Originally Posted by dave angel

echo Dalem's comment.

both - when taken with their crews - are head and shoulders above anything they are ever likely to meet in anger.

Tanks are usually rated on firepower, mobility and protection.
The Chally main armament is very good with plenty of potential to fire future natures. It can also do bombardments because of it's rifled gun. Split ammo is safer but takes longer to load than the M1 one-piece. The M1 smoothbore defeats anything at present but would need a longer barrel to get faster projectiles. Infantry suppression is woeful on the Chally whereas the US have a total of three MGs and may be fitting a remote weapon system for the commander.
The M1 wins hands down on mobility; it has a very powerful and reliable gas turbine which drinks like a fish but just goes on and on. Compare that to the train engine in the Chally. Chally can go much further on a tank of fuel, and even further with it's extra fuel drums.
The bow of the M1 seems invulnerable while the sides are are weak. numerous M1A1 were lost to RPG attacks and i saw a SDG chally2 that took 8 direct RPG hits and a milan hit and still fought on. the only chally lost was due to a blue on blue incident from another chally2 (and that was a mess). Chally has a questionable bow-hence the ERA-but has fabulous add-on Dorchester on the sides. You are more likely to survive a turret strike in the Chally due to it's split ammo stowage and it's electric gun kit; ie no hydraulic fluid to explode.
Hope I haven't missed/misrepresented anything as it's been a while since I've been near a tank.

(Nearly forgot; Chally has a boiling vessel. )


with thanks to ObnoviousJockGit and ArmySurplusSpecial for the technical gubbins....