Comparing IFVs: Puma, Lynx, or CV-90 - Which One Stands Out?

[@l.h.3586]

Well, anything German or Swedish is likely better than anything Russian or American.

[@BewareOfTheKraut]

Happy that all three are on our side.

[@VolkerGoller]

Lynx was designed as a potent, but more economical alternative to the puma. It’s flexible and I believe it will have a great future. If true that it is optimized for mass production, that would be a key factor for scaling up production

[@MFitz12]

Puma was designed to meet the requirements of the German army. Lynx was designed as a private venture for export.

[@DBond-bv2oi]

Absolute correct ..the Puma was especially designed for the needs of German Army. The Puma is the perfect IFV for Germany. The Lynx would not be possible without the development of the Puma but the Lynx is more an Allrounder for Export to customize the needs of the customer.

[@84erElessar]

The youngest proven of them is Puma. It left its teething issues behind and in the version VJTF/S1 it is a pure beast! But that does not mean the other two are bad. They are a class of its own and European Nato members could be glad they can rely on 3 of these formidable IFVs!

[@johanneswunsche5762]

we also have to consider there is a way to get a 105 mm gun on top. cockerill 3105. these can shot anti tank rocket out of his gun Falarick 105mm. therefore there is a way to get these IFV into a Battle Tank destroyer. Tank vs IFV must not ber a problem with only 2 Rockets also other typs of Cannon can be fired from this... I don´t thing Puma is limited on 30mm anymore

[@84erElessar]

@ but before considering putting a Cockerill 30105 on top of a Puma, just use a KF41- there are already Plans to do so. Or there are even FV90120s out there. And tbh- we won‘t see German Pumas refit with a 105mm- that’s Not the German way. Panzergrenadiere and Tanks work together, so Puma and Leopard build a unit. It would make sense to use it on Boxers and there are already modules for that.

[@Galhara]

For me the Puma and Lynx are a new category, they are Heavy IVF's with the armor protection, and both have a full hunter killer ability. The CV90 has a limited hunter killer ability.

[@gabrielarcari4460]

CV-90 the most versatile...

[@kreathyr8270]

This is just wrong all 3 are modular and can have different guns/ turrets.

[@MathiasGrunditz]

CV90 if I was a infantry soldier 🇸🇪

[@pwa8453]

The Puma is designed and built for the digital battlefield of the future. It’s the hub for a digitalised Infantrygroup. That‘S the future. No doubt. The problems reported are a result of this ambitious objective (compare also e.g. Project Ajax in the UK).

[@Sturmer69]

it will be the cv90. its proven, its versatile, and suited to many different configurations and roles. The new CV90 standard, the dutch version CV9035NL will top them all.

[@hansulrichboning8551]

If you face an enemy like russia, the west has to think in terms of war-economy. My suggestion: agree over some proven systems without any teethening problems and produce them in license and in large numbers all over europe. For an IFV my choice would be the CV90 because its proven and all teethening-problems are cured.The success of the old Bradley shows, that you not always need the newest high-end stuff. In such harsh inviroments like in Ukraine you should keep your weaponry as simple and reliable as possible. Overcomplicated systems will break down in short terms and will become useless on the battlefield.Just my 2cents.

[@BlackWolf9988]

100% agree. Ukraine war has shown that even the best is still very vulnerable to getting destroyed in one hit. It has also shown that it's better to have a bad tank than to not have a tank at all like how both sides are using T-62 and leopard 1. It doesn't need to be good, it just needs to be good enough.

[@DarrenJamiesonJamieson]

Do you're history. Russia are Britain's allies, not The USA (who've been yrying to conquer us since 18th century). You do know that Elvis is dead don't you?

[@vorosjanos77]

the main weapon of the lynx (basic), the same 30mm machine gun as the puma, for programming ammunition... also with a coaxial machine gun, and on the roof a remote-controlled machine gun on a CIWS task. Instead of the ATGM, it can carry drones (loitering ammunition) as needed, the rocket launcher is designed to receive this as well, and the remote control of the drone is integrated in the commander's console... (can also be ordered with other turrets with 35mm Wotan or 50mm Bushmaster machine guns) ... and has an active 360-degree shield, strikeshield APS.

[@KristerWarmenius]

The CV90 all days of the year.

[@sorennilsson9742]

This is a hard choise to do, I would choose the CV 90 because having the same platform for, airdefens, indirect fire, engineering, tank hunter, combat vehicles, combat command is very cost effective.

[@Janoip]

I mean you can Put Air Defense on a Puma/Lynx base as its also modular and the 30/35mm gun is near the Skyranger, Mantis, Mellenium Gun

[@YZF_R6_2020]

And the weight can be decisive in muddy and snow situations like in Ukraine, so the CV90 in the fields and forests, the other two on hard ground and city's

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@YZF_R6_2020 Puma has better specific ground pressure than CV90, so yeah.... so much for CV90 being better on soft grounds

[@SonnyKnutson]

@@cathulhu-q7y Until you go to trials and find that the CV90 is perfectly fine on soft ground and crush it's competition with ease.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@SonnyKnutson until you go into the trials and find out, that CV90 is sitting around 3rd place behind Puma and Lynx and is getting absolutely trashed by Puma in all areas (target aquisition and sensors, main aramaments precision, terrain mobility, protection etc)

[@jonnyhjalmarsson9057]

The CV90 MkIV has better ATGM ( Akeron 5th Gen Missile). There is a good reason that Czechia, and Slovakia choose the cv90 . The 5th Gen CV90 is outstanding

[@cathulhu-q7y]

Akeron has comparable performence to SPIKE LR2

[@MFitz12]

The ATGM (which the customer can specific on any of these vehicles anyway) is NOT why CV90 was chosen in Czechia or Slovakia. My main issues with CV90 are that it was not designed with crew comfort in mind and cannot accommodate modern humans of normal height except in the back 4 seats on some models. Ammunition stowage is also inadequate. Also, at about half the mass of its competitors there is no way it can compare in terms of protection - if that is a requirement for the end user.

[@rossg4788]

​@MFitz12 I heard Sweeden has CV90s with a raised deck level/higher interior height to fix this issue. Some countries have added a rack system over the rear door/ramp. Also, a ramp is far superior to a rear door - hopefully they can be upgraded

[@MFitz12]

@@rossg4788 - Yes. starting with the Swiss vehicles the rear hull is raised 100mm, so 4 people at least of human height can sit without always smashing their head on the roof. Of course, that makes problems for firing over the rear arcs as it eliminates any gun depression.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@MFitz12 the problem with the roof height of CV90 (and other low roof IFV´s) is, that they cant implement proper mine blast protection with decoupled hammok seating. thats why Puma and Lynx are so "tall", so that average central european males (183cm) can be seated in decoupled hammock seating with appropriate mine blast protection

[@klausberfelde-je2ye]

You can compare Lynx and CV90 but Puma is a special design to the explicit needs of the German Bundeswehr. As update and to replace the German Marder and to fit in the A400 M. That's nothing the other two have in mind or being designed for.

[@JS-mb7yo]

The CV90 can be transported with the A400M. And unlike the Puma without dismounting the armour and being operational driving right out of the A400M

[@klausberfelde-je2ye]

@@JS-mb7yo Yes, because CV90 is designed for Swedish needs and an other generation than Puma, less protected at max level than the German cat. As far as I know Puma has 3 protection level that can be added according to mission. Btw, Wiesel can be transported by CH-47 but it wasn't designed for.

[@fredosinsemilla3896]

Which one is cheapest?

[@Galhara]

@@JS-mb7yo The newest MK IV Version has too much weight for the transport with an A400M. From these three is only the Puma transportable with the A400M.

[@RichelieuUnlimited]

The first round of Czech trials has shown the Puma to be on an entirely different level than the CV90 and the Lynx in terms of mobility, _effective_ firepower and protection. It has some teething issues and only six dismounts which limits its export potential, but it’s definitely the one I‘d trust most.

[@jontus9925]

And they chose the CV90!

[@RichelieuUnlimited]

@@jontus9925 Because the Puma only allows for 6 dismounts, which disqualified it from the second round of trials. But they weren’t satisfied with any of the offerings in those, which is hardly surprising, after they had seen what the Puma could do.

[@olivierfaber8478]

7:51 one of our Dutch CV''s. They are getting newest CV90 upgrades even the Swedes havent seen yet.. Intergraded with ze Germans with their stuff .

[@markuskomann3108]

I don't think that there is "the best" IFV. There is only the IFV that matches best the requirements of one army. As requirements differ another IFV might be better for another army.

[@jontus9925]

That was easy, CV90!

[@Sigge82]

cv 90 all day without a doubt

[@alexlanning712]

The South Korean IFV which can be acquired with fewer manufacturer conditions,is mature,and has its own personality,which suits Australia's needs (for example) and isnt as heavy,but still has good survivability characteristics. and the ADF will arm it with the Israeli ATGM

[@gvibration1]

Redbacks for the win.

[@ulfblom1662]

The IFV that Ukraine has chosen to produce themselves against the Orchs is: CV90

[@huriken8899]

And there is a KF51 factory being build in Ukraine

[@klausberfelde-je2ye]

@huriken8899👍...and they are producing KF41 Lynx.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

the reason Ukraine has chosen CV90 is not that it is the best, but that it is good enough and also comparatively simple and cheap. Its 1990s technology, that is today relatively cheap and quick to manufacture. More capable systems like Puma are much more difficult and expensive to produce. Ukraines budget is severely restricted (5b$ pre war budget, today the budged is only sustained through major external funding by germany and other parters)

[@TheBooban]

@@cathulhu-q7yyet cv90 still better than the rest. 8:21 that’s a main battle tank gun on it.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@TheBooban sure, but that's no ifv anymore. Neither is the mortar carrier etc.

[@Musrusticus-]

Unless I’m going to find out something I didn’t know here- why didn’t the UK go for CV90 instead of Ajax?

[@cathulhu-q7y]

because the UK wanted something different than CV90.

[@jonny2954]

Required larger internal volume for specialised recce equipment.

[@BoAndersson-kr5oq]

CV 90 is outstanding

[@James-wn2jo]

Czech and Slovakia CV90 Mark4,Dutch, Sweden and Denmark Mark3c.

[@SyafieHanifah]

CV-90 = suitable for South East Asian countries due to lighter, agile & fast as terrain of South East Asia full of thick rain forest and mountain.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

Puma can do the same stuff in respect to terrain mobility than CV90, even better in fact, as it has less specific ground pressure than CV90 MKIV

[@SyafieHanifah]

@@cathulhu-q7y But Puma is bigger & heavier than CV90. Dimension:- ▪︎ Puma: 7.4 m x 4.0 m, (43 tonne) ▪︎ CV90: 6.8 x 3.2 m, (38 tonne).

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@SyafieHanifah track width and contact lengh are relevant. a lighter tank with a narrower and or shorter track has higher specific ground pressure than a larger heavier tank with wider and longer tracks. specific ground pressure is relevant for how well the vehicle can cross softer grounds. Puma is here clearly in the lead. it has better offroad mobility than cv90.

[@SyafieHanifah]

@@cathulhu-q7y Ok .

[@InventorGadget]

CV90! How is this even a question ⁉️

[@NotUnymous]

A decades old system against the most modern and sold all around the globe... Right... How isnthat even a question 😁

[@Valkyrie737]

The cv90 is combat proven in ukraine

[@gegenschauABOnnieren]

Aber macht ihn das deshalb auch besser?

[@aramisone7198]

But only the Swedish version has the 40mm gun that i know of.

[@Valkyrie737]

@@gegenschauABOnnieren yeah it is superior than the puma

[@Valkyrie737]

@@aramisone7198 I think the tank destroyer version is on the way on its release

[@Rick8191-tv8pg]

Proven to burn from a cheap drone .

[@rxt744]

What about the South Korean Hanwha AS21 Redback? It beat out all three, especially the Lynx in the multi-year Modern IFV Trials in Australia. It's being looked at along with the Lynx as a potential replacement for the aging US M2 Bradley - XM30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle (MICV) program.

[@jonny2954]

It only beat the Lynx, CV90 and Puma weren't offered in the bid.

[@NikolasT-sw9fe]

It lost to the Lynx in the US. So there is that…

[@kentunemo5866]

There is about 15-diffrent versions of the CV 90...

[@pwa8453]

No doubt that LYNX can be as versatile and we will see different versions (e.g. mortar, 120mm gun etc), soon.

[@imakmperfd9120]

IFV Puma❤

[@tyo8663]

Combat record counts for a lot in the CV90. Let the the others come back when they've fought.

[@nils1539]

You are wrong, once again, BAE systems didn’t create the Stridsfordon 90, that is Bofors and Hägglund

[@guygabriel6251]

Lynx is bobcat!

[@marcusulpiustraianus6096]

What about the Namera IFV?

[@herbertbrem4307]

DerPuma Ist nicht schlecht, kann nur 6 Soldaten aufnehmen, schaukelt extrem bei Fahrt/ Gelände. Hatte Elektronik Probleme, Das Allison Getriebe schlecht abgestimmt. Und der Preis ist extrem hoch bis zu 17 Millionen € .Der CV 90 ein sehr guter Schützenpanzer und variablen Kanonen, etwas klein zum günstigen Preis.Dem Lynx gehört die Zukunft, Excel Entry Fzg.Nr.1

[@NikolasT-sw9fe]

Allison Getriebe? You are clueless af. Stop talking if you don‘t know shit

[@To.Si.Ma.]

The Puma shoots anti tank and airburst ahead ammo like the skyranger. - Don t know if the other competitors too. But it is a minimum requiry for IFVs.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

Lynx can be equipped with the same gun (MK30-2/ABM) or a larger caliber gun (wich drasticly limits ammunition carried, just like on CV90). All guns for Lynx can be equipped with the AHEAD System. With CV90 it depends on the gun. The 40mm fires a proprietary air burst ammunition (3P) wich was not designed for land targets but naval use. The smaller caliber guns (35mm and 30mm autocannons) all use the AHEAD system from Rheinmetall. The main problem is, that 35 and 40mm ammunition is so large, that you sacrifice half or more of the ammunition load for not much of an improvement over the 30mm cannon. 35mm and 40mm KE rounds dont have a relevant increase in penetration over 30mm KE rounds nowadays. The HE-Frag Grenades of 35mm and 40mm cannons dont provide such an extensive increase in area of effect lethality, that you couldnt do the same with 2 30mm rounds and still have one spare for the same storage volume of a 40mm round. (1 40mm round takes the same storage volume as 3-3,5 30mm rounds)

[@ioanbota9397]

They are so powerful I like

[@tasman006]

You forgot one the Redback IFV.

[@ingvartorma9789]

Those of you who criticize the CV90 don't know a damn thing. The CV90 is the best of these 3 and it has proven that time and time again. While as I have said before, neither Pumpkin nor Lynx has been involved in war. The CV90 is the oldest but has been modernized and is state of the art. The CV90 is the ONLY one of these 3 that has 5 different versions. Those who know this and those who have used the CV90 in war consider it the world's best in its category Just take the Leopard is the world's best tank thought it was from 1979 and it has been upgraded to the Leopard 2 and it is still the best in the world and the Swedish version is the best Lepoard 2, although in Sweden it is called the tank 122 and has even more modern and better technology .

[@cathulhu-q7y]

the point is, that Leopard 2A8 is also reaching the technical limits of the Leopard 2 plattform and a more extensive redesign like the ARC. 3.0 remote turret on Leopard 2 are going to be implemented to cut weight and give the system more abilities. CV90 is also reaching its maximum technical limits, but those limits in respect to combat weight etc are comparably low, as the vehicle was designed to weight around 25t. now its sitting at 37-40t. Also other technical limitations appear, like the lack of a fully integrated 360° sensor coverage and integrated active protection system, or the comparably low level of passive protection in comparison to more modern IFV´s like Puma, wich can take substantially heavier hits than even the most beefed up CV90 MK IV. Due to threats like ATGM, Loitering Muntions etc evolving further and reaching very high penetration capabilities (and other weapons also are more dangerous now), a high passive protection is mandatory on a modern battlefield. As we can see in ukraine, IFV´s that are only resistant to 30mm cannon fire are no longer up to the task in a high threat peer vs peer battlefield environment. Another major drawback of CV90 is in the CV9040 version. The 40mm is no longer adequate. In the 1990´s the 40mm had a relevant performence advantage over 30mm cannons, this advantage is now so narrow, that it is neglible. At the same time, the ammunition volume is 3 times as large, as a 30x173mm round. The ready ammunition of the 40mm and magazine system is outdated and the large ammunition size reduces carried ammunition in the ready rack and in total. CV9040 carries less than 1/4 of the ready ammunition of a 30mm cannon and less than 40% of the total ammunition load. This drasticly limits combat endurence in prolonged combat situations and requires a much more frequent withdrawl from the line to rearm from onboard stored reserves or if these are exhausted, a withdrawl to a save resupply point. While the CV90 is still a good system, and more modern than many others, its no longer at the leading edge of technology and developement and only getting refitted with these, wich leaves it with compromise solutions. (for example due to powerpack power generation limitations, seating onboard is not really mine blast save, refitted ablative armor increasing combat weight etc)

[@Bo2diddly]

Everyone is talking about ..... thick armor, its electronics and so on. But can the Puma and Lynx drive thru deep snow and thick mud and marsh land like CV90 ? Because if can't get thru it's to no use. Just my two cents😏

[@cathulhu-q7y]

yes Puma can. It was extensively tested under winter conditions in northern norway in 2012 and also in sand desert conditions in saudi arabia. Puma can do the same as CV90 in respect to terrain mobility.

[@Bathtubcrocodile]

Cv90 combines advanced with rugged. Platform is old and reliable in the mud and snow. Tech in the tower is cutting edge. Protection has been proved to be amazing in Ukraine. They also like the STRV 122 Leo 2 variant best of all the MBTs. So right now in 2024. Sweden takes 2 wins.

[@brianpreval5602]

The Bradley is doing very well in Ukraine and is very well liked by their crews and of course are battle proven!

[@BlackWolf9988]

Debatable. There is entire scrapyards of bradleys that are being salvaged for new parts in ukraine. There is also a lot and i mean A LOT of videos of bradleys getting FPV droned.

[@YZF_R6_2020]

@@BlackWolf9988 True, they are targeted by drones as all verhicles, BUT in compare with the ruskies IFV's they are much better ans so the Ukrainian crews are very happy with them. AND the Bradleys who are send are surely NOT the latest versions

[@James-wn2jo]

Soon new cv90 mark 5.

[@ari1981music]

Cv90 🇸🇪👑

[@fmodin1]

CV-90

[@FredrikSahlin-s3c]

The CV90.

[@brianpreval5602]

Cavalry were on horses so why show foot soldiers, surely you could have found some pictures of 'cavalry'

[@Musrusticus-]

Yes, though that said, these are Infantry Fighting Vehicles so why did they mention cavalry?

[@brianpreval5602]

@@Musrusticus- Because the cavalry moved on to IFV's

[@brianpreval5602]

And helicopters!

[@Musrusticus-]

@@brianpreval5602 Did they? In my experience mechanised infantry in the British Army manned their own APC’s and then IFV’s and cavalry Regiments had Light Reconnaissance Vehicles such as Scorpions and Scimitars and, of course, MBT’s.

[@brianpreval5602]

@@Musrusticus- yes!

[@jaripukki267]

CV-90 is only one designed for wet conditions, arctic and basic terrain

[@nagmashot]

crap claim... in Germany it rains 150days a year ;)

[@cathulhu-q7y]

Puma was tested in northern norway in the winter, it performed exceptionally well there.

[@jaripukki267]

@@cathulhu-q7y testing and building one for conditions is different thing

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@jaripukki267 Puma, just like every german armored fighting vehicle of the last 65 years, has been intentionally designed to be able to operate in harsh conditions. They are designed to have high terrain mobility in deep snow, mud, sand etc. A puma, even though it is heavier than other IFV, can operate in these conditions on the same level or better than the competition.

[@TheRisto2]

Let's hope the Puma doesn't have BMW, Audi and Wolkswagen solutions. 😂😂

[@Texo333]

Puma 100%

[@biggerminds523]

In the past, well that idiocy is not going away. Istead we get more stupid and create war so the richest people can be more rich. And the idiots die and idolizing them.

[@tommyandersson5878]

Imposible to answer without prizes!?...

[@cathulhu-q7y]

in fact, Lynx, CV90 and Puma are all about the same unit price when cutting out maintenance, training, simulators etc from the contracts.

[@nightwing.3378]

British Army should have bought the CV90 instead of the stupid and useless Ajax it can carry up 8 infantry soldiers made by Bae Systems and combat proven tested both in Afghanistan by Denmark, Norway and Sweden and Netherlands and in Ukraine against Russia where it has destroyed a T-72 main battle tank it also, comes in different variants like recovery vehicle command and mortar so it's the best in the world and looks awesome so England scrab the Ajax and send it to Ukraine instead and buy more CV90 MKIV better cheaper.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

yeah thats not the case. CV90 can carry only 6 dismounts from MKIII onwards.

[@FredrikSahlin-s3c]

The Puma is ridicoulus expensive.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

not that expensive though. Lynx sits around 10m$ per unit, CV90 MK. IV at 9-10m$, Puma is just 2-3m more expensive per unit. so you pay close to the same per unit CV90 than you would pay for a much more modern and capable system.

[@FredrikSahlin-s3c]

Hard to find perfekt information. The Bundeswehr ordered 50 pumas for 1.087 Bn euros in 2023. But that was with spare parts and 8 spike missile simulators. Do you have another information?@@cathulhu-q7y

[@FredrikSahlin-s3c]

@@cathulhu-q7y I could be wrong but the Bundeswehr ordered 50 for 1.087 Bn EUR in 2023 including spare parts and 8 spike simulators. That is 21.7 millions EUR each. If you take away spare parts and the simulators it's probably close to 20 millions EUR each. The only other source I can find is a price of 18 million dollars a piece. Do you have another source?

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@FredrikSahlin-s3c that's the package price. It also includes repair and maintenance contracts with the manufacturer for standard operation maintenance etc for the next decade and a few other things like spike missiles, ahead ammunition, vehicle simulator systems etc.

[@FredrikSahlin-s3c]

So you mean that the price tag for one Puma is 13.0 million EUR and the maintenance and ammunitions cost per unit is 8 million EUR over 10 years. That sure sounds like a shitty contract.

[@thecurlew7403]

You would go with the lynx it's newer.🇬🇧😑🎆

[@robertluiswilliams7189]

Cost. Maintenance training . 😊

[@deathseraphlife8613]

Gaijin screw all of this tanks in WT

[@DBond-bv2oi]

The CV90 is a good one but an IFV developed in 1980s and also with Updates not in the same class as a Puma or Lynx.

[@NikolasT-sw9fe]

All these swedes that claim their CV90 is the best haha. It‘s not even the best in ukraine right now. Much more talk about the bradley and that‘s some 40+ years vehicle. Who wants to sit in a IFV like the Cv90 with zero armor?

[@ingvartorma9789]

CV90 is clearly superior to both Puma and Lynx, as CV90 has 5 different basic variations and can be changed more and adapted. Then the newest thing they are developing that makes the CV90 even more superior is that they are developing systems that make the CV90 invisible. Neither Pumpa nor Lynx have been used in any battles at all, but only tested, so you don't know how these are in sharp condition. All military from different countries who have experience with CV90 and other tanks of that class raise CV90 to the sky to be the best. Now those who celebrate it are Ukrainian soldiers. So both Pumpkin and Lynx should be sent to Ukraine to see what they can really do in real war.

[@Kurikost_]

Puma and Lynx are newer and more modern tanks. The fact that a tank has already been in a battle doesn't mean much. With that logic...stick with a tank from WW2. Puma and lynx have a better protection and every new gimmick available. E.g. Hardkill and Softkill sytems. In the c protection level, the armor can withstand even a hit from a mtb!

[@ingvartorma9789]

@@Kurikost_ Your statement shows that you know NOTHING about these vehicles. Just because the CV90 model itself is older, the CV90 MK5 is the newest version right through and everything is state-of-the-art with a new weapon system and the best protection for the soldiers. Since, as I said, neither Pumpkin nor Lynx have been in real combat, so there is no data on how they really work. As said, they have only been in tests and not in reality.

[@hatchet646]

@@ingvartorma9789 you are also just throwing around words tho ("CV90 invisible", "best protection for the soldiers")... chill out lmao. These vehicles are top of their class currently, wtf are ppl even arguing for....

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@ingvartorma9789 its a generational leap. CV90 is a late cold war era IFV. Even with its most modern iterations it is still that. (like a modern M2A4 Bradley) Puma and Lynx are a new generation with more capabilities, that cant be retrofitted to older systems. Its like you compare an EF-2000 and an F-35. EF-2000 is a very capable and modern fighter, but F-35 is a new generation of fighter with capabilities you cant retrofit to the EF-2000

[@Taxisch]

You are extremely dumb. Very funny how you write the bible and prove nothing. "Neither Pumpa nor Lynx have been used in any battles at all" Genius, how can you tell that the CV90 is superior in any way, when Puma and Lynx arent even used in battle yet. You literally just described what is written in the bio of the video.

[@Texo333]

Lynx is going to fight in Ukraine soon

[@gustavmeyrink_2.0]

GTK Boxer (wheeled or tracked) but somehow missing here.

[@riasapta4109]

A medieval weapon called caltrops exist and still in use today, very effective for puncturing tires and heavily used by both Ukraine and Russia in Ukraine war, so i think tracked ifv is better than wheeled ifv

[@gustavmeyrink_2.0]

@@riasapta4109 Get tracked Boxers then.

[@VonnieMcIlroy-de7xy]

Lynx💪👍

[@cathulhu-q7y]

Puma. Lynx is speced down export material

[@jontus9925]

Only the CV90 can be transported on European railroads!

[@RichelieuUnlimited]

@@jontus9925 That‘s plain BS. How do you think the Leopards, Challengers and Abrams‘ got to Ukraine. They’re all bigger and heavier than the Lynx and the Puma.

[@capespring]

eventually they all have to 'wear' anti drone cages.

[@asrada7521]

redback...

[@rolyantrauts2304]

Puma & Lynx are just too heavy coming in near the 42 tons of the Leopard 1 A5 that Ukraine prefers as ground pressures stop much terrain being used and limit the vehicles to predictable choke points. Even the CV90 has put on weight as newer models have been introduced, but is sveral tons lighter than the other 2. The Puma has a cost price that no nation is fielding any numbers and even the budget concious Lynx is $9+ per unit, again the sub £9 CV90 is the most cost effective. The Puma and Lynx are dead ducks already if challenging terrain such as the Ukraine and even worse on the islands of the South China sea, is to be design spec. The next gen CV 90 is supposedly employing a hybrid drive that should cut weight and extend range considerabilly. Apart from the crewless turret of the Puma/Lynx they lack any serious advantage over the CV90, where the only buyers of the Puma will be Germany in support of the industry that makes them. There have been quite a few buyers of the Lynx as many current millitaries have a peace time disconnect on what is an effective fighting machine.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

the weight difference between the newer CV90´s and Puma / Lynx are neglible. All 3 sit around 40t. But CV90 was designed for a weight in the upper 20t range, its newest versions are in the 40t range. thats at the upper limits of its capabilities, without major redesign of the whole system. The price per unit for CV90 MK IV, Puma and Lynx are not that different. All sit around 9-10m a piece with Puma being slightly more expensive. With the CV90 MK V unit price will equal or surpass Lynx. Puma was tested in all terrains from polar circle norway in winter to saudi desert. in all regions it surpassed Leopard 2A6 in mobility, agility and offroad speed. Pumas and Lynx advantage over CV90 is, that they are next generation systems, that have higher weigthclasses included in their design, but also their technological packages like extensive sensor suites, networking node, active protection systems etc, so they have growth potential, unlike CV90 wich is reaching its technical limits with the MK V. Modern battlefields, especcially peer vs peer battlefields require heavier armor protection and ALOT of onboard ammunition plus active protection systems and high mine protection. We are no longer having the luxury of thens of thousands of recruits bolstering NATO armies, so we have to keep our professional soldiers alive as long as possible (because professional high skilled soldiers take years to train). Due to this high protection, mobility and stayingpower (high ammunition reserves etc) are vital. In the south china sea, NATO wouldnt use heavy mechanised infantry, but naval infantry or medium and light infantry like Paratroopers or Jäger and striker brigades (motorised medium infantry).

[@rolyantrauts2304]

@@cathulhu-q7y Mk4 CV90 weight bloated to 35 to 37 tonnes, the hybrid drive and mods for the upcoming gen 5 is supposedly back down to 30 tons. The Puma is 43 tons and 6 tons is not insignificant as that equates to 16% of the CV90s weight. The Puma and Lynx lag CV90 tech by quite a number of years where the current Mk4 was put into operation in 2018 and the Mk5 will consolidate that lead whilst the likes of Rhienmetal just play catchup.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@rolyantrauts2304 it's just bolting on new stuff to a 40 years old platform. Sooner than later the expiration date for cv90 is coming

[@rolyantrauts2304]

@@cathulhu-q7y Its a platform that got bloated but is returning to a more effective combat weight, whilst the Puma and Lynx have been designed to be heavier and are now looking like a cluster F of a design. No-one is buying the Puma but Germany, the Lynx has had sales and you have to feel for Hungary and Italy as they purchased when weight and tech requirements has changed.

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@rolyantrauts2304 there is no foreseeable weight loss on cv90, the hybrid drive is still only in discussions. The weight gain on cv90 was armor. Puma was designed for the German army, so yeah no surprise that nobody else buys it. Lynx on the other hand has comparable sales to cv90 but is a much more modern and future proof platform

[@elduderino4983]

How can you call the lynx a young wolf.?!

[@kdubs9111]

Ask the Bradlys currently sitting as trophies in Moscow next to the Abrams, Leopards, and Strikers; just which side has the best IFVs.

[@mikaelkarlsson2724Mikemike]

And? Offcource, they are all better than Russian crap!

[@pwa8453]

Most of the BTRs and BMPs exploded, it’s as simple as that.

[@kdubs9111]

@@pwa8453 You're confusing a Ukrainian BMP (Soviet Era) with a Russian Tigr (Modern Era) because you listen to a television screen every time you don't know what you're looking at.

[@pwa8453]

@@kdubs9111 Troll- accept the facts

[@kdubs9111]

@@pwa8453 Toretsk, Ugladar, and Vulehdar all fell while you called people trolls. You're pathetic at best.

[@NotUnymous]

Puma or Lynx. CV90 is great. But old. The Puma is sold around the globe for a reason (some named him even Lynx ;-))

[@cathulhu-q7y]

Puma and Lynx are different vehicles. Different chassis etc.

[@85daniel]

Nobody will buy the Puma. It's the most expensive IFV ever designed

[@cathulhu-q7y]

its in fact not that expensive and only 2-3m$ more expensive than a current generation CV90. (9-10m for a cv90 MK. IV. vs 12m for a Puma)

[@85daniel]

@@cathulhu-q7y If you buy the puma now it's 17m

[@cathulhu-q7y]

@@85daniel it's not, that's the contract price broken down to unit price. The contract also includes stuff like simulators, extensive maintenence and repair contracts for more than a decade, crew training etc. When bought as just the unit, the price is closer to that of Lynx and cv90

[@lucem.glorifico]

you can discuss until Apocalypse, which of them stands out, but the best is BMP-2 with anti-drone defence. Cheap, mass-produced, deadly and definitely not a expencive unicorns like these white elephants in the world of armored vehicles.

[@mikaelkarlsson2724Mikemike]

And bad protection for the crew. Sorry, crap!

[@lucem.glorifico]

@@mikaelkarlsson2724Mikemike my dear expert, 2000 poor BMP with 30 mm gun and protection against FPV is much better than 20 super expensive IPV, which burning so funny despite the armor and modern electronics. One battalion on CV90 is nothing against a regiment on BMP's, and you can't do anything with this truth of life.

[@mikaelkarlsson2724Mikemike]

@@lucem.glorifico Russian orc?

[@lucem.glorifico]

@@mikaelkarlsson2724Mikemike you know, my dear, I'm really Russian, but I live in the NATO country and against this war. Was b4 and still stay against now. A lot of my friends in Russia suffered and are suffering right now because they're against the war too. But if you allow yourself to say such nasty things to an interlocutor you don't know, it means 2 things: 1) you don't have proper arguments, 2) you're not better than those Russians who call Ukranians defenders "nazis", you are just their twin brother, but just with "right" citizenship. I respect Ukrainians, who are now in trenches, I respect all who are helping them to fight for thei freedom. but I despise such commentators.

[@jontus9925]

Hahaha!

[@Awatarexer]

OK. But what about Polish "Borsuk" infantry vehicle...? 🤔 Did You find it good enough...? 🇵🇱🦾

[@gegenschauABOnnieren]

Polen ist auf jeden Fall klasse!

[@cathulhu-q7y]

not even in production yet. so irrelevant.

[@RichelieuUnlimited]

@@Awatarexer Not to be overly harsh, but the Borsuk is too lightly armored as an IFV for the modern battlefield, more so if you consider how heavy it is despite its comparatively low protection level. The planned heavy version is probably more sensible.