Two of the many main battle tank seen in combat today are the M1A of the American army and the Challanger II the Britishforces.

Reasearch has turned up that these two tanks are actually very similar, both use the 120mm cannon and a 1500 hp engine. However, the Americans use a round that explodes inside the tank, rather than on impact in the case of the Brits, this makes the damage to the tank much greater.oth tanks contain similar antipersonel machine guns mounted on there turret.oth contain Advanced optics and range finders. The American M1A2 contains a 6 barreled smoke discharger,a highly strategic advantage over the challanger II. The M1A2 also contains reactive armor. Wich explodes on impact redirecting the round and/or wxplosion away from the tank, underneath these reactive panals is thick armor thats statistics are highly classified. The challanger has one major advantage though, it is MUCH lighter and more meanuverable. Making it more versatile then The M1A2. Taking all of this into acount, while the challenger II is definately a combat effective MBT the M1A2 supasses it by being far more technologically advaced. But how about you vote, which is better, M1A2 or Challenger II?

The last bronco... wiped out by the mauraders.

um....wheres the leo 2A6?
The Abrams is also much faster than the Chally, and can run on virtually anything combustible. The M1A2 also uses a Rhienmental 120mm smooth bore gun. IDK what the Chally uses though. And the M1A3 comes out this year anyway. It's goinng to be much lighter the Abrams.

how about a Leopard 2A6?

Rheinmetal L55 120mm Canon ( not that crappy L/44 you americans put on your m1 )
MG3 Machine guns ( or MG MAG, wich is still awesome )
freaking airconditioning ( have fun cooking in your tanks in the desert )
just as much horsepower as you

See u didnt put enough info on the challenger ll but honsely idc

This is a very biased vote IMO

When you wrte about each tank you née to give a balanced argument as otherwise it's bias and an unfair vote

For that reason I chose Challenger 2

Okay ive made some refinements. Keep in mind that the governemtn does not release all info on their mbt's so i have limited recources. As far as guns go the main cannons are the same caliber. They have very similar night, infered, and other advanced sighting technology. The Challenger two carries more ammunitions than the M1A2. Armor specs for the Challenger could not be found. here are the armor statistics for the M1A2: Frontal Turret Armour: 359mm-~780mm vs KE, 896mm-1220mm vs HEAT Frontal Hull Armour: 125mm-~490mm vs KE, 285mm-910mm vs HEAT. Both tanks use 4 crew. One major down side to the M1A2 is the face that its thermal signiture is very large in the rear and will attract heat seaking missles easily.