Centauro 2 Fire Support Vehicle - Overview and Opinion

[@idanceforpennies281]

The Centauro was an absolute winner when it first came out in the early 80s. Now even better.

[@supervirus87]

It displays a beautiful outfit even better than Centauro. Italian designers do not make only fine sport car but armored vehicles too.

[@ravener96]

they have improved somewhat since ww2

[@gikaradi8793]

so the Centauro makes a fine sports armored vehicle

[@FirstnameLastname-py3bc]

And then they sell to Germans

[@Keckegenkai]

C1 Ariete likes to differ

[@lorenzo4408]

@@ravener96 we improved everything since then...

[@UncleFester84]

Fun fact: the US army leased 16 centauro to when they were developing the stryker to gain experience on the vehicle type

[@TheBooban]

Shame they didn't choose Centauro instead.

[@PrinceOfParthia74]

@@TheBooban they never will. U.S is a super power and can not comprehend borrowing/buying military equipment from another nation. even if that means what they make is going to be inferior.

[@TheBooban]

PrinceOfParthia74 don’t know why you think that, the US buys a lot of equipment from foreign countries. Instead of centauro they bought the Stryker, which is the Piranha which was bought from the Swiss and made in Canada,

[@belladesa91]

@@PrinceOfParthia74 why the US chose the advanced FREM frigates in the Italian navy to replace their old frigates?

[@paolosprugnoli482]

Giusto

[@noscopesallowed8128]

I'm actually surprised that they could jam all that equipment into such a "small" platform. 600+ mm of pen at 3km is absolutely insane though.

[@xboxgorgo18]

That's because they literally built an actual vehicle to perfectly house its cannon and system, unlike what other countries do like just putting a cannon to an armored vehicle that can barely house large caliber guns.

[@ECHOFOXTROT289]

Is not "an Italian version" is an Italian heavy-armoured vehicle produced ex-novo by OTO-Melara

[@davidebonannini640]

Edoardo Ferrari ma si, versione italiana non significa per forza "clone" di qlcosa fatto da altri.

[@ECHOFOXTROT289]

The David, non intendevo questo, ma mi da fastidio il fatto che dall'estero debbano trovare un qualcosa fatto da altri e su cui ci si basa infatti _versione_ > _variante_ > _modifica_ , è da riconoscere che in Italia siamo molto avanti in questo campo, molto di più che nei carri armati , e non che abbiamo "reinterpretato" qualcosa di già collaudato ed esistente, la centauro non ha euguali saranno gli altri a reinterpretare questo ottimo veicolo

[@davidebonannini640]

Edoardo Ferrari io non l'ho interpretato così, infatti ne ha parlato molto bene per tutto il video. Ha solo citato lo "Stryker" americano e ha detto che il Centauro è la versione italiana, ma non nel senso che è basato su quello, era solo per far capire il tipo di veicolo. Anzi, ha detto proprio che il C. è "qualcosa di nuovo" e che sarà "il futuro", e che altri eserciti dovrebbero seguire questo concept.

[@granindo7867]

lo stryker e' basato sul Centauro, di fatti gli USA noleggiarono una decina di mezzi dell'EI per produrre un proprio anticarro.

[@rem700vtr]

lo Stryker è basato sul LAVIII che a sua volta è basato sul Mowag Piranha svizzero.

[@Hortifox_the_gardener]

Super good video again! This wheeled vehicle is perfect for a lot of situations. For the home front anyways - Italy is pretty much developed and almost all the time the actual movement would happen on paved roads or at least solid agriculture pathways. Also the landscape for off road usage is pretty good there. Steel tracks do a lot of damage on regular roads and therefore are not to anticipated with local mayors and citizens. This Lynx thing with the rubber tracks is in between such a wheeled vehicle and something one steel tracks. Also for UN and similar missions it is also perfectly fine. Like in Afghanistan - the missions are always patrols on roads and this vehicle could give the opportunity to put a way heavier armed vehicle alongside the group without using a MBT that damages the "roads", is super loud and also kind of scares away the locals. Also obviously you save a lot of fuel on road wheels!

[@FunkyRezable]

Old comment but still... "Italy is pretty much developed and almost all the time the actual movement would happen on paved roads or at least solid agriculture pathways" True but also it has to be keep in mind that 70% of Italian peninsula is covered by high mountains and hills. It's a nightmare for tanks and other tracked vehicles (if you take a look, during the WWII invasion of Italy there were mainly infantry battles). That's why Italy never update regularly his MBT in favour of Centauro and almost every italian vehicles carry big guns and are pretty fast on any terrain.

[@lucianorosarelli-xr5lr]

@@FunkyRezable i m italian . is true that u said in a second part of your writting but no for the right reason . money money alwais money . it is cheaper than a mbt but now 2023 probably we goes to buy leopard 2 a 7 like a filler gup to new main tanks built in italy or a consortiom

[@lucianorosarelli-xr5lr]

@@pregno1421 guarda anche l'orografia dell'italia montagne e colline meglio le ruote o i cingoli?

[@karlp8484]

Always been a fanboy of the Centauro since I saw a detailed review of it in 1983 (Mk 1 ). The "H" drive transmission keeps it low compared to conventional diff arrangement which hangs outside the hull, this one is built in with two prop shafts and drive shafts coming off them laterally. Good stuff. This vehicle pushes the outer limits of what weight can be carried on 8 wheels, I think with the extra armour it reaches 30 tonnes. But still capable of 100 Km/h. The design emphasis was on strategic mobility (1000 Km), particularly in the South of Italy, where long distances could be expected but top tier tanks probably not be encountered. But it's multi-role so..

[@idanceforpennies281]

You could use it as a fire support vehicle, and one which can get into position very fast. Its cross-country tactical mobility is almost as good as a tank, but it has twice the range. And on roads, it's 30 Km/h faster than a tank.

[@ZionZah]

Italian viewer here, thank for the awesome review

[@Limescale12]

Caveat: I intended for this comment to be posted on your previous video but it took so long for me to type it, by the time I clicked post, this video already auto played. in any case I hope you get it... 👌 Do it Matsimus, get started again - that's the only way to keep your fit for fight! Like you, I'm an army veteran that's been trying to get back in the service soon. For the past 7 years, for various reasons, I've fallen into a civilian slump of laziness, denial and eventually depression. I've been making excuses for not picking myself up and training. Now I'm 31 years old and I felt past my prime. As of new years I was 236 lbs (I'm only 5'8") and I've always dreaded running - the one thing I really needed to do. With motivation from my family and friends and the nostalgia from the old glory days of my service, I finally "did it". I started back up a real training regimen. I got a gym membership finally and I've been running everywhere. I actually LIKE running, something I never thought possible. I've never felt better and with each pound I lose and second I knock off of my 2 mile run, I feel more motivated and closer to rejoining my beloved Army. I've lost over 20 lbs now and I'm beginning to feel like a soldier and a warrior again. I know I'm preaching to the choir my friend, but I thought I might try motivating you a little as we both have quite similar goals. Each time you mention getting back into the Army in your videos I feel a sense of relation and motivation myself and I'm rooting for you. God speed in your endeavor and as always, great video 👍

[@TheAKgunner]

A superb new AFV. I agree with you, the Italians have a winner with this one. If you don't mind, would you mind reviewing the M60 Sabra?

[@ronniewhite4392]

Europe is coming out with some amazing military vehicles. Centauro 2, boxer and puma. They would be effective in combat.

[@mortenlund1418]

You are absolutely right. This has to do with, if Europe gets attacked, it will be a land attack! If USA gets attacked, it will be a sea attack. And all the main combat in a future war will be land combat, so Europe are doing vicely.

[@lucianorosarelli-xr5lr]

@@mortenlund1418 good luke dude constallation class tha became from italian fremm version built marinette fincantieri shipsyard they are waitng for fiinal project to built first one how many time we waiting for? ps. american navy have change everithing of the fremm original that it was cheper and faster to built and i think with best armament too like otomelara 127 cannon with volcano ammo or 76/62 with stales ammo ( twice are the most utilized gun in all navy arond world)

[@frarevo]

Very impressive tank destroyer.

[@brandonm1881]

im American so Naturally id go for our own tech, but this looks way sexier then the Stryker, Safe to say the Stryker is no longer the "most powerful vehicle on wheels" from youtube sources...but this vehicle is beautiful, love the turret look

[@DeMasterzOfDisaster]

Brandon x Stryker is bad.

[@brandonm1881]

Serg Revolvera how is it bad

[@DeMasterzOfDisaster]

Brandon x it gets the job done but when they made it they could've done a lot better. The Stryker was basically developed from the LAV-25, which was developed from the Canadian LAV-III, which was then developed from the swiss 8x8 Piranha. Its armor is bad, and it protects poorly from anything higher than a 12.7 or .50 cal. Its like the M114 in Vietnam.

[@brandonm1881]

Serg Revolvera i agree it could have been done better, but it not all that bad, i dont see any valid arguement about the Stryker being bad other then its armor, do you know the actual armor specs?

[@DeMasterzOfDisaster]

The Stryker is bad for conventional warfare. Its armor thickness all depends on what armor package it has at the moment. Its usefulness in low intensity conflicts can be arguably seen as satisfactory, however its protection is rather lackluster when it comes to fighting other IFV's. Do you understand what I mean?

[@JoseLopez-vt8kd]

España opera el Centauro I, y esta segunda versión me parece un acierto. Vehículo multi rol me parece una buena definicón.

[@BEIRUTEE]

Brasil ja começou a produzir centauro 2, o brasil vai produzir 200 centauros 2 até 2026

[@carlomarini4255]

The best of its category!!!!!

[@Leptospirosi]

Nice video indeed. One thing to point out is that the main difference between the Centauro II and the Centauro B1 120mm is in the lower plates of the hull: the new vehicle has been completely reshaped to be more effective against land mines and powerful IED. Also, applied reactive and composite armour are not meant for tank vs tank combat, where I think mobility is nowdays the ky to survival, but rather patrol duty in asymmetrical combat theatre, protecting the crew against ambushes and RPG.

[@Real_Claudy_Focan]

shafts still outside the hull, the crew will be safe, but the vehicle will be in a total mobility kill after one IED/mine hit

[@Karelwolfpup]

if it hits a mine the tires will be shredded anyway, so immaterial.

[@djka8083]

30 year old RPG will make mince meat out of the crew of this vehicle,bulk of the weight is in the turret so not much was left for the armour, patrol duty with mobility of a canal boat is a joke . Imagine some modern anti tank projectile hitting it,or any 30mm will shred it in 2 seconds. Italians either dont care about the life of the crew, or not planing to get involved in a real conflict :D It has no sense in Europe maybe in Africa but I doubt it will ever see any action.

[@gabrieletesio6848]

Well the Centauro B1 was deployed in Africa, Lebanon, Iraq and the balkans, I don't see why they should not deploy also the B2.

[@bf109e4trop]

You know how it is done the Centaur 2 and with what materials? the OTOMelara was based on 'direct experience on the battlefield both in afganistan iand in iraq with armored Centaur 1 and applied all the latest-generation materials that can absorb both the bullets shaped charge as RPG7 the bullets 30mm . You can rest assured that the Italian soldiers are much safer on the Centaur 2 than in any other armored!

[@aldoagnellini756]

something that makes us proud of being Italian

[@gordonlawrence1448]

You have plenty of other things too. EG in WWII my grandfather was in a landing craft which was a bit too far up the coast and when they landed the Italian army fired a few shots in the air and up went the white flags. There was an SS unit on furlough that had armour with them. They started inflicting heavy casualties on the British at which point the Italians opened up with everything they had on the SS. My Grandfather said there were many British lives saved that day by the Italians. I used to know some Italians that fought in WWII and every single one of them said they were on the wrong side which is why they more or less refused to fight the allies. What happened to Mousolinni says it all really.

[@simoneorilio5052]

@@gordonlawrence1448 Yeah the situation was very complicated but for sure most of the country was in opposition to the nazi-fascists, when the war breakout was clear the king tried to use a puppet in case things went wrong but Mussolini was able to get enough power and following thanks to Hitler and italian extreme right-wing people to turn the table and leading. There were still a large opposition to the regime... Socialists, communists, democrats, common brave people, people who left Mussolini party when was clear things were going into total madness exc. So there were opposition, but in a totalitarian dictatorship opposition is exiled, imprisoned or killed most of the time. Many Italians didn't liked being allies with who we fought so hard few years before in WWI. Basically when there were the opportunity cities like Naples and most of the North turned the table again with nazi-fascists killed or kicked out of the country, hanged Mussolini, Royal Family exiled and in June 2 46' Italian Constitutional Republic was born🇮🇹 . So the "italians switching side" stereotype... Is false

[@xbox7]

Thing is a beast in armored warfare

[@alexdibe86]

Check the Centauro 155mm: the Centauro 155/39 is equipped with a modified B1 Centauro hull, to increase mine protection; It has a crew of 2 components: pilot and commander. There are 15 ammunition of 155/39 NATO in the turret, ready for use: the Centauro 155/39 can shoot up to 4 simultaneous (one after the other) projectiles that can hit different targets at the same time. It can shoot up to 8 shots per minute with a maximum range of 60 km. Due to the limit number of ammunition it can carry, it is necessary to have carry-ammunition service at his side.

[@alexdibe86]

And also the Centaur 76/62 Draco: the Centaur 76/62 with Draco tower is a further development of the Otomatic SPAAG developed in the 1980s. Draco is a 76 mm remoted naval tower that can shoot all NATO ammunition 76/62 mm and DART and C-RAM bullets of Oto Melara. The rate of fire is 80/100 shots per minute with a radius of 6-8 km (air) or 20km (ground). Very nice!!!

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

the south african rooikat uses a locally bult 76mm based in the italian 76mm, and it can pen export t-72s at 2km away, so i imagine the italian one is just as good.

[@BigBex]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 as penetration goes, yes, but the draco and the OTOMATIC can shoot every 0.5 seconds XD

[@lucianorosarelli-xr5lr]

@@BigBex ies it do

[@Rickusty]

This is a really cool vehicle. But it's not "eye-vecoh" but "ee-vecoh" ))

[@aldoagnellini756]

without the h ;)

[@italianduded1161]

VIVA L'ITALIA

[@JK-vb8di]

just high-explosive ravioli

[@andychauhan6544]

Tutti...fruitty!

[@Pollouomo]

Così, random

[@morrisfonti8320]

@@JK-vb8di Evviva l’Italia sempre il paese più bello al mondo non lo dimenticare mai stronzo

[@vasskolomiets41]

By the way how the name of the vehicle should pronounce - sentoro or chentoro?

[@stephenbritton9297]

I think the Battle of 73 Easting back in 1991, where then Captain McMaster led an American armor calvary troop that was sent to recon the enemy, but was powerful enough to exploit the advantage they had when they found the enemy, wiping them off the map with losses, is a clear indicator you are onto something with your belief about future recon missions.

[@marcovizzari3008]

I'm italian, i'm almost a fanatic and i have to correct you: usa used a centauro to develop striker, so, striker is the american version of centauro

[@swarnaprabhat9453]

Yes u r right

[@gordonlawrence1448]

Amongst allies this sort of testing always goes on. I used to have an Italian Tankie friend who had worked on Leopards, Challengers, Cheiftains, and all sorts. There is a huge amount of cross training. The Italian Army has Challenger II certifies crews. The British Army has Leopard certified crews, The Americans have a handful of crews certified for both. Everyone evaluates everyones kit.

[@lucianorosarelli-xr5lr]

e sono riusciti a fare il peggio come con le fremm e le loro constallation class non imparano nulla

[@sasquatchishere7453]

Another great video. Thank you and keep up the excellent work!

[@pergamonrecordings]

It would be interesting to combine this technical analysis with geographic features of Italy, which are really quite specific. One can identify specific hotspots (most of which concern easily defensible passes or river-crossings) which control the main arteries and crosspoints of Italy's overal roadsystem --itself emphasizing the centrality of Rome. This is true from the time of ancient Rome, actually. Take Mount Cassino guarding the entrances to the Liri and Rapido valleys, the Futa and Giogo passes in the North, The Alpine passes even further North as well as the lower stream crossings of the Sangno, Trigno, Biterno and Ofanto rivers along the eastern route (from south to north). All theatres of battle in ancient and modern times. This would seem to make this vehicle concept very suitable for Italian defensive demands. As you noted, it is capable of reconnaisance, firesupport and so called "territorial defense tasks". I would say that the latter term is basically a term for the first two combined in a national defence situation. It would be a very cost effective vehicle for defending retreating and recovering using the landscape to its advantage at places just mentioned. From such advantagous positions the vehicle could likely ward off considerable tank power (or at least be a significant contribution to efforts to do so) with a serious reduction of costs.

[@PancitKanton]

Hopefully Philippines would consider this such beautiful wheeled tank.

[@guitarsword1]

Really impressive. Beautiful design.

[@bert26a]

In regards to tracked vehicles I think you'll be starting to see more of the lighter vehicles equipped with rubber tracks. The Canadian Army has successfully put rubber tracks on their M-113 based vehicles currently in service and a version of the CV-90 called the Armadillo has been seen with rubber tracks as well. The maintenance is much lower with them, they ride smoother, and can last longer than conventional steel tank tracks.

[@2LaneTraveler]

8-wheeled fighting vehicles like this and the South African Rooikat always make me think of the patrol tanks from Masamune Shirow's "Dominion: Tank Police".

[@eb3279]

The Italians make some gorgeous vehicles. Something amazing about those folks. This looks so much cooler than the LAV, Stryker, AMX-10 RC, and so on.

[@jccalvente]

Very good quality italian product. greetings from Spain

[@theq4602]

Man I'd ride that thing into battle over any tracked tank. In battle track repair is HELL. a tire change can be done in seconds if you know what you are doing. That plus high range, mobility (probably better than an Abrams) and speed makes it really cool.

[@albertoamoruso7711]

Matsimus Italy is designing the Ariete C2, will you do a review when it comes out?

[@marcovizzari3008]

stiamo facendo un aggiornamento di "mezza vita" che consentirà di prolungare il servizio del c1 fino agli anno '30, poi credo ma soprattutto spero, verrà creato il c2

[@albertoamoruso7711]

@@marcovizzari3008 Lo so, ma l'aggiornamento di mezza vita include comunque delle modifiche sostanziali e credo che alla fine lo chiameranno C2. Ovviamente ben diverso da quella meraviglia mostrata all'Eurosatory 2002

[@diegoyuiop]

@@marcovizzari3008 io credo si farà l'euro tank

[@marcovizzari3008]

@@diegoyuiop io spero di no, c'è già troppa europa per i miei gusti

[@charliebowman785]

Beautiful machine, weird and as Matsimus said, more tank than whatever might be. Watching the vehicle while cornering, it feels like is going to tip over under the weight of its turret.

[@blue280485]

Brilliant 👍 LWT : Light Wheeled Tank Perfect for Indian Army Light Tank requirements 🙂🙏

[@t.s.p1864]

They will not even test such platforms they will buy s2 spurt mark my words. Non sense MOD. And requirement of IA.

[@Karelwolfpup]

I do like the slight return to armoured scouts like the Wehrmacht had: a lot of 8 rads with autocannons, short barreled infantry support guns and even longer anti-tank ability. Always felt that scout troops should have more firepower when conducting recon by fire, and if you can shoot and scoot and spook an MBT crew or two even better. This certainly seems nice for an RRF or recon/recon support role.

[@wumbologytm4466]

This and the M1128 MGS are absolutely amazing vehicles

[@generalmelon1776]

The Italians really got it good

[@paulwallis7586]

105kmh top speed is pretty good, and that suspension isn't rattling about at all. Could probably make quite a mess of any type of vehicle, if not a "tank destroyer", too. Not amphibious, perhaps, but looks tall enough to wade to some extent.

[@raymondhollingsworth3643]

A very nice looking system!

[@domdegood5376]

I sent the sketch of this vehicle to Otto Melara in early 80s.

[@fabriziodini5806]

You serious?

[@fabriziodini5806]

You are serious, you'r Chanel Is All about mechinac design eficency and improvements, Is the design for the centauro 40 years old?

[@terminusest5902]

My favourite combat vehicle. The new model looks cool. Reconnaissance should be its main role. Its wheels can cover lots of ground with relatively low operating costs compared to tracked vehicles. With its mobility it can deploy quickly and gain the best ground and could also be effective in deep penetration or flanking maneuvers. Obviously not for slogging with modern MBTs but can be an effective armor destroyer if used effectively, Modern active armor can improve its survivability. Also should be very capable of direct fire support for infantry. A 105mm gun could be useful for fire support. Such as with Cockeril 105mm turrets. Potentially with indirect fire support. Or a 120mm breach loaded mortar system. Effective mobile artillery. There is a 155mm howitzer version but it is large. There is also a 76mm gun that can be used on airborne targets. It could damage ground targets as well. And they can work with the armored personnel carrier version. An AMOS 120mm mortar could provide deadly direct or indirect fire. Get to the battlefield first and carrying heavy firepower. There is no missile armed tank destroyer but the APC version can carry some missiles. Iveco has an amphibious APC but it is a different vehicle with different hull and systems. The US marines will be using this vehicle in future for amphibious operations. If the project is managed effectively and they do not add equipment that is not fully developed.

[@saviour1175]

Christ that thing is awesome. immediately reminded me of the LAV-25. surprised I've never seen it before

[@noslak2537]

Awesome design but good only for defensive purposes . The turret looks really heavy and to add more armor protection might compromise its mobility. I think 105 is the best option for this awesome LFV . Good job to the Italians

[@thecommentaryking]

The vehicle alone weights 30 tons, while the add on protection is 1,5 tons. The vehicle was designed with the protection kit already in mind and according to Leonardo there will be no significat decrease of mobility

[@thasterthaster9711]

Actually the Americans copied the Centauro to build the Striker

[@jonny2954]

Actually the Stryker wasn't developed in the US. It's a swiss Mowag Piranha which is much older than the Centauro.

[@jonny2954]

Now you're just making up stuff. Source on that please? The Stryker is based on the Canadian LAV III, which is again based upon the swiss MOWAG Piranha IIIH. The chassis of all vehicles is identical. Italy or the Centauro were not involved by any means. Perhaps the Centauro was presented in the evaluation process like many other 8x8s, but it has nothing to do with the Stryker.

[@jonny2954]

It says they were used for the CREWS to acquire more experience with wheeled armored fire support vehicles, but NOT that they used anything of it for the Stryker. The Stryker is 1:1 a license build LAV III, no parts or influence from the Centauro. Get your sources straight. But if you are so sure about it, tell me, what on the Stryker originates from the Centauro? Armor? LAV III. Powerpack? LAV III. Hull? LAV III. Drivetrain? LAV III.

[@jonny2954]

'why don't take the LAV III or Mowag Piranha for the CREW to acquire more experience with wheeled AFV?' They did! The Centauro was only ONE of many (including LAV variants) wheeled 8x8 the Army trained with! Let me cite: 'During the 1970’s, the Swiss vehicle manufacturer MOWAG had developed and manufactured a successful 8×8 Light Armoured Vehicle known as the Piranha. This vehicle went on to be licensed built during the late 80’s by GM Defence Canada for the USMC & US Army, designated the LAV-25, but the Army pulled out of the project in 1984. But the US Army still required a new Light Armoured Vehicle. GM Defence Canada went on to develop and licence manufacturer the MOWAG design over several years in different models for the Canadian Army, the most recent being the LAV-III. The LAV-III design was further developed and designated the Stryker and entered service with the US Army in 2002. General Dynamics Land Systems then bought GM Defence Canada in 2003 and are the current manufacturer.' 'In November 2000, the LAV III was selected by the Army as the IAV platform' The Stryker is 1:1 a LAV III. No mention of the Centauro. It maybe would've been better the Centauro was involved because maybe the army didn't end up with a tincan like the Stryker, but it wasn't. Deal with it.

[@jonny2954]

Stryker: www.gdls.com/images/products/stryker_ICV.jpg LAV III: www.gdls.com/images/products/LAV-III-APC.jpg Yeah, really big difference and resemblance of the Centauro there buddy, NOT.

[@TastingwithTonyShow]

In terms of the recce role there's a sound argument for such vehicles to have some real punch. A disciplined enemy that are alert to recce probes won't easily reveal their assets via a disproportionate response to a threat. Put simply if attacked with heavy MGs they aren't going to show where their most valuable firepower is without there being a credible threat. Recce troops with high end firepower can fight for information and force the enemy to respond in a way to show their strength and disposition. One short radio message and recce have succeeded at their mission. They then break contact and speed back to the hide for tea and medals. Meanwhile the enemy is wondering how a ground attack suddenly turned into an MLRS mission that annihilated everything they had in a whole grid square.

[@fetusofetuso2122]

I still think that a smaller vehicle armed with ATGM's will fare better in recce role. The only drawback to the ATGM is the flight time.

[@miskatonic6210]

Sorry, but thinking somebody would start to attack this thing with an MG first to wait for return fire from the gun is naive. In case this thing is seen first, it's pretty much done.

[@thetrashman5381]

It looks so cool... it's like an LAV with a massive tank turret on it

[@kieranjones6273]

I really enjoy your military vehicle reviews. keeps up the good work mate. 🖒

[@Anderson21G]

Love your videos bud, always easy to follow and full of knowledge keep at it and thank you.

[@Redavv]

i would prefer to have more of these than main battle tanks in a modern army, also great for ambush tactics specially for non aggresive countries

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

well eastern MBTs like the T-72 and T-90 have great mobility but i know what you mean. ideally my perfect army would have 3 classes off mobility, ligh, medium and heavy, with light being fast (depending on terrain) wheeled vehicles like most wheeled AFVs and IFVs, then would come medium which would be the new concept of light-medium tanks of about 30-40 tons aswell as tracked IFVS, then would be the proper MBTs of 50-60 tons

[@Whitepandemic]

its super cool! :D

[@jonathan083]

As much as I love having MBT I think Centauro 2 or Type 16 from Japan is most suited for archipelago country like Philippines. Tanks above 40tons will simply destroy the infrastructure. Centauro 2 or Type 16 from Japan.

[@deanfirnatine7814]

CV90 is also a winner

[@davideb.4290]

Oyherwise russian tanks, like te t72b3 and stuff like that

[@arx3516]

Japan can't export weapons and miliyary equipment due to its constitution. Italian companies however can.

[@vecchiogufo4863]

You are right, even tanks of similar weight era not so useful, they are better in off road duties, but have the bad characteristic to destroy streets.

[@andreacriscuolo9750]

his strength is based on agility and speed, the clash between him and a tank is won by whoever hits first, I would prefer to be on a vehicle twice as fast capable of hitting in the race at 110km / h rather than in a slow tank

[@dr.paulwilliam7447]

Pair these 8-wheelers with some lighter craft a mile ahead, and you can very quickly deliver ample firepower for cover and retreat if spotted. Very good vehicle for woody and/or hilly European terrain. Insane to put this on a large scale battlefield as nearby impacting arti shells could shred tyres and/or lighter armoured parts of the craft. So yes, good for hit-and-run or hit-and-route recon!

[@GreenLeafUponTheSky]

How much does this Ferrari cost?

[@alessiostaccioli9151]

Only 11'000'000€ :D

[@dodgedemonsrtx]

@@alessiostaccioli9151 that's expensive,right?

[@kevinyaucheekin1319]

@@dodgedemonsrtx yes in the early/mid 1980s you could buy a fully equipped Type 59 Tank for US $50,000.

[@dodgedemonsrtx]

@@kevinyaucheekin1319 sounds cheap

[@GunsNGames1]

This thing raises some hell in Just Cause 3

[@cosmenogueiradealmeida6062]

Um excelente veículo de combate.

[@USALibertarian]

Tank Destroyer is an application, not a specification or a definition of a unit. That is why it is always hard hard to nail down the term as such.

[@MikeKnell2884]

Another great video Matsimus. I discovered your channel a few weeks back and I'm still catching up with your videos, mate. Love your channel. Especially the videos about the PZH2000 and 2S7 Pion. In depth videos about vehicles other than tanks are greatly appreciated by me. I can't wait for you to do a video on 2S25 Sprut-SD. I don't know if you're familiar with it, but since you're an artillery guy, you might want to check on the soviet self-propelled 240mm mortar 2S4 Tuplan/Tyulpan.

[@DeepVeinThrombonus]

Hey Matsimus, i have an obscure tank for you to take a gander at. The South African defense force operates a tank called the Olifant MK1A/B

[@jesseDelisle]

It is indeed a very impressive vehicle. Certainly seems to outclass most other comparable vehicles. Although watching it handle on the O course it seems to be top heavy and easily tipped over. A mobility kill is still a kill.

[@sohpol]

If possible, please put interior photos of vehicles. Interior pics are the most cool ones :)

[@REgamesplayer]

Well, radio jamming reminds me of a loosing battle. A wire can work just as well in many situations and it is unjammable. Radio jammers are the cute idea, it is useful in limiting enemy its options, but not much outside of that.

[@orkhepaj]

yup , 2m wire to the reciever and that jamming will probabyl fail that far

[@Hortifox_the_gardener]

A lot of these things are cellphones hooked up to a bomb and when the vehicle approaches the (usually) terrorists just call the bomb. Of course they will find ways but most of these things are super primitive and when you have the chance to jam it it would be dumb not to do so.

[@73North265]

The Centauro/Freccia family of AFVs really covers a lot of different roles - Fire support (as here), apc/ifv (Freccia), mortar carrier, command, ambulance, SPAAG, even a 155mm howtizer version and other things. Made me think about all the Boxer mission modules and whether they would make a 120mm fire support module as well - but would, say, the British or german armies want one? Seeing as I’ve not seen anything about one, I guess not. Anyone have an idea as to why not? It sounds useful, but is the view that lighter calibres suffice/it is not worth the cost?

[@iamthebatmanxiii3574]

Hey matsimus, check out the SADF Rooikat. It's an 8x8 "tank" the south African defence force used back in the border war with angola.

[@nicolaihilckmann4677]

SADF was the first to develop this type of a vehicle

[@brandonmcvicker706]

geat vid matsimus!

[@_Matsimus_]

Thanks! :-D

[@xuda7100]

could you do a video on the Stryker MGS or M2A3 Bradley? Please

[@jacobsetser6572]

I think we need to field something like this... “we” as in the US’ needs to use more of something like this... we operate a Stryker with a105mm... def need a 120 against modern and upgrade armoires vehicles. For a military so massive we also operate a little number of them.. in there air we may be dominate but we need the bigger guns to support our troops, tired of seeing Strykers with the 50cal, need atleast a 30 mm fitted on all or most of the Stryker units if were gonna transfer from gourilla to conventional.

[@MPdude237]

The 105mm is lighter, cheaper, and can carry more ammo than a 120mm and is sufficient against everything but MBTs. 120mm does open up anti-tank capabilities but these platforms are not designed to “duke it out” with MBTs, as their armor is not rated for anything more than 14.5mm HMGs, let alone 125mm HEAT or APFSDS rounds, plus they lack the range advantage that ATGMs have, meaning that fighting a tank always means they can return fire. Maybe their mobility can allow them to use hit and run tactics or their lower cost allows them to have more of them, but I do think an ATGM on a technical is a better suit.

[@vecchiogufo4863]

@@MPdude237 105 mm and ATGM are optional on the same turret. 120 mm was clearly asked by some possible clients and by E.I. that want use the Centauro II not alone but in combat groups. A 120 mm gun can fire more lethal hits than an ATGM system, Centauro II is designed for short fire action and fast disengagement.

[@ktiger1766]

Absolutely right,we need it for the airborne inf. Support!👍

[@mortenlund1418]

What if it gets beefed up a bit - maybe to a 10 wheeler, more armour, more engine - same speed and mobility. I think wheels has a great future - because of the mobility. Today there are so much paved roads - the ability to transfer this kind of firepower to the next hotspot maybe 500 km away is valuable.

[@xuda7100]

that is a nice little Italian Tank Destroyer. it actually mounts a bigger gun than its American counterpart the Stryker MGS, which btw matsimus you should do a video on it.

[@Vendell_23]

It looks like my country is going to choose this one as their FSV 105mm version

[@schlirf]

Excellent report, thanks!!

[@NeoEngineCorp]

Great vid, as always.

[@YTMMS-hy6mz]

Finally they got the engine upgrade!

[@CGSRichards]

I'm actually waiting to see if these kind of vehicles can be paired with an active protection system akin to the T-14's. If it lives up to hype and can knockout kinetic energy rounds in addition to RPGs, recoiless rifles, and ATGMs, then these vehicles could conceivably be as or more effective than an MBT in a head on fight. Not to mention between a tenth to half of the cost with greatly reduced complexity.

[@theherger7339]

i got a fever and the only prescription is more tank destroyer. great job. keep'm coming.

[@marvingulanes5577]

Now this is the kind of vehicle the Phil Army needs. light and agile but packs a punch good for the types of terrorists we are having problems with

[@MatoVuc]

considering the number of countries that are basing their future forces on wheeled, to the point of planing to scrap all their tracked inventory like the belgians supposedly, a cannon on wheels like this and the various french vehicles of a similiar conceptare going to be very important in the future.

[@sparviero142]

In my opinion che Centauro is better than the Ariete, The Ariete will have some problem against other modern tanks and (i suppose nothing for sure) is more expensive than a Centauro. Also in Anti-Guerrilla situation where the protection of the centauro is in theory enough to stop enemy weapons is far better a centauro than a tank. you have the firepower and the sufficent protection with a less expensive and more usefull veichle . Nice video!

[@krautmaster7922]

Love your Videos! You forgot to mention the sweetest Engine Sound of all wheeled combat vehicles, especially compared to the two stroke diesels of the LAVs

[@HibikiKano]

Seems similar to the french AMX RC. I always liked that little thing.

[@marcovizzari3008]

centauro is better

[@HibikiKano]

@@marcovizzari3008 probably by all SPECS. Aesthetically I still like the AMX rc a bit more, but then again I don't have to use them P:

[@joycegroeneveld4329]

I drove that thing back in kosovo loved the fiat steer inside

[@deanfirnatine7814]

Like it, a winner for Italy

[@dernwine]

Wish we could get some of these to supplement Ajax and the MIV in the new strike brigades....

[@olafweinzer5746]

Even in the Centauro 2 version, the 120mm cannon has no length to speed up the projectile to pierce Leo 2A7 and Abrams SEP. Luckily they are allies.

[@doc7440]

i'm not sure , Centauro 2 use a 120/44 with APFSDS like Leopard 2 ( but leopard2A6-7 use 120/55 ) or Abrams is not short or weakened version.

[@LaminatedLama]

People are saying its gonna be destroyed after one big hit. Of course. Its a recon vehicle not a tank. It just has a big gun to defend itself in a worst case scenario but remember its primarily recon and is not meant to take more than small arms fire.

[@reillybrangan2182]

Another Matsimus overview video, another happy KZbin user :)

[@AdstarAPAD]

The example vehicle was driving around with it's wheels deflated around that demostration ground.. It did seem to be a bit overweight as it is now.. It would be interesting to see it try to go through some serious mud.. Plus if it had all the extra armor addons that would add even more weight.. So i would doubt it's ability in wet conditions with a full armor kit..

[@cosmoray9750]

This will make a great addition to the Canadian military

[@hannes_mlbx9599]

Very nice video mate! please do one on the austrian "Ulan" LAV

[@ronniewhite4392]

The vehicle is well suited for rapid response force, if you wanted to get to a trouble spot in the world in 24hrs. Here's your vehicle.

[@davenewell9137]

As for being early I demand matsimus answer my question. Wine or cheese?

[@_Matsimus_]

both ;-) thanks for watching

[@davenewell9137]

Matsimus Gaming but do you perfer wine or cheese?

[@davenewell9137]

Matsimus Gaming Answers, I demand them!

[@applepie55555]

you usually eat and drink them both lol

[@thegreenguy8837]

both

[@Bob_Lennart]

This makes me think of the AMX 10 which is pretty much the same concept right? And it's been around for a while.

[@juliuscajilog9371]

where do the spent shell cases go? I cannot see anything flying off. In the M1128 stryker, it automatically flies off in the back of the turret.

[@gbladewarrior6884]

I think the AMOS turret modified to be capable of firing the LAHAT ATGM would more versatile.

[@okin_rezresua1715]

Could you perhaps do a video about the new German IFV "Puma"? There's a lot of controversy about it being too heavy, clumsy and so on. Would be nice.

[@throatnotchingtroutzzz6789]

Hey Matsimus. Yes, Saw your video on the Russian T 14 and as it supposedly can shoot missiles out to 12 Km, it seems to me, that something like this could be a counter answer understood that way that if you developed a long range missile for some vehicle like this, it could stay longer behind the frontline and shooting precision hitting missiles at specific targets (T 14's). It could drive fast back and forth and have a good amount of missiles in each vehicle, and in that way be some kind of tank destroyer too if needed. Then one could fill the ordinary shells in, when more ordinary tasks are required of vehicle and gun. ?? Just a thought, I am not and expert or a military person, but I have for some time been thinking now and then, why someone did not develop some vehicle, that could have a lot of these anti tank missiles in them, that Russian tanks can fire out of their gun, and just yes operate them longer behind the front line, to take out specific targets when required and so, like written. It seems to me, that you win some money because you can use a cheaper vehicle without at least some of the really expensive tank technology for a front line fighting MBT, but on the other hand the ammunition will be more expensive, as it is missiles, but some smart economists must make some calculations about that some day should it be. :o) Just a thought as said. Nice videos about military vehicles you make I think.

[@khangkt1721]

Great video so far. But still... waiting for those naval video that you been teasing ;)

[@untypicalbudgie_2950]

Great video Matsimus and can you do a video in the Swedish strv 103 as I believe it's quite a unique piece of equipment .

[@timothyhonner3666]

Hey matsimus, can you consider doing an overview on the Rheinmetall boxer CVR and the BAE amv35? They're both being considered as a replacement for the Australian ASLAV and M113AS4, it would be interesting to get your opinion.

[@MicheleFerrariAX]

great stuff as always mats

[@fauxpastea4169]

I think the future of recon is going to be way more drone-based than using vehicles like this.