2810]

Hori production vs the jagdtiger.

[@AnnatarCarvour]

After you nerfed the.m774 shell even more..either way still love the game..but used to be able to one shot the T-80 or 72 with it through the ufp

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Use mean first gen DU used to have the same incendiary party trick as later gens?

[@AnnatarCarvour]

@@ronaldthompson4989 yep I don't even play anymore not sure if they shut down my account Stopped in 2021 sometime..had top tier in most everything

[@ronaldthompson4989]

@@AnnatarCarvour oh, you missed out on the M1A2 SEP. America now has the armor and firepower to hang with the Russians

[@legomanyt3524]

You should do a updated version like the M1A2 vs T90A

[@IxBl4ckH4rtxI]

"Communism is a temporary setback on the road to freedom" LP

[@zeffy._440]

Capitalism*

[@largegummyhitman5786]

2:15 "hello fellow players"

[@baunguyenba8736]

American m4 sherman vs japanese chi he

[@tigersympathiser2265]

2A4 vs Type 90

[@JavaCZLP]

I like how you compare 10.0 with 9.7(?), I wonder what this means... Maybe that the abrams deserves lower BR?

[@HornetHeeehee]

They should of used an m1a1 Abrams against the t80

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

How much do I need to play to get the T-80B for example? With and without premium time, tanks and talismans.

[@fsxlover2maumauthelink5]

depends where you are in the tech tree

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@fsxlover2maumauthelink5 Haven't played any Russian tank yet.

[@user-bk2zj1rd4c]

about 25 years

[@fsxlover2maumauthelink5]

@@imnotusingmyrealname4566 well then thats gonna take a very long time, if you really wanted to get it you could buy the T55am, other than that its gonna take a long time.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@user-bk2zj1rd4c haha my guess

[@chilltrooper9695]

The t-80 was better than the M1 Abrams and the M1iP until they made the M1A1