Thread 64496896

Specifically between the M60, Chieftain and Leopard 1, which was the best?

>no stabilizers

What the fuck were HATO smoking?

>>64496967
What the fuck are you smoking? All of those tanks are 2 axis stabilized. Are you some kind of omegashill?

>>64496986
>>64496967
Oh wait. M60 didn't. What the fuck?

>>64496896 (OP)
I really love the way the turret on the Leopard 1A3 looks

>>64496999
Kek

>which was the best
Picrel

>>64496999
AMX-30 also didn't

>>64497700
but can it make tea?

>>64497001
has powerful WW2 vibes

>>64496999
>>64497711
Checked. Also WHAT? Who the fuck greenlit that?

>>64496896 (OP)
The M60, at least after the A3 upgrade with stabilization. The M60 can actually mount the 120mm gun too. The Leopard has literally no fucking armor and the Chieftain was unreliable until late into its life, but I think the Chieftain is the most interesting.

None of the above. The Centurion.

>>64499221
gun stabilizers werent as good in the 60s as they are today, they just allow for quicker shots on a short stop rather than full shoot-and-move capability and the M60 was a fairly stable gun platform to begin with
the US was working on a 2-plane gun stabilizer on the T95, but it was cancelled, and only the version without a stabilizer could be mass-produced in a hurry as the M60A1

the M60A1 was meant to be a temporary measure, they didnt want to install 5000 stabilizers on all of them only to have to remove all of them later
but then the MBT-70 program got delayed, and eventually cancelled, so it became clear that their temporary measure was more permanent than they thought
so they just ended up slapping a 2-plane stabilizer on the M60A1 in 1972, by which point stabilizers on most tanks were mechanically effective enough to allow for accurate shooting at several hundred meters range

>>64499584
the M60A1 was upgraded with a stabilizer in the early 70s
the M60A3 had a full-digital FCS and laser rangefinder, and then a thermal sight shortly after

>>64496896 (OP)
Each one has specific strengths and weaknesses that make one better than the other in different situations and also depends heavily when they are used as well.
M60 has a good blend of speed and protection but it isn't exactly the most mobile and is quite tall being relatively easy to spot.
Chieftain has pretty strong protection but the main thing is that its gun can take on pretty much anything the Soviets throw at it. What holds it back is that engine is a joke so it won't be going anywhere fast before breaking down.
Leopard 1 is very mobile and fast due to its weight and size but anything shooting at it is going to go through its armor like a hot knife through butter.
>>64500211
This arguably is the correct answer though. Its the best compromise between all three.

>>64500211
too old

>>64496999
Early leo 1s also lacked them for some reasok, though that got fixed pretty quickly.

>>64499584
this anon is technically probably correct, and agree with him that the Chieftain is most interesting (particularly if ? it had been re-engined earlier in its career)

>>64500211
See above my answer remains >>64497700 the only correct answer to OP

>>64496896 (OP)
>>64496967
YOU MADE THIS EXACT THREAD EARLIER THIS YEAR.

>>64496896 (OP)
welded leo 1 are so shit retarded.

>>64502131
There's an alternative timeline where either the Shah stayed in power or the Israelis adopted the Chieftain. Either way the engine trouble is sorted out. We end up with a Chieftain 2 rather than a Challenger 1.