The Abrams. The T-90 is nothing more than an upgraded T-72, renamed after the mauling the 72 received in Desert Storm. It is wholly inferior to the Abrams (and the Leo, Challenger, Merkava) in armor protection, firepower, electronics, and speed/acceleration.

The Abrams pretty much kicks the ass of the T-90 in everything except being lighter, so it might be able to get to the battlefield faster and more. Plus, the missile defense systems give the T-90 maybe an advantage against modern ATGMs, but the Marine M1A1 has one too, so it's probably not much time before the M1A2 gets one.

Use your eyes. T-72 is a modified T-64/62. T-80 is a modified T-72. T-90 is a modefied T-80. Some use diesel, some use turbine. Basic chasis shape is same. But later model add ERA armour and a host of more advance FLIR and other electronic. Passive armour is upgraded with better material. But basically you can say that a T-90 is a highly modified T-72 or even T-62. After T-54/55, The russian introduce the T-62. If you look carefully at T-62, it can be morph into a T-90 by ading laser, Flir, era and a new paint ! The basic design and architecture and even the silhoutte of the turret (when era is removed) is almost 70% similar between T62 and T90. T-95 would be a real radical departure and would probably be the ONLY really new tank from chasis up after the introduction of T-62 in the 1960s or late 1950s. So the three fundamental different tank category is T-54/55, T-62/64/72/80/90 and T-95. For US, there is only 2 different fundamental category of tank. Namely M-47/48/60, M-1 FCS is another category altogether (should not be classify as a normal heavy or medium tank, its a light tank , same as AMX-10 and russian airborne tank or M551 sheridan). M-41 is also too light and hence not included (its a different category, same as russian light tank) British has three fundamental post war tank design. Centurion, Chieftain/khalid, Challenger1/2. German has two main fundamental postwar tank design Leo1 and Leo2 France has two post war tank design AMX-30 and leclerc. Japan has two main tank design Type 61/74 and Type 90/mbt-x. Italy has one --ARIETA S.korea has one K-1 and xk-2

No, the T-90 is a modified T-72, infact it is a renaming of the T-72BU. The T-80 is not a modified T-72, it has some different design features despite resembling the T-72.

Ok for starters unless Pakistan some how gets an M1A2 these two tanks wont face each other, by the time US tanks face Russian tanks the US will be using something totaly different and Russia will have the T-95. Ok The US currently uses one of the most powerful guns in the world, the 52cal 120mm, second it uses DU and Chobham armor, thrid (but probaly first) the US has highly trained crews and some of the est elecronics to assist them. forth the M1 is faster then the T-90. Ok the T-90 has the most advanced ERA in the world, an anti missle system and electronics equivilent to the origonal M1(remeber the US uses for more advanced stuff) The problam which kills the T-90s is the poor quality of the gun(Russian manufacturing is inifior to the US) that means less propelent and thus a lower velocity, and second is the Autoloader, well how t is arragned in the tank with live ammo in the crew area(I think the autoloader itself is fine the US considered using on in the A2). Ok well now we can say the M1 will win hands dow? No. you can't it depends on the crew and the battle conditions(though the M1 can function any where) and the M1A2 is not invincable. It depends on the crews, take an Iraqi crew and put them in an M1 and put a US crew in a T-72, the end result the T-72 wins, why? well the training of the US crews, as well as been tought about their own equipment they also learn about the enemy tanks(the need to know their strengths and weaknesses in order to take advantage. ok thats combatwise, tech wise M1A2, not even the T-95 will beat the M1A@ in electronics, so that sais it for the T-90..

If you have a platoon of M1A2s moving to contact with a platoon of T-90s, with well trained Russian crews. The M1A2s have a great advantage with their highly superior optics, gun, ammo, communications, armor. If you have a platoon of M1A2s vs. a platoon of T-90s doing stuff like we are in Iraq, the tanks are more equal.

Adamantine wrote: "T-72 is a modified T-64/62. T-80 is a modified T-72. T-90 is a modefied T-80." Where do you find these ideas, do you just make them up or something? The T-62 and T-64 are entirely different tanks. The ONLY similarity is in general appearance. Other than that, it is like saying an M1 and a Leopard are related to each other because they look so similar. The T-72 is NOT descended from the T-64. The T-64 is a superior tank to the original T-72. The T-90 is descended from the T-72, but not from the T-64. This is pretty basic stuff that any newbie US Army master gunner could tell you, in fact most US Army tank crewman know this information. None of it is classified. Like most of the other stuff you post, you have a smattering of good techie knowledge mixed in with a bunch of stuff that makes no sense. Please check your facts a bit more. In fact, there are several really good discussion of the lineage and design of Russian tanks on this very board, posted by folks who should know, including MikkoLn and myself.

>>If you have a platoon of M1A2s moving to contact with a platoon of T-90s, with well trained Russian crews. The M1A2s have a great advantage with their highly superior optics, gun, ammo, communications, armor. If you have a platoon of M1A2s vs. a platoon of T-90s doing stuff like we are in Iraq, the tanks are more equal I would pretty much say so too. In tank vs. tank fights, even most radically refitted russian tanks are well behind western standards and can't cope with them on direct firefight with standardized crews. On all-around battlefield tasks the gap will be more narrow and due to the price and certain robustness difference (M1 just is a plain high tech tool too advanced to be used by all) T90 can be easily favourable however. For the russian tank tree and development, mike said all necessary. It's strictly two pronged from the end of 60's, with T64/80 and T72/90 lines, of which T72 line takes more from basic T62 design (though I still woudn't say they belong to the same "batch". In that case the conclusion can be nearly made all the way through T54, T34 and BT and subtypes of all these right to the Christie, all being more or less direct successors and developments of each other).

"The T-62 and T-64 are entirely different tanks" No they're not, they're all (Leo2 and Abrams included) pretty much copies of the French Renault FT-17...they all have turrets, tracks, guns.....

the origonal T-64s(M-1970) had the T-62 gun and turret.