M1A2 SEPv4 Abrams: The Army's New Super Tank?

The Abrams tank, which has gained significant recognition, has undergone several updates throughout its existence. Its predecessor, the original M1 Abrams, was adopted by the US Army in 1980 and named after the commander of US forces during Vietnam War, General Abrams. The Abrams M1A2 SEPv4, also known as the M1A2D, represents the latest iteration within the Abrams M1A2 tank family. It serves as an upgraded version of the M1A2 Abrams SEPv3, boasting enhanced capabilities and features, and is expected to be the most powerful tank in the Abrams family so far.
Subscribe Now :
/ @military-tv

[@MrShpoulsen]

02:39 This graphic needs to be corrected. The co-axial machine gun is mounted internally in parallel to the main gun. The 12.7 mm HMG is the one on top of the large optic on the roof. The smaller roof-mounted 7.62 mm machine gun is manually operated by the loader seen on the right side of the tank.

[@ericclausen6772]

And you get the cigar it's internal but it's coaxial with the main gun sights and controls

[@christopherhartline1863]

Its not 12.7 mm. It "caliber .50".

[@MrShpoulsen]

@@christopherhartline1863 same shit.

[@DJC_YT]

​@@christopherhartline1863 same thing 12.7x99mm is .50 You're just american

[@coorsbanq]

@@christopherhartline1863 Don't be dumb

[@AZPaul48]

I've built the DECU for this behemoth for about 30 + years now. Got to play in one once.

[@timmcpherson9632]

There's no such thing as a "unstoppable" tank !

[@Slaeowulf]

There is such a thing as armour superiority.

[@ChandranPrema123]

@@Slaeowulf so why are people saying Tanks is useless

[@sebayangaming]

There are no such thing as tank other than water tank

[@Slaeowulf]

@@ChandranPrema123 What people?

[@thefew.theproud.19Kilo]

​@@Slaeowulf The people that never been in combat.

[@I_am_MeriumT]

Did anyone else see the Akatsuki written on the barrel of one of the Abrams?👁️👁️

[@ryangoslingIRL]

?

[@wreckincrew2714]

No tank is "unstoppable" but combine it with a well trained crew and the might of the US Military behind it and yeah it's going to kick some major ass in the future.

[@davidphillips8674]

Composite metal foam armor is changing everything for Tank armor. Same or better protection for 1/3 the weight and it’s good at masking IR signature

[@amiradler7666]

Army should consider countermeasures for mines. What's the use of a tank that can't go through mine fields. No tank can resist countless mines

[@Slaeowulf]

What gave you the impression this was not considered?

[@nationalsniper5413]

There are special mine plows for tanks.

[@T_81535]

Utube m1 assault breacher vehicle

[@tomsmith2587]

Watching the "jack in the box" effect of Russian tanks when hit makes me realize that even if an Abrams is knocked out, that experienced crew survives to fight another day. The Russians have no experienced crews because getting hit is unsurvivable.

[@mou5007]

Abrams published 🤮🤮🤮🤮👎👎👎👎👎

[@mou5007]

Resist in Libya and irak

[@thefew.theproud.19Kilo]

​@@mou5007 We (as in the US) did fine when it comes to the Abrams in both. It's when we took the armor off and sold them to other people who thinks a tank is a single unit that don't know how to use them is when they got destroyed. Kinda like every one of Russias top made tanks have been destroyed for the same reason. Can Any tank be destroyed, Sure. But Unlike Iraq, Lib, SA, We don't think a tank should ever be used by itself and Russia learned that the hard way

[@mou5007]

@@thefew.theproud.19Kilo Abrams is nothing for Russia or China you propagande mensonge 🤮🤮👎✍️

[@ericclausen6772]

Good for you

[@ericclausen6772]

When you do that put new tracks on them and make sure everything works and check barrels cause a wore out barrel on machine guns makes it harder to hit your targets quickly and make sure they have been reblued with the machine guns so your crew has something better to do with their time by not having to clean the machine guns and barrels because they don't have bluing on them and it really takes up time for maintenance of your vehicles

[@BMFurball]

3:55 did you seriously show an artillery gun being loaded? I get that a self propelled howitzer looks similar to a tank, but you showed them loading powder behind a 155 round…

[@jasons44]

What's the diff v3 vs v4 ?

[@marcatteberry1361]

Buck Wild. Nice.

[@trankt54155]

One 152 mm artillery round and the super tank will become scrap....

[@UltimaKatana]

His 7.62 and heavy machine gun and coax are labeled in the wrong area. A true tanker spots this easily.

[@highcat2046]

Video is currently outdated, as of yesterday, September 6th, the SEPv4 project was canceled in favor of the M1E3 variant.

[@Broken_dish]

is the abrams x still being worked on obviously usa needs a tank till that tank is ready and it will probably take a decade give or take...i havnt heard anything on it in awhile and have been hearing of this version instead so just curious if anyone knows if that was scraped for this or whats going on

[@GeorgeLerma]

What about protection from drones? That's gotta be a consideration!

[@jdogdarkness]

Any Abrams tankers in this thread? If so, how come some Abrams have those square add ons in the front turrets? In the sloped armor area

[@akro7481]

Those are friend or foe indicators, I think they glow when looked at with Thermal cams (but I forget the details) . The ultimate goal though it's they are a quick point of identification to help prevent friendly fire.

[@Tormentality]

@@Slaeowulf 😂😂

[@T_81535]

They are panels. Can't remember what there made out of but are flimsy and light weight. The section they cover keeps that section of armor slightly cooler then the rest of the slope that is not coverd so when you see it through thermals you'll see two big square dark areas so you can identify it as friendly.

[@calvinheart7263]

Lancet : Hi 😂

[@fridaynight3181]

Iron fist?

[@TaskSwitcherify]

Also equipped with advanced teleportation ability, the tank can evade any enemy. WHAT??

[@ronniefarnsworth6465]

Old, old news !!! Semper Fi 💙💛

[@hermionefinnigan7469]

I don’t think any kind of armored vehicles are “unstoppable”. Today’s modern weapons of war are capable of destroying all of them. The M1 Abrams, Leopard 2, and Challenger 2, are all vulnerable and can be stopped.

[@graymatters7584]

Sounds like a lot of things that can break to me.

[@emre2na]

2:34 wrong

[@avseille7643]

We don’t even have the M1A3 yet 💀🙏

[@chrismair8161]

Abrams fought as a Tank Commander in WW2. He knows how a M4 Sherman was deficient. He was the one who made the U.S. Military stop the 105mm Bored Barrel for the (German) Krupp 120mm smooth bore Cannon. That is not the only advancement he made. He was a Tanker true and through. No MTB is invulnerable and the more gadgets you add only wear and tear everything else. Those who see and shoot first? Will win out. This gun can go well over 3 miles and its round can communicate with Friendlies to guide the round. Who else has that capability?

[@melgross]

I thought they decided to not do a SEP IV.

[@raiderpilot8928]

Say the name Akatsuki on one of the cannons Naruto reference.

[@aurathedraak7909]

Ukraine won't get the American advance protection, because of American law.

[@renumihai5263]

wonder when the Abrams will get an diesel engine ...

[@thefew.theproud.19Kilo]

It can run off diesel

[@SCH292]

@@thefew.theproud.19Kilo Ikr. The OP of the comment is still using old ass sources.

[@nationalsniper5413]

I believe the Australian Abrams has diesel engine.

[@nikolavukicevic9799]

That's what was said for AMX 30,Leopard 2,Challenger 2 tanks and they are burning in Ukraine we haven't seen Abrams in Ukraine

[@kostyantynlafazanov5615]

Chalanger 2 tanks weren't in Ukraine yet

[@Michael-nh8ht]

(DAUM) - Depleted Uranium Armor Mesh is extremely (DTP)-Difficult To Penetrate. It's like shooting an air powered BB pellet gun at a hardened steel plate covered in a tightly & thickly woven Kevlar chest & back body torso law enforcement officer or military soldier body protection armored suit.

[@aliancemd]

“Working on active protection”, does not actually have it? It seems like otherwise it has zero protection against drones, which the Afghans definitely could of afforded if these were available the last time these things saw combat.

[@thesubigang4291]

See how the US keeps improving their Abrams along the way, unlike the russians having several T- Model tanks and the new Armata trying to match the Abrams

[@ericclausen6772]

Yeah it is known it's just you don't know

[@kinsman5807]

It has turned into COD franchise. 10% new 90% same. Yet they call it a new tank!

[@AchwaqKhalid]

1:46 Akatsuki 😂😂😂

[@NaturalTreeHugger]

Well its not the Unz Toppable tank like T74

[@Mediocre_JT]

The coolest feature is that this tank is real and exists, unlike the T-14😂

[@SamuelSchehrer]

T-14s were spotted in Donbas 🤡

[@baltichammer6162]

@@SamuelSchehrer Those were waiting for a tow truck to bring back to the factory.

[@christopherdukes2425]

​@@baltichammer6162 🤣😂🤣😂

[@dreb222]

⁠@@SamuelSchehreroesn’t mean shit if the tank is never to be found in or around combat. Russians and sympathizers love to quote “T-14 this, blah blah that”, but in reality it lives more scarcely than the chupacabra. Rare, disputable sightings here or there, but we can actually see the damage the chupacabra leaves behind unlike the T-14.

[@algabo9200]

Это можно исправить, отправьте на Украину, но этого не сделали, чтобы горели других стран танки, ничего личного, бизнес 👏

[@nikkotan2840]

They said Tanks are now becoming obsolete, then let me say those people are dumb and have zero experience in war. How can they say that Tanks are not needed on the Battlefield?

[@nationalsniper5413]

True. Its like saying combat jets are obsolete because there are SAMs. The reason there are a lot of anti-tank weapons is because the tank is such an effective and dangerous weapon system. Same with SAMs. And there will always be periods in which either protection or missiles have the upper hand compared to tanks and combat jets. Like all weapon systems you have to use them properly. If you are just rushing into well defended areas without combined arms like Russians did you are going to lose a lot. But if you use combined arms like US does you won't. US Thunder Runs in Bagdad proved that even in its most vulnerable area (urban area) tanks are very effective and survivable. What is proven in practice is that light vehicles and light infantry are to vulnerable to pretty much everything. Drones are overrated. You can jam the signal between drone and operator and anti-drone systems are going to be deployed on tank upgrades or new designs.

[@markj2726]

Is this the abrams X ??

[@thatonelocalauthority2809]

No.

[@ttttoasty950]

Abrams is the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD HANDS DOWN!

[@NZobservatory]

*The M1 Abrams is without a doubt the most effective MBT of the modern era. Perhaps of **_any_** era.*

[@andreyt7687]

Is this the Abrams who can be destroyed by an old RPG-7 and does not know how to drive where there is no asphalt?

[@NZobservatory]

@@andreyt7687 No Olga, it’s the Abrams that has been destroying every russian tank since 1991.

[@andreyt7687]

@@NZobservatoryYou are lier. Abrams did not destroy a single Russian tank. And the fact that the Abrams get stuck in the mud is a fact. And they are destroyed by old grenade launchers, this is a fact.

[@NZobservatory]

@@andreyt7687 lol comrade. The Abrams destroyed *everything.* It made russia’s garbage tanks look like broken toys.

[@andreyt7687]

@@NZobservatory Abrams is useless shit. It gets stuck in the mud, is too complicated and breaks down at every step.

[@Tormentality]

after spending one's young adulthood in a tank, is the rest of life extremely boring?

[@user-bd2ff6tg1n]

Лартака сток бунданка рок 👍 фияркута бонза бугазотка тутка сияние бухта

[@jdogdarkness]

Unfortunately the US is pawning off its near obsolete 1980s Abrams to Ukraine, while saying "US provides modern tanks to replace outdated soviet era tanks, with US-soviet Era tanks lol

[@epistte]

Those tanks are still superior to the T80/T-90s.

[@bugstomper4670]

Those Russian artillery shells, if they make a direct hit, will be hitting this tank, from the top, where all tanks have less armour.

[@destarizani089]

08.9.0

[@andreyt7687]

Is this the Abrams who can be destroyed by an old RPG-7 and does not know how to drive where there is no asphalt?

[@GOD719]

No. There is no Abrams that can be destroyed by an rpg7 and none has. And the abrams can drive mostly everywhere. From the soft sands of iraq, the mud of Europe, and the snow of the arctic circle. There is plenty of videos of Abrams being hit by atgms. STRONGER than rpg7 and shrugging them off

[@andreyt7687]

@@GOD719 There are many videos online of Abrams getting stuck in the mud. And how Abrams is destroyed by rpg-7. You're a liar.

[@CatIsNotInterested]

Nah, you mean Older Abrams like M1A1

[@fridaynight3181]

​@@andreyt7687rpg 7 can't destroy Abrams. In fact,​Abrams​can took it in the face and survive. May be you are seeing the blow out panels of old M1s burning and think tank is destroyed. No, it's a safe system for crew. Tank is repairable as only the blow out panels damaged.

[@amazeus1980]

It is simply “amazing”how human civilisation is fascinated with equipment that destroys human civilisation! Dunno if I should cry or laugh…

[@markarnez8983]

And yet you watched and committed on the video lol.

[@hansblitz7770]

Discarding "SABBAT"

[@llyrs]

A lot of this info is very incorrect 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@trankt54155]

Send this "super tank" to Ukraine and we will know soon enough how super it is.....

[@IanRoyFCabel]

Akatsuki weeb confirmed 🤣

[@ericclausen6772]

It's going to be a killer all right

[@nimay13]

Ukraine war tells us one thing. No armor is invincible.

[@PicklePro]

y'all cant even make the animations correct 🤣

[@user-bd2ff6tg1n]

Каркустка страктакта барзактория бакраска бурструкт фиграния фидачкот

[@DayneJAH333]

The best country in the world and we can't build a new tank. Nobody do it better than Russia. The Armata

[@Theinitedstatesofamerics12345]

Fly high t90 turret just like 911

[@GeorgeLerma]

lol, the Armata sucks

[@SamuelSchehrer]

Still no auto loader?!

[@nationalsniper5413]

That is why it's turret won't fly off high into the sky when hit. ;)

[@somerandomboibackup6086]

@@nationalsniper5413 not really we just don't like autoloaders (for now). Meggitt developed a rather good autoloader for the Abrams but they don't seem to like it

[@GaryBonnell-tl1jp]

But the m1 A2 doesn't have a ejecting turret as good as the Russian tanks and the Russian tanks cost less and the Russians have trained cosmaunauts manning their tanks so there t

[@user-bd2ff6tg1n]

Фриянка кульбароса букта стика рубикон лояска кафритакустка бундароса кухкаруска

[@freerbt4839]

Its is not new! Just an upgrade.... SMH

[@danielsamson9505]

it is at the foot of the wall that we see the mason... for the moment the NATO equipment has not made the difference... a lot of marketing, few results...

[@benjaminschmidt8255]

🇺🇸💪❤

[@geeussery8849]

Why are they sending 40to50 year old tech in a handful of units to Ukraine instead of the more modern ones?

[@SamuelSchehrer]

They don’t want new US tech in the hands of Russia, and they know they are just going to get blown up by lancet drones

[@somerandomboibackup6086]

Because those 40 years old tech are better than even 20 years old Russian tech

[@srijanme]

Lol Ukrainian Abrams flying in orbit beg to differ 😂😂😂😂

[@ericknemo997]

Thelma

[@Defort-jd8xe]

Can you hear that? Its the actor cocaine clown in Ukraine screaming "GIMMEEEEEEEEE"

[@dannywaller4397]

We wont give them even close to this tank it's just the basic like we let Saudi Arabia build

[@nationalsniper5413]

@@dannywaller4397 But still better than anything Russia has. Armor wise probably comparable to Challenger 2 or Leopard A7.

[@johnpilesky8538]

I’m sorry but the world has moved on. You can see it in the war going on that anything and be taken out with a missile now. And for our tanks, why put jet motor in the tank way too much maintenance way too much fuel cost.

[@warfootage7890]

"Unstoppable" Anti tank mine and anti tank missile left from existence 😢

[@thatonelocalauthority2809]

your point being?

[@matthewlewis-zw3tf]

Sorry, it can have it's frontal armor penetrared by $1000 shoulder fired ATMs.

[@nationalsniper5413]

It can't. Only the rear and top.

[@matthewlewis-zw3tf]

@@nationalsniper5413 It was done in Lebanon, 2006!!!! By Hezbollah fighters. Rpg-29 and more modern. Double tandem warheads. Newer Russian ATGMs have triple tandem warheads...

[@matthewlewis-zw3tf]

@nationalsniper5413 M1A2 has obsolete heavy depleted uranium Armour. More vulnerable than you may believe. U.S. soldiers were burned inside when frontal Armour was penetrated by Rpg-29 in Lebanon, 2006. Wasn't on the news here.... You can verify online...

[@somerandomboibackup6086]

OMG SHOULDER FIRED ATMs?????? FREE MONEY LAUNCHED FROM SHOULDERS??? 🤑🤑🤑💸

[@somerandomboibackup6086]

@@matthewlewis-zw3tf tandem warheads have next to nothing effect on non-ERA armor

[@nationalsniper5413]

I love the Abrams but I think it is time for a completely new MBT. There is a limit to how far you can upgrade a vehicle. At some point you need to design something completely new. Like for instance the German K-51 Panther. There is a reason that the USAF flies F-22 and F-35 instead of upgraded F-15 and F-16.

[@Jknight416]

That’s easier said than done. It cost cost to develop a brand new MBT. And it’s uncertain whether a brand MBT is worth the money or not unless it tastes actual combat. Besides, the Abrams already has a strong proven track record in battle. It’s unlikely that it’ll need a brand new replacement anytime soon. If it were to get replaced, it’ll likely be in the form of a newer Abrams tank variant built to suit the needs of the modern battlefields like the Abrams-X design.

[@ameritoast5174]

well the airforce is upgrading their F-15s to the F-15EX version and they are working on making it so they can fly F-16s autonomously. Also they are working on a design for a new tank but that's a few years away. Other platforms were deemed to need a new vehicle first. The first was the JLTV to replace the humvee, which is operational. The AMPV to replace the M113 is also about to come out. The M10 Booker light tank or MPF depending how you want to call it is starting production. Next is the Bradley replacement with the OMFV, the winner should be picked out this year. A new light transport has just been picked which is the V280 Valor and then theres teh new light attack helicopter which should see a winner chosen I believe this year as well. After that I think the MBT will be next. Army has alot of modernization projects recently and the tank has been pushed back because even though its old, its still one of the best tanks out there today.

[@dexterlove6555]

Don't you need jet fuel. LMAO. MOTHER RUSSIA RISING

[@nationalsniper5413]

Gas turbine engine. Just like Russian T-80. Except that Abrams turret won't blow off when hit.

[@dexterlove6555]

@@nationalsniper5413 You silly Americans won't fight Russia in Ukraine. America talks a big game, but no action. Continue to fight your proxy wars. At some point you Americans will have to use your own blood. The world will be waiting, America. MOTHER RUSSIA RISING

[@somerandomboibackup6086]

Fact: Turbine engines can run on diesel

[@user-bd2ff6tg1n]

Крагунана бракта дриктоскт кубланкт гизания гранкта каринакт габланкта графинкта

[@Coinz8]

26 feet long and 12 feet wide 66 tons of American pride.

[@user-bd2ff6tg1n]

Гуфиниякта гадраст

[@nattygsbord]

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just have upgraded a Sherman M4a2E8 than building an Abrams tank that you still need to upgrade?

[@36thulsterdiv72]

Yeah because a 76mm Sherman is going to penetrate the armour on a modern MBT

[@nattygsbord]

@@36thulsterdiv72 I said an upgraded Sherman 🙄Yugoslavia did put a big long 122mm gun on their shermans. So why can't we then put a 120mm gun on it that can fire the same ammunition as M1 Abrams and Leopard2?

[@Shining237]

A money pit on an impractical tank

[@miranda50]

We are improving our tanks, while Russia’s tank force is being attrited, losing their best tanks and crews. Russia always has a bigger tank force, now ours is actually bigger

[@danielsamson9505]

🤣

[@christopherbecker8703]

The army leadership is still too dimwitted to replace the fuel guzzling turbine engine. If the U.S. Army ever faces a near peer adversary in battle, the Abrams will get slaughtered once the enemy gets to the vast fleet of fuel trucks needed to keep the M1s running and the tanks start to run out of fuel. The whole situation is ridiculous given that a 1500 hp diesel powerpack has already been developed and could replace the achilles heal of the M1, its fuel guzzling turbine. Every general officer associated with this program should be drummed out of the Army.

[@T_81535]

So your what? A five star general or something?

[@xylem2202]

Diesel engines definitely have their own set of advantages but the turbine engine has: Great Power to weight ratio ( They weigh a lot less than diesel engines of the same power.) More reliability in terms of not having as many mechanical problems, enables high mobility, fuel flexibility, as well as quit operating sounds and no visible fumes.

[@user-bd2ff6tg1n]

Гардрикта мугазот боракта каскрот ияхта гуфраниякта гудракт

[@user-bd2ff6tg1n]

Гугразия мордокрет гудрафолт ияска

[@user-su9sr3sk4u]

🤣🤣🤣

[@mosesgutierrez-qk3ze]

More scrap metal for Ukraine the Abram tank

[@eagle7757]

Believe in Jesus Christ and you will have Everlasting Life, to believe in someone, you are convinced that they are true. If you Believe that Jesus is the Christ, you will be Saved by Grace Alone through Faith Alone in Jesus Christ Alone, 1 John 5:1, John 11:20-27, John 3:16, KJV. Once you are Saved, you are always Saved, John 6:37, KJV....

[@user-bd2ff6tg1n]

Дранкта гулизгат кадраскта гублана лугарот бензикта кугланкта лигазот трикдрастка

[@jeanettewest]

This tank would be worthless in Ukraine; tracks are too slim, pads on tracks, would sink to be entrapped in the mud. Note the Russians use tracks that are wide and absolutely gnarly for super traction, they know what they are up against (the mud).

[@chasemccall391]

Thing is this tank was designed to fight Russia in these areas

[@jeanettewest]

@@chasemccall391 During summer, fall and winter. Ukrainian military criticizing German 155mm howitzer due to mobility issues it shares same track design if not same track as Abram.

[@jonny2954]

Extremely stupid comment. Both Leopard 2 and Abrams actually use wider tracks than the T-90. The T-90 is on 580 mm tracks, the Leopard 2 and Abrams on 635 mm tracks. They just seem wider on Russian tanks because the tanks are much smaller. The Leopard 2 and Abrams actually have lower ground pressure than a T-90. They are heavier but have the mentioned wider tracks and are substantially longer vehicles, increasing ground touching track area even more. The ground pressure of a T-90 is 0.94 kg/cm2, the ground pressure of a Leopard 2A6 is 0.83 kg/cm². The power/weight ratio of the Leopard 2 and Abrams is higher than a T-90 aswell, even the latest T-90MS with a power/weigh ratio of 23.5 hp/tonne is below the power/weight ratio of a Leopard 2A6 with 24.0 hp/tonne. Rubber track pads are mounted for peacetime to protect infrastructure (you know, the thing Russia barely has any of). For combat operations trackpads can be removed/not changed after wear down. It's a myth that Soviet/Russian tanks are more mobile than their NATO counterparts. Not to mention close to non-existing reversing speeds on eastern designs. Ukraine mentioned the PHZ 2000 had comparably high maintenance because it also delivered order of magnitudes more ordnance than any other system in Ukraine (or in the world by that metric). Mobility was not criticised, it was moreover praised because it was the fastest shoot-and-scoot capable system in their inventory.

[@jeanettewest]

@@jonny2954 L'il Jonny angry much?

[@jonny2954]

@@jeanettewest Stating facts.

[@makegaminggreatagain3907]

I'll never understand why the US opted for the Honeywell gas-turbine engine over the Continental V12 twin turbo. The gas-turbine engine is prone to overheating, depending on the AO, high-cost maintenance, and if fielded along side, Challengers, Leopards and Merkava's, Avgas is not interchangeable with diesel, nor can you fire smooth bore projectiles from a rifled barrel Vice/Verses. US Military: Have we to told you about the M1AX? Tank Enthusiasts: Yes, it is trash.

[@xylem2202]

The diesel and gas turbine topic is definitely a hot topic but the advantages of the turbine engine are: High power to weight ratio, more mechanical reliability, fuel flexibility, enables high mobility, quiet operating sounds and no visible exhaust.

[@nipunchandrawansa9014]

BIG NATO tanks can't fight in Spring, Autumn.or winter in Ukraine.

[@nationalsniper5413]

So why does Ukraine want them so much? These tanks were designed to fight the Russians in Europa so they were build for that battleground.

[@nipunchandrawansa9014]

@@nationalsniper5413 because what other choices do they have ?

[@somerandomboibackup6086]

Elaborate?

[@Spaceballz123]

LoL M1 Abrams no match against Russian T54/55 😂

[@angelopatterson226]

You're screwy if you believe that 😅

[@joaopaulopeluzio4195]

Yeah, probably because the Bradleys would get them first, just like Gulf War

[@Mediocre_JT]

​@@joaopaulopeluzio4195 Yeah, those TOW missiles are no joke. Main reason why the Bradley destroyed more tanks in the Gulf War than the Abrams I believe. I hope we get to see those two in action working together.

[@itskeagan3004]

You are high

[@Spaceballz123]

Russian tanks are superior because Russian turrets can fly 100 feet in the air 🤣

[@wst8340]

Too big,gas hog and high maintenance

[@aliahmed-kv5nt]

Haven't you seen what happened to this tank in Iraq? if the Iraqi can destroyed it then imagen what the Russians would do it! wait until this tank meet with Kornet Missile or 9P157 Khrizantema-S Self Anti-tank missile system.

[@chasemccall391]

Lmao ok

[@madalinradion]

If Mr paralel reality here says so then it must be true

[@nationalsniper5413]

Very few were actually lost. Only by 500km IEDs. Russian tanks are destroyed by far far less because they have weak armor and ammo in crew compartment. Russian tank turrets make more flying hours than the Russian Air Force. Russian Air Force still doesn't have air superiority over Ukraine against much weaker country. Russian Army unable to defeat much smaller Army in war.