Interesting... All the comments here say that Abrams is vastly superior to T-90 and can use it for target practice. Where did you get this information? Where is proof of what you say? Since there are practically no facts, numbers or references to professional sources in your comments, I guess you get it all from American TV shows? Don?t you :) I admire you patriotism, my American friends, but what about facts?

When I say t-90 I mean the latest model T-90A. For Abrams its M1A2SEP.

Let?s get some REAL information.  

1. T-90 is bought and is planned to buy by number of countries which can easily buy Abrams or already have them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-90 For example, India bought 620 and plans to get 1000 more, Saudi Arabia plans to buy 150. Why these countries prefer t-90 to Abrams?

2. About T-90 being modernized version of T-72. Abrams was first produced in 1978. What Abrams is now is a modification of this very old model. But most importantly, T-90 got completely new electronics optics computers, including night vision sights, stabilized gun, basically similar to what the latest models of Abrams have, armor protection got 3 times more resistant than that of T-72 and new depleted uranium APFSDS rounds though still a bit inferior to the best USA rounds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

3. TV shows that you guys are watching is US propaganda presenting Abrams as superior to Russian tanks and best in the world. These shows are lying for 2 reasons: first there is a fierce competition between two biggest weapon exporters Russia and USA. These shows designed to convince foreign politicians not to buy Russian tanks. Second, tank crews perform best when they don?t fear being killed by enemy tanks and believe in they own tank protection.

4. Abrams like any other tank can easily be destroyed if shot from modern RPG or any other antitank weapon hits lightly protected sides, back or top. Some tanks in Iraq were damaged by well placed 0.5 inches machine gun rounds. ?Further combat was seen during 2003 when US forces invaded Iraq and deposed the Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. As of March 2005, approximately 80 Abrams tanks were forced out of action by enemy attacks? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

http://weapons.technology.youngester.com/2009/05/t90-main-battle-tank.html

Abrams of course can easily penetrate T-90 sides and back but T-90 will have big advantage thanks to its smaller size, height, smaller turret and of course gun launched rockets.

6. Catastrophic ammunition explosion of T-90 is overrated.

In Abrams 6 out of 40 main gun rounds are still placed inside the tank corps and in front of the loader. That can still cause catastrophic explosion. If back of the turret hit, explosion of the rounds will still put tank out of service. Often the blow out doors don?t work as intended and Abrams get destroyed by ammunition explosion. See photos in http://btvt.narod.ru/4/t-90vsabrams.htm

Not any penetration will cause catastrophic ammunition explosion of T-90 - only if penetration hits the ammunition. T-90 rounds are located not in the turret but in the tank corps which is much harder to hit.

Let?s go to the numbers

Maximum Protection

(Wikipedia)

Abrams

vs HEAT: 1,320?1,620 mm

vs APFSDS 940?960 mm

T-90

vs HEAT: 1,150-1,350mm

vs APFSDS: 800-830 mm;

Main gun

Abrams

Penetration

Based on reports that it could not penetrate front of Abrams tank even at point blank range should be less than 900 at 2000m.

Range, direct 2600-2800m

Quote    Reply