>>>Play War Thunder for FREE! Support my channel and get a premium aircraft, tank or ship and a three day account upgrade as a BONUS: gjn.link/RedEffectWarThunder Also available for free on PlayStation®4 and Xbox One.

remember when sturmpanzers kept killing M1 Abrams when they first came out?

Thanks to everyone that pointed out that M1 didnt use M735, I had info that the projectile was in service, but guess it was wrong. The situation still doesnt change, Leopard 2 had superior protection and commander's independent sight, so it still holds the title as the best tank of 1980. But it is important to point out the mistake.

Yeah you can play the T72 or Abrams in War thunder... * *After year of painfull grind or hundreds of euro spent :D :D

Ah yes WarThunder a beautiful *life spending game*

Yeah as a Bradley guy I think I see the Abrams in my battalion fueling up more than actually maneuvering

Clearly you didn't add crew comfort because it would be an automatic win for the brits with their tea making facilities lmao. Jokes aside this is a pretty entertaining video. keep up the good work!

When i saw the notification, i read NATO vs UBER

Salty comments battle between self proclamed tank expert begin

Its fair to say that in thr 80's most of the western and eastern tank fleets were still based on second generation MBTs like Leopard 1, M-60, Chieftain, AMX-30, T-55, T-62, early T-80, T-72 and T-64.

Steven Zaloga had a relevant observation on this at the point where the T80u was king in penetration and armor. Since the use of smokescreens at the time was a given, and the stabilization quality made firing on the move realistic, the lack of thermal sights to see through smoke and auto-lead may have made the T-80u's firepower nearly irrelevant and left it as a potentially superior platform only needing some relatively small modifications to be the dominant force, but modifications that remained a step behind the needs of battle.

I knew this video was coming! Great one Red.

gajuble: historically accurate vehicles also gayjingles: ostwind 2

1:50 never underestimate a good pair of Zeiss binoculars

A marvelous analysis thank you so much

What about the Chieftain and Challenger tanks?

Thank you for providing sources!

Very good analysis. I enjoyed your video.

Congrats on the sponsorship! Keep up the good videos :D

Another nice video, this channel is very good!

Also you seem to forget that Early Leopard 2 did not have thermal imaging gunner sight until Leopard2a1 which didnt start seeing fielding and implementing till late 1982 through 1983 it also used early Type A composite armor which is significantly less than what you stated the values you gave are on par with Leopard 2a4 with Type B composite armor.

Great video bro

Great video and good analyses, but in a war there are many other factors that contribute in achieving victory, like tactics and even pure luck. However like I said a great video, keep up the good work.

Very good breakdown of all the tanks to the gulf war

Now I know where Red Effect gets all those Sekrit Dokuments.

1989, I say the T-80UD did win. Same installments as before but improved turret protection, plus a little cost for the diesel engine which is better than the gas turbine engine, but slow like the T-64.

"The engine wasn't very powerful, so the tank was kind of slow.." LOL

I dont know if it carried through - but at least some generations of western tank crews was trained to measure distance not on target, but to solid terrain features near the target. Not as much to avoid the warning systems of soviet tanks, but to get a better measurement. Quite a significant doctrine there which might have had an impact on the battlefield we luckily never had.

HOLY FUCK YOU ARE SPONSORED BY WARTHUNDER, im really happy for you! Keep it up!

I think if you were to do a video on the future of armor on the battlefield, that'd be pretty awesome. Perhaps you could make your predictions as to what features you think will become more common and which will be more successful. Maybe make a design of your own, that you think would be ideal for a given country.

Yeah yeah yeah you can totally play those tanks in war thunder only if you grind a country for more than a year not worth the time

I am one of the few Americans that dipped my toes in US equipment and Soviet equipment. Hands down, US is much better if you have the logistics. I prefer Soviet weapons because they can be used for multiple purposes, rugged and can perform a task for minimal cost. Talk crap all you want about the T55, I do myself. It makes for a great siege gun. 23mm cannons can be fashioned into rifles or on to a Hilux. A PKM is a lighter and is more weildy than a 240 via box hugging techniques. All I am trying to state is if you are in a situation that requires rugged weapons, Soviet is the way to go.

Would be good to include parameters like maintenence ease (for example how much time does it take to swap engines) or crew survivability (like comparing M1s ammo stores and Challenger ammo stores) Crew comfort and internal/external storage space, Range and mobility ( it is rather important most soviet tanks couldnt turn in place) etc .Those are rather important factors. In this video its rather important to mention the armour comparison in front turret armour coverage. Most allied tanks have rougky equal turret coverage (except the Leopard 2a4 weakspot and the weak armoured Leclerc Mantlet) but in Soviet tanks turrets got only the cheeks armoured and th turret center has gaps in both special armour and reactiva armour. And that is a large gap. In order to make a video like this it needs those considerations included

Don’t know if you’ve done one but would be awesome if you done one when basically the french and German tanks got big upgrades and new British challenger 2 came out. Also American and Russian upgrades to theirs

These analysis need more soft factors as well. The independent commander’s sight is one such soft factor which makes a good difference. But having a good AC unit, sound protection and enough room to move for the crew can also be vital to keeping them at peak capabilities. Reloading a shell inside a cramped turret is simply going to be a lot more tiring and have a higher risk of it taking longer to properly load. You might be able to hold out for a few hours, but if this is your 12th day in a tank driving and maneuvering and you just spotted a target for the first time, you want your crew as unstressed and alert as possible. Maybe look for after-action reports, memoirs and the like to see how crew fared under conditions.

Btw. Chally Protektion from Front Tower ist 650mm againt Apfsds ans Hull is 470mm againt apfsds

My man RE with another great vid that isn't Challnger 2 vs T14. Come on dude when are you going to drop it on us?!

crew comfort would also be worth a word they often are in the tanks for a day or more and speaking about autoloader would also he great (do they work good or do they struggle) and the problem with autoloader you cant seperate crew from ammo (no blow out penal) but otherwise its a fair compare

Please make a video about tanks of Iran

So no mention of the improved armour on the chally 1 mk. 3, or the DU rounds we put in them?

Well made and researched video but if I were you I'd put like title cards for each of the years so its easier to find which section you are talking about. Few things I noticed: No mention of L26 round (not L26A1 used with 120mm L30) for the British which the Challenger 1 used in the gulf war, though no idea on introduction date. Not sure weather it would have been able to penetrate T-80U either but would have been better than L23/L23A1. Also the L23A1 was introduced in 1985 so you could have mentioned that in the 1985 section rather than 1989. Yes you're right in saying this wouldn't have reliably been able to penetrate T-80U. Also if you're going by "Cold war" then technically T-90 doesn't fit this list as it was accepted into service after the Soviet union had disbanded, although it was developed during the timeframe so ill allow it.

please do a video on weaknesses in Al Khalid tank

Haven't finished video, but my guess is gonna be t-80U and M1A1 are gonna be tops with some challenger sprinkled in for flavor

When ever red uploads a video about abrams.... Ah shit here we go again

Do a review of the leman Russ MBT of the imperium of man 😁

Thermal sight is quite a game changer. Western tank could just fire smoke grenades when engaged and return fire unopposed.

The problem remains that the doctrine that determines how the tanks are used is more important than the tank's stats. you right hull on the abrams isn't great but the abrams was designed as a defense tank to fight behind cover with only the turret showing. That's the reason nato tanks have higher turrets it helps with depression(hill shooting) of the guns. Russia tanks are designed for an offensive war, which is why the turret is smaller and the hull armor is better. Please do a video on how the tanks fit their nations doctrines and why the design where such.

Still , I think T-80UK was somewhat better . It was much lighter and the engine as you said was much more fuel efficient . Thus , it had more range . And also you didn't say anything about the gun range and the ATGMs accomodated to it and whether they can compete against M1A2 protection or not .

You skipped over an Abrams varrient IPM1 and different important parts of tanks such as crew efficiency track and other reliability avg rate of fire weight

You look like that spongebob worm when you unlock the abrams

True what you say tech doesn't always mean that a tank has an advantage the crew training is paramount . Let's just say I know this from what I have seen . For example a t72 may be old but crewed by well trained Russian guys could be best in the world on its day . Challenger 2 a dinosaur but as I say and I've seen combat record speaks for itself . One more thing your videos are the most accurate on KZfaq you are very impressive

I personally think a standard design diesel engine has many advantages over a turbine, any thoughts?

pls you can make a video on the italian c1 Ariete MBT?

1992 the new t-80 absolutely rocks

Also, what is the practical application intended of the anti tank missile used on the t64 and possibly later tanks? I believe you mention the t64, t72 and t80 all largely use the same main guns which you also note are/were superior. So with a superior main gun for use against armor. In what scenarios would the anti tank missile be used?

The one thing you didnt mention is numbers. The M1A1 vastly outnumbered the T-80 of the time which only had a few hundred produced.

I read US tankers called the additional frontal turret armor on T tanks the dolly parton and super dolly parton mod

How many t80u's were available? As well as the ammunition?

It's ok for a technical comparision not to look on the costs, but there is one rather important issue always neglected by all this "what was the best", the reliability and servicebility. The best Armor is useless if the Tank can't move and the best gun if the sights are faulty.

Have you done early and / or mid cold war comparison as well?

Gj nice

The feul consumption was offset by large feul tanks.

More like ~600mm of RHA equivalent for the turret protection vs KE for baseline M1A1 from 1985.

Question: did anyone ever think about taking the T-72 hull and mating it with the T-64 turret? Or are they not compatible and replacing the engine/ upgrading the whole tank was the cheaper option.

What I always found curious is that here in Germany the Leopard 2 keeps getting serious upgrades towards anti tank warfare while the M1A2 received its biggest upgrades towards urban warfare.

War thunder is not "historically accurate" anyone who says that is wrong the game is buggy the shell penetration values are so wrong even the armour on the tanks

i read that germany got their hands on a T-80 after the cold war, and they test fired 5 rounds with a L44 on it and only one projectile manged to penetrate(hull). which lead to the devlopment of the L55. apperently the americans didnt had that problem with their DU-ammuntion. PS: u should mention, that the low profile of russian tanks is bought with bad gun-depression, which hinder their tactical use in some circumstances. but its probably not that easy to rate :D

What about the Israeli Merkava(sp)? Also, it seems the Chieftains and M60's were fairly effective against the soviet built tanks (probably cheaper quality) thrown at them during the Yom Kipur war.

Were Russian tankers on these newer tanks usually professionals, or also conscripts? That might be a factor against all-professional US tank crews. I'm not trying to throw shade at the Russians. It's just that highly trained pros usually do better than the latter, no matter willingness or bravery. Again, I'm not going after Russian tank crews, I'm just curious if that would change your calculations. But I'm only asking because I have no clue as to what types of crews the Russians were fielding during each period. Great video, btw. Very informative. Thanks!

Hey man can u do a video on china's mbt 3000 plz, much love thanks. :)

could you also cover early and Mid cold war

Hey what’s your favorite source for all this tank information. Would love to check it out

RedEffect could you do a video on why Soviet Tanks performed poorly in against Abrahams in first Gulf War, was it that they were mostly obsolete models or poor training and tactics or no air power. How would Soviet Tanks of performed with Soviet crews and more modern tanks.

This war thunder advertisement aged well

I have a question. During this time the A-10 and the Russian equivalent were flying around. Both I believe were supposed tank killers. I am guessing the missiles each carried made easy work of most tanks but were the guns pointless except for light armor? I mean the A10's gun seemed really cool but you were not really going to take out a tank with it were you?

So in 1980 none of the Soviet tanks had thermals? They didn't stand a chance, outside of a massive bumrush at the enemy to get close enough to be able to see in order to hit NATO tanks. But the losses in order to get there would have been _horrendous._

Can you talk about ERA being deadly to any close infantry support, meaning russian tanks are less effective in a combined arms conflict especially in tight urban environments?

When I was on the M60A1, the T-72 worried me and the T-64 (or disinformation around it), scared me. When I was on the M60A3, the T-64 didn't worry me and I knew I could take the T-72 from dusk to dawn; dawn to dusk was less of a sure thing. When they rolled out the M1, the T-72 became an object of pity and the T-90 was mildly interesting. Oh, how times change.

could you give your thoughts on the kaplan mmwt?

Hello RedEffect where are you from ? just curious coz accent. Thx for good informative stuff.

M1 had M774 introduced at the same time.

Yea you can take control of the tanks mentioned in the video in war thunder.... but only after you paid around 500€ or played several years....

Red can you please give Gaijin your source for the T-80UD’s armor array. They have made it a copy and paste of the T-80U’s array.

I hate the term “best” anything. Each State designs and fields pieces of kit and platforms that meet-and all States have specific doctrines practiced. Whatever piece of kit they have is most likely the “best” piece of kit...to have at that time and for whatever doctrine a state/military adheres too at that time. Like the M4 Sherman for the US and allies-it was the best tank in the world...for the US at that time.

Idk where this guy gets his arm out ratings for abrams and challenger? Those ratings are still classified. So he is guessing based off of Soviet guesses on the ratings.

Do us a favour and don't copy challenger armor values from Gaijin for crying out loud they are entirely wrong. Every document states it has superior CE protection to M1 and the Hull was upgraded to 500mm vs KE in the MK2 iteration onwards (about 1986). Loved the rest of the analysis though.

really a bummer you couldnt talk about the leopard 2a5, since it was introduced in 1990, and formally introduced in 1993. But its ok.

RedEffect Please can u tell me what is the armor (im MM) on the T-80 BV with Kontakt-1 is it around 530 mm like t-72B? (against Apfsds)

You forgot that the challenger had hunter killer capability

T55, T62 and T72 were the backbone of soviet divisions. Many european countries still relayed on Leo1, M60, M48 and AMX, en pair with latest T55 but inferior to T72.

RedEffect will you make vidoe about why soviets kept such terrible revese speed on their tanks?

Turns out that in the Ukraine, Russian tanks became allergic to their turrets and would sneeze them several feet in the air. The Russians also thought regular maintenance and training was for soft western nations. Finally, Russian troops are danger-adverse when facing Ukrainian troops armed with Javelins and NLAWS.

The Abrams was kinda cringe irl until the A2

So the M1A2 should be better in war thunder? The leopard 2a6s dm53 should not be able to pen the turret cheeks?

1989 defiantly new t-80ud

Red: "If you play WT you're going to have to wear this snazzy armband, you filthy untermench!" Also Red: *"Hei EvRi fRiEnDs, kupite War Thunder!"*

@RedEffect Please can u tell me what is the armor (im MM) on the T-80 BV with Kontakt-1 around 530 mm like t-72B? (against Apfsds)

What about crew ergonomics?

What about the leopard 2a5... it came out in 1990...

Dreamer !