>Abraam tank(Typo intended) can accelerate 70tonnes to 30mph in a few seconds
How fast could you get it going if you removed the armor, weapons and only keept the engine and chassis?

I got one up to 55 on a downhill slope once at NTC.

>how fast can a 1,500-horsepower gas turbine engine accelerate something light with tracks
Pretty fucking fast, assuming you geared for acceleration you could probably get a 10 second quarter mile out of it even with the huge drive train loses that come with tracks.

>>64016234 (OP)
I don't think weight is the limiting factor so much as everything beating itself to death at high rpms. If you were looking to maximize speed--and hilarity--you would have to tolerate a one way trip. My guess is you could hit 80mph and possibly higher. The first thing to go would likely be a tread. If you reinforced those, you could get pretty fucking fast before snapping an axel or the turbo shaft.

If you were to remove the armor and weapons from an Abrams tank, reducing its weight from approximately 70 tonnes to an estimated 30 tonnes, it could accelerate much faster.

Based on calculations, if the tank can accelerate 70 tonnes to 30 mph in 11 seconds, the engine generates an average force of about 85,344 Newtons. With the reduced mass of 30 tonnes and assuming the same constant force from the engine, the tank could reach 30 mph in approximately 4.7 seconds.

This is a significant improvement in acceleration, demonstrating the impact of mass reduction on vehicle performance. Keep in mind that this is a simplified calculation, as factors like air resistance and transmission efficiency would also influence the real-world acceleration.