"The Abrams was made with the T72 in mind, the American tank needed to counter the new Soviet machine."
No it wasn't. It was made with the T SERIES in mind. It was designed to outpunch and outarmor the T series while at the same time providing tremendous mobility.
"After field tests its British 105mm L7 (M68) gun proved to be ineffective against frontal armour of the Soviet T72 tank."
USMC M-60A3TTS tanks using the 105mm gun had no problems destroying Iraqi T-72's in the Gulf. The 120mm gun was introduced to counter the T-80.
"That is how the M1A1 was born, the German Rheinmetal main gun which was used on the Leopard 2 tank. The M1A1 proved to be quite expensive especially with its new ballitic computer and other electronic appliances, probably too expensive to be produced in large numbers in a full scale war with the Soviet Union."
Since the United States Army and Marine Corps have over 3,000 M-1A1's and newer models, i guess your statement here is just plain stupid, eh?
"The M1A2 was developed after the Cold War was over and the need for a tank that could be easily mass produced in a large scale war was no longer needed."
The M-1A2 was always planned as a legacy improvement over the earlier models. It's design has nothing to do with the end of the cold war.
"The M1A2 got a new ballistic computer new armour etc.
But that made it too heavy, it is not only some 17 tonnes heavier than the T80 but it is also more cumbersome. It has a great difficulty of negotiating rivers on pontoon bridges."
The M-1A2 is still one of the most capable manuever warfare tanks ever devised. If you think otherwise, you are just deluding yourself. Tell me, how far and how fast did the US 3/7 Cavalry race against continuous opposition?
3/7 blasted thier way right through the forward elements of the Medina RGFC division so effectively they got themselves surrounded.
So they proceeded to stave off numerous counter attacks while holding their objective until relieved. US 3/7 tankers PROVED the excellence of the M-1A1HA design.
"It cannot swim under water unlike the T80."
Niether can a T-80. LOL.....but you're welcome to try.
"The gas turbine engine of the M1A2 (which was copied from the T80's gas turbine engine) unlike its Soviet counterpart proved to be ineffective in desert enironments. "
Um, no it wasn't copied, and um, no it wasn't ineffective in the desert.
The M-1 prototype was introduced in 1976....the T-80 in well, 1980.
"The Chobham armour of the M1A2 is not undefeatable as many of you think, in this Gulf War many M1A2's were disabled by RPG's, and some were destroyed by RPG's."
"Consequently one might think what damage would a 125mm T 80 round do to the armour of the M1A2. It would do great damage."
Ummm, not in real combat it hasn't. It's been totally ineffective. Sorry cuz.
"When Germany was reunified, the Bundeswehr fired T72 rounds at their Leopard 2's which has Chobham armour and it proved to be ineffective in stopping 125mm Soviet rounds."
Errr, wrong again. It was the Leo II's shooting at the T-72's.
LOL, the US Army has had T-72's since the late 70's.
"So my opinion is that the T80U is a better tank than the M1A2 because of the following reasons:"
"1. It is more mobile and agile than the M1A2, it is also faster."
The M-1 will hit 70mph with the governer disabled.
"2. It will outrange the M1A2 with a "Kobra" ATGM at the range of 5000km, the M1A2 would not hit anything up to the range of atleast 3000m."
The T-80 can't see 5000m, it can't even see 2000m at night.
The M-1A2SEP can easily engage targets beyond 3500m at night.
"3. It's engine is much more reliable than the M1A2."
LOL! That's just funny! Russian engines BLOW!
"4. It can negotiate rivers up to 5 meters deep while the Abrams can't."
Yeah, in the press brochures.....don't try that yourself at home sonny.
"5. It has a higher rate of fire because of the automatic loader, unlike the Abrams which doesnt even have a Rate of Fire because that depends on the loader and his training."
The loader is a huge advantadge to the Abrams. This just shows how totally clueless you are. LOL.....troll.
"6. The T80 is cheaper and easier to mass produce."
Yeah, cause it's a piece of shit.
"7. The fire control systems of the T80 are more reliable in extreme cold and extreme hot environments."
LOL, based on um, what facts?
"8. The T80 has a further range."
Um, gun or driving? Gun, no. Driving, not farther than the A2SEP.
"9. The T80 has a sleeker profile making it a harder target to hit than the Abrams. "
Cause the T80 isn't a MBT. It's a MEDIUM tank.
"The T80 is an all round better tank than the M1, in a full scale conventional war the T80 would wipe the floor with the Abrams."
It is nearly impossible to contain the laughter at this point....
The reality is that in a conventional war with the US, the AH-64 and A-10 would ravage the (lol) 'mighty' T-80.
All the Abrams would be doing is smashing through to the objective against shattered opposition....