Sorry to bust your bubble but RPG's are as whimpy as it comes in the catagory of anti armor weaponry. Heck, an RPG 7 couldnt even kill an A48A5 from most angles There are pictures of 48's that took over a dozen hits from RPG7's after it had been immobilized by a land mine with no crew casualties. They barely penetrate APC's armor.

Sorry to burst your bubble supertankerm1a1, but it is believed that it was a dual warhead RPG that penetrated the side of an M1 recently (look at this sites picture gallery). Not all RPG's are equal.

As an Abrams tank commander I am a little biased but here is my list taking into account reliability and other things that I have seen in the field. 1 Leo2A6 2 M1A2 3 Challenger 2 4 Merkava Mk4 5 M1A1D 6 T-90 (Russian) 7 Type 90 (Japan) 8 AMX 48 Leclerc 9 Challenger 1 10 Type 98 (China) The russian tanks and chinese are low mostly due to poor reliability, whether from poor training in the Armies that equip them but especially due to the low quality of components used in order to reduce costs. The AMX 48 would be higher but the reliability is alot less than other european tanks. If you have 100 tanks but only 75 can fight due to breakdowns your not in such a good position to excercise your battle plan to its potential. There are a lot of small advantages and disadvantages that seperate these ten tanks but doctrineand the training of the crews can be more important.

There is some features people don't understand about Leclerc: French enginners have design the Leclerc ten years after all the other tank so have benefited to the latest technologies. They have introduce autoloader and supercompact powerpack in order to reduce volume and external surface.So the leclerc have a frontal height reduced by more than 10% and a lenght by 20%.It save a lot in surface to protect and if you do the calculation a 59t Leclerc is equivalent to a 72 t tank assuming the same armor!!!! Second another feature is that Leclerc have been design from scratch for the gun and thus has a better stabilisation: at the same level of accuracy it can fire at a distance double of any other tank while on the move on target on the move.It is also due to its active hydraulic suspension instead of torsion dampers. Third it has independant protection cells.If the gunner is kill the tank commander can do his job! Of course it has also C4isr, double data bus,52 caliber gun and other options (like jammer).Its armour is modular and easily upgradable.It reliability was bad but now improving to the good level after modifications. It is a generation ahead at a costly price.

The Leclerc has already performance ahead of any other tank on mobility, firepower, protection so only its software needs to be upgraded.

When French have only upgraded AMX30 I never considered it was above a newest tank like M1 or Leopard 2 at this time.French army had wait a lot to received the newest tank of the world.I think that Leclerc then Leopard 2A6 are the best tank in the word considering that firepower, then mobility, then armour are the most important features as all conflicts since WW2 demonstrate that.

You said: "Second another feature is that Leclerc have been design from scratch for the gun and thus has a better stabilisation: at the same level of accuracy it can fire at a distance double of any other tank while on the move on target on the move." So, are you seriously trying to tell me that the LeClerc can engage a target while moving at a range of 6000+ meters? I engaged enemy targets, while moving, with an M1A1 in 1991 at ranges of 3000+ meters. I have engaged targets at even greater distances, while moving, during training. If you want us to respect what you post, at least be factual in your claims.

Does there target where moving also?Whas the terrain almost flat?I have worked with Leclerc engineers and this fact is true.I cannot transmit you data but if a M1 have for example a 1 meter accuracy with a given probability of hit at 2000 meters the Leclerc has the same accuracy at 4000 m.A M1 can hit at 3000 meters of the move, but the leclerc can do really at double distance or at the same distance with a greater cross country speed.I explain that: a generation ahead.It is why French efforts are concentrated on improving its reliabilty than upgrading for now.About the size it is true also and you will understand also that a 20 % reduced total surface is also a factor of survival.Survival is multiplication of factor: armour , surface size, countermeasures, speed , internal arrangement, reduced sensibility of munitions to explode while beeing it, reduce sensibility to fire etc.. Also modularity and internal arrangement are important to repair quicly a tank. To the English don't think that some other nation can not do know armour good as latest chobdam. Some Leclerc were tested to multiple hit by 120mmm APFSDS NATO round and survived.The Leclerc has a cost double of a M1 or Leopard. See some data on OPFOR tank pages at w

Sorry for grammar. of course

Sorry, but the explanation you give, "a generation ahead", doesn't wash. Yes, LeClerc is a generation ahead of the M1-IP and possibly half a generation ahead of the M1A1. It is not, by any means, a generation ahead of the M1A2 or M1A2SEP. The info I gave about hitting targets while moving at 3000+ meters is with an M1A1B (also called an M1A1 Heavy). I have no hands on performance data for the M1A2, but I would assume that there is a performance increase over the M1A1. In any case, based on personal gunnery experience with M60's, M1-IP's, and M1A1's I seriously doubt your claims that there is a 100% improvement in range and accuracy of the LeClerc over the M1. Accuracy is a combination of multiple factors, including the gun, the sights, the computer and the stabilization system. The single main factor is the gun. The LeClerc's gun is not significantly better than the American gun, perhaps an improvement of 10%, mostly due to the age of the gun.