Now we know: the top ten greatest ever tanks of all time

Welshwarrior said:
I would have thought the Sheman would have been further up the list, it was outstanding in the North Africa campaign in WW2
Click to expand...

For the time it was a meek design. It's major abilities being speed, reliability, easy to repair, and wonderful ability to be modified into most anything. It really doesn't have the makings of a tank like firepower and armor.

Later models like the Easy Eight where pretty good.
 
Of course, the T-72 is the prior generation of tanks, compared to the M1a2 and Challenger, so its not a fair comparison. Soviet leftovers and outdated equip
 
That's not the same top ten I saw.

On the top ten I saw the Challenger and T-34 were both in the top 5. If I remember correctly it went Abrams, Challenger, Leopard, T-34, Merkava. The Abrams was scored well all around, the Challenger had the best tech score but its low number of production models meant that it was penalized, the Leopard I think should have been first, the T-34 did so well because of the sheer number of tanks produced, and the Merkava scored so high because of crew survivability, which was essentially off the charts.

But the list I saw was on the Military Channel, not Discovery. I think the Military Channel is part of the "Discovery Family" since its former name was "Discovery Wings".
 
Well I watched the Discovery Channel 2 or 3 days ago and it was the most recent one that I saw about the top 10 tanks.

This is what they said about each tank and why it got the place it did.

10-The sherman: PROS-Fast,easy to repair, mass produced, manuverable, and light,
CONS- In a 1 on 1 fight between a German tank it was basicly usless.

9-M-551A1 Sheridan: PROS-Very light (could be dropped out of airplanes),small (perfect for the jungle),it shot guided missiles instead of the conventional shell,fairly fast
CONS-because of its light aluminum body it was weak and had light armour.

8-Panther: PROS-Very thick armour, very powerful main gun 75mm/88mm, slopped armour (takin from the russians),well made,zimmerits (anti-mine coating)
CONS-To heavy and to slow, because the germans tried so hard to make them perfect there was never enough made,high fuel consumption,big tank big target.

7-T-72: PROS-powerful main gun 125mm,don't need a loader,very low to the ground,fast firing, pretty good armour.
CONS-you had to be 5'6" or smaller to fit in the tank,and the automatic loading system could catch an arm of the gunner. (thats why the gunners prefere the T-64).

6-S Tank: PROS-fast, can do a complete 180 (when driving then turning right away), low to the ground,hydrolic aiming system in the suspention, can dig into the ground,perfect defence tank,
CONS-no turret,not a good attack tank,have to get out of the tank and load it from the back, had to move the tank to aim the gun, and its only really useful in the Swedish forests.

5-Centurion: PROS-great design,fully automatic stabilization system, long service time (just after WWII till 1990)
CONS-hard to drive

4-Merkava: PROS-good design,very safe tank,forward mounted engine, design for urban and desert combat.
CONS- Its only use is to the Israeli army because it was designed for their needs only.

3-T-34: PROS-Very good design, fast, well armoured, slopped armour,powerful main gun 75mm/85mm/100mm,easy to repair, one of the only tanks that could stand up to the German tanks.
CONS-fuel consumption, weight.

2-M1A1 Abrams: PROS-Fast,good armour,uses a jet engine, manuverable.
CONS-Very high fuel consumption (uses 8 galons just to start the tank.

1-Leopard 2: PROS-Fast,good armour,manuverable,can plug a laptop into the tank and it will tell you exactly what wrong with it (this is the tanks computerized maintenance system) , land navigation system,The hybrid navigation system consists of a Global Positioning System (GPS) and an inertial navigation system,Thermal fire control. Easiest tank ever created to repair and maintain.
CONS-didn't have any

These are just some of the reasons why these tanks made the top ten list. I cant remember every exact word said about the tanks and i probably missed some things here and there. But now everyone knows what the Top Ten Greatest Tanks Ever, are. And just for kicks one of the jugdes was Tom Clancy, the rest were just tank designers, military personal, and that kind of thing.

Well hope this clears it up for you all.
 
I found it!

10. M-4 Sherman (US)
9. Merkava (Israel)
8. T-54/55 (USSR)
7. Challenger (UK)
6. Mk IV Panzer (Ger)
5. Centurion (UK)
4. WWI Tank (UK)
3. Tiger (Ger)
2. M-1 Abrams (US)
1. T-34 (USSR)

Ok, so I might have been a little off on what I thought the top five was, but I did correctly mention that the Challenger was heavily penalized AND the T-34 was very high.

Military Channel's Top Ten

The above link includes other Top Tens, not just limited to Tanks.
 
Last edited:
Damien435 said:
I found it!

10. M-4 Sherman (US)
9. Merkava (Israel)
8. T-54/55 (USSR)
7. Challenger (UK)
6. Mk IV Panzer (Ger)
5. Centurion (UK)
4. WWI Tank (UK)
3. Tiger (Ger)
2. M-1 Abrams (US)
1. T-34 (USSR)

Ok, so I might have been a little off on what I thought the top five was, but I did correctly mention that the Challenger was heavily penalized AND the T-34 was very high.

Military Channel's Top Ten

The above link includes other Top Tens, not just limited to Tanks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we discussed this list to death on another thread. Another list with odd choices and ommissions although I think this list included the overall influence of each tank as a prime factor rather than how good they were tank for tank.
 
CanadianCombat said:
Well I watched the Discovery Channel 2 or 3 days ago and it was the most recent one that I saw about the top 10 tanks.

This is what they said about each tank and why it got the place it did.

10-The sherman: PROS-Fast,easy to repair, mass produced, manuverable, and light,
CONS- In a 1 on 1 fight between a German tank it was basicly usless.

9-M-551A1 Sheridan: PROS-Very light (could be dropped out of airplanes),small (perfect for the jungle),it shot guided missiles instead of the conventional shell,fairly fast
CONS-because of its light aluminum body it was weak and had light armour.

8-Panther: PROS-Very thick armour, very powerful main gun 75mm/88mm, slopped armour (takin from the russians),well made,zimmerits (anti-mine coating)
CONS-To heavy and to slow, because the germans tried so hard to make them perfect there was never enough made,high fuel consumption,big tank big target.

7-T-72: PROS-powerful main gun 125mm,don't need a loader,very low to the ground,fast firing, pretty good armour.
CONS-you had to be 5'6" or smaller to fit in the tank,and the automatic loading system could catch an arm of the gunner. (thats why the gunners prefere the T-64).

6-S Tank: PROS-fast, can do a complete 180 (when driving then turning right away), low to the ground,hydrolic aiming system in the suspention, can dig into the ground,perfect defence tank,
CONS-no turret,not a good attack tank,have to get out of the tank and load it from the back, had to move the tank to aim the gun, and its only really useful in the Swedish forests.

5-Centurion: PROS-great design,fully automatic stabilization system, long service time (just after WWII till 1990)
CONS-hard to drive

4-Merkava: PROS-good design,very safe tank,forward mounted engine, design for urban and desert combat.
CONS- Its only use is to the Israeli army because it was designed for their needs only.

3-T-34: PROS-Very good design, fast, well armoured, slopped armour,powerful main gun 75mm/85mm/100mm,easy to repair, one of the only tanks that could stand up to the German tanks.
CONS-fuel consumption, weight.

2-M1A1 Abrams: PROS-Fast,good armour,uses a jet engine, manuverable.
CONS-Very high fuel consumption (uses 8 galons just to start the tank.

1-Leopard 2: PROS-Fast,good armour,manuverable,can plug a laptop into the tank and it will tell you exactly what wrong with it (this is the tanks computerized maintenance system) , land navigation system,The hybrid navigation system consists of a Global Positioning System (GPS) and an inertial navigation system,Thermal fire control. Easiest tank ever created to repair and maintain.
CONS-didn't have any

These are just some of the reasons why these tanks made the top ten list. I cant remember every exact word said about the tanks and i probably missed some things here and there. But now everyone knows what the Top Ten Greatest Tanks Ever, are. And just for kicks one of the jugdes was Tom Clancy, the rest were just tank designers, military personal, and that kind of thing.

Well hope this clears it up for you all.
Click to expand...


IMO the Discovery Channel did a horrible job. Exspecially on the M1.

M1A1 and A2 PROS:

BFT (Blue Force Tracker)

GPS/NAV (Global Positioning System/Navigation)

Integration of the vehicle electronics system through the use of a dual redundant data (MILSTD 1553D) and utility bus architecture

2nd Gen FLIR Thermal Imgaging Sight and FCS

CTIV (Commanders Independant Thermal Veiwer) Only on the A2

UAAPU (Under Armor Auxiliary Power Unit)

Embedded Battle Command (EBC) command and control software

Intervehicular Information System (IVIS)

Tank Management System (TMS)

Along with the new TUSK.
 
Cadet Seaman said:
IMO the Discovery Channel did a horrible job. Exspecially on the M1.
Click to expand...

So because the M1 was 2nd they did a horrible job? Bit over the top don't you think?

I can understand wy the Leo 2 was made No 1, going by how the Germans build their cars. Porsche started off building Tigers in WW2 after all. German cars are arguably the best built cars in the world and only the Japanese can really claim otherwise. When taking into account sports cars the Germans are probably the best. And if they build their cars this way it stands to reason that their tanks are built with just as much loving care, as always with the Germans. The Panther and Tiger tanks in WW2 were beautifully built, not good in wartime when your enemy is outproducing you 10:1. But this isn't wartime and the Germans can take as much time as they like. And they've learned well from the lessons of war, making the Leo 2 a very easy tank to repair as well as satisfying the 3 classic areas of tank design; speed, firepower and protection.

There's not much to choose between the Merkava IV, Challenger II, M1A2 and Leopard 2 A6. All four will do a fine job IMO. But the Leo 2 is the Porsche 911 of the tank world. It's rivals are close but the Porsche just keeps pulling out 'Car of the Year' titles and it just seems to have that little bit of 'something' that keeps it ahead.
 
Doppleganger said:
So because the M1 was 2nd they did a horrible job? Bit over the top don't you think?

I can understand wy the Leo 2 was made No 1, going by how the Germans build their cars. Porsche started off building Tigers in WW2 after all. German cars are arguably the best built cars in the world and only the Japanese can really claim otherwise. When taking into account sports cars the Germans are probably the best. And if they build their cars this way it stands to reason that their tanks are built with just as much loving care, as always with the Germans. The Panther and Tiger tanks in WW2 were beautifully built, not good in wartime when your enemy is outproducing you 10:1. But this isn't wartime and the Germans can take as much time as they like. And they've learned well from the lessons of war, making the Leo 2 a very easy tank to repair as well as satisfying the 3 classic areas of tank design; speed, firepower and protection.

There's not much to choose between the Merkava IV, Challenger II, M1A2 and Leopard 2 A6. All four will do a fine job IMO. But the Leo 2 is the Porsche 911 of the tank world. It's rivals are close but the Porsche just keeps pulling out 'Car of the Year' titles and it just seems to have that little bit of 'something' that keeps it ahead.
Click to expand...

I meant that they named horible PROS. Plus, if I'm not mistaken tanks are for combat not looks.

The M1 also satisfies the 3 classic areas of tank design; Speed, firepower and protection.

Out of the four you named Merkava, Challenger, M1, and Leo 2 all have seen combat with the exception of the Leo. I don't thinl that you can fully judge a tank until it's been though combat.

The Leo may have UBS Laptop hook-up and a cool dignostic system, but what happens when a 125mm Sabot hits it or a an RPG-7v for that matter? All the tanks above have adapted to combat the conditions of the battle, like Urban combat.
 
Cadet Seaman said:
The Leo may have UBS Laptop hook-up and a cool dignostic system, but what happens when a 125mm Sabot hits it or a an RPG-7v for that matter?
Click to expand...

That remains to be seen and I do hope it isn't one of our Leos that gets the first taste of those sabots or rpgs.:tank:
 
Cadet Seaman said:
The Leo may have UBS Laptop hook-up and a cool dignostic system, but what happens when a 125mm Sabot hits it or a an RPG-7v for that matter? All the tanks above have adapted to combat the conditions of the battle, like Urban combat.
Click to expand...

As much the same as what happens to a Merkava, Challenger II or M1A2 I'd imagine.
 
Leos has already been hit with verious rounds as of the Swedish tests. The tests ware conducted in the USA and Sweden, between the M1A2, Leo 2 S and Leclerc. Against each other, there ware no direct difference as of the protection of those three tanks. Not even enough to make it a reason for what tank to chose, there ware other things that tipped the scale, one was the engines.

If this is the program that i saw, which im pretty sure it is. With the STRV 122 featuring the Leo 2. One of the biggest pros of the Leo 2 (STRV 122) was the fact that you can basicly put a 10 year old in there and he/she will be able to drive it and the protection and durability, hence why they used STRV 122 as an example of the Leopard 2s capability, conscripts ware the operators in the episode.

And the reson for the Merkava not being in the top place was because it was so special for Israels needs that other countries wouldnt be able to use its full potentionell, same reason was given for the S Tank. And if im not misstaken it was the M1A2 that was featured. Why Challanger wasnt in there im not sure of, guess those that made the list (english and american historians and tankers and celebs) didnt think it was supposed to be in top 10, dont ask me why. I think more of it then the M1A2, but i didnt make the list.

"Out of the four you named Merkava, Challenger, M1, and Leo 2 all have seen combat with the exception of the Leo. I don't thinl that you can fully judge a tank until it's been though combat."

The Balkans. Germany have used Leo 2 A5s for a long time down there. The danish used Leo 1 and ware reguarly attacked by RPGs and atleast one tank (Bosnia).
 
Last edited:
AlexKall said:
Leos has already been hit with verious rounds as of the Swedish tests. The tests ware conducted in the USA and Sweden, between the M1A2, Leo 2 S and Leclerc. Against each other, there ware no direct difference as of the protection of those three tanks. Not even enough to make it a reason for what tank to chose, there ware other things that tipped the scale, one was the engines.

If this is the program that i saw, which im pretty sure it is. With the STRV 122 featuring the Leo 2. One of the biggest pros of the Leo 2 (STRV 122) was the fact that you can basicly put a 10 year old in there and he/she will be able to drive it and the protection and durability, hence why they used STRV 122 as an example of the Leopard 2s capability, conscripts ware the operators in the episode.

And the reson for the Merkava not being in the top place was because it was so special for Israels needs that other countries wouldnt be able to use its full potentionell, same reason was given for the S Tank. And if im not misstaken it was the M1A2 that was featured. Why Challanger wasnt in there im not sure of, guess those that made the list (english and american historians and tankers and celebs) didnt think it was supposed to be in top 10, dont ask me why. I think more of it then the M1A2, but i didnt make the list.

"Out of the four you named Merkava, Challenger, M1, and Leo 2 all have seen combat with the exception of the Leo. I don't thinl that you can fully judge a tank until it's been though combat."

The Balkans. Germany have used Leo 2 A5s for a long time down there. The danish used Leo 1 and ware reguarly attacked by RPGs and atleast one tank (Bosnia).
Click to expand...


But it still stands. The Leo has never seen combat. As it has been said before and will be hundrends if not thousands of time more..... Simulated combat is not the real thing.

Certain things happen in combat that can't in the most real training conditions.
 
Doppleganger said:
As much the same as what happens to a Merkava, Challenger II or M1A2 I'd imagine.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't bet on it. The Russian made Sabot's just stick in the M1's DU coated CHobham like arrow's (Proven in ODS).

No question about the Chally 2 being hit by a CHARM 1 by another CHally 2.

The Merkava facing the lovly Palisteinian owned T-72's.
 
CanadianCombat said:
Well according to the Discovery Channel the top ten greatest ever tanks of all time are:

1-Leopard 2
2-M1A1 Abrams
3-T-34
4-Merkava
5-Centurion
6-S Tank
7-T-72
8-Panther
9-M-551A1 Sheridan
10-Sherman

so its official
Click to expand...

Sherman sucked, Sheridan sucked, and the S-Tank was interesting but very restricted,
 
Once again, M1 Abrams refers to the M1A1 and M1A2 combined, not just the M1A1, and as I also pointed out I posted a list provided by the discovery channel which differs from the list provided by the creator of this topic.
 
Cadet Seaman said:
But it still stands. The Leo has never seen combat. As it has been said before and will be hundrends if not thousands of time more..... Simulated combat is not the real thing.

Certain things happen in combat that can't in the most real training conditions.
Click to expand...

Simulated? Did you read all I posted? :-?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top