Oldbutnotwise, plz explain how your expert hae ranked armor, considering that the Chobbam, french "chobbam", israelian "chobbam" are all classified .. ???? Its maybe possible to rank all the chobbam version between them, but i dont think that we can compare it with ther other tank's armor ( chobbam type ).

french is a chobbam type but from what i can find is generally regarded as inferior. the israelie isnt a chobbam type of armour from all accounts its a steel/fibre laminate not a ceramic based armour again its generally regarded as inferior to chobbam but superior to "steel" armour you claim that because chobbam has been around a few years that it no longer can be the best, firstly the actual composite is a closely guarded secret and has gone though many different versions secondly the developemnt of chobbam has been a slow process of finding what works and what doesnt very soficicated ceramics are used combined with various other materials. yet you reckon that a company can jump in with a version that has only a few years developement and is suddenly superior to a product that has been constantly improved over the last 30 years. this is the height of arrogance. unless you can prove otherwise it would be safe to assume that the experiance of the people behind chobbam gives it the edge over a hurriedly started project started after the failure of the french to buy chobbam for the leclerc. this is a good example of the french attitude of ours is best with no evidence that this is the case. I will admit that untill someone does a side by side comparison of the two and publishes the result, that its all guess work but as all the industy analysis that i can find places chobban as the armour of choice, i will follow their lead

>>The m1a3 (coming out late 2005/2006) with have 3rd Gen Chobbam armour with more advanced DU sheeting.<< Anyone have any proof of this? I have never heard any (legitimate) discussion of an M1A3. A quick bit of googling and a review of Armor magazine on line does not seem to verify it either.

The M1A3 should have an longer gun tube with MEXAS rear and top armor

It was on the history channel a few times they talked about what will be upgraded. Gun Engine (lv100 i think its called) Improved protection Fire & control and otherthings It was modern marvels - the m1 tank

Like you asid before , nowadays we know several versions of Chobbam: THe Chobbam 1 The chobbam DU The chobbam export version The chobbam 2 I dont remember that english have ever had an advance in tanks technologies on French. So i dont see why suddently they would be abble to do a thing largely better than the French. If i remember well it has not been the french who failed to buy the Chobbam but more the contrary, a GIAT idear to developp its own chobbam. Now the question isnt really here. The Leclerc armor is 20 years younger than the Chobbam 1 and the export version, and she is even younger to the Chobbam DU, and i know thaty we have studied the progress made by other until the end, in this domain to do the best armor possible for the Leclerc. Now i have heard, found on several sites, and considering the Leclerc weight, that the Leclerc armor for a better/Same protection was lighter than the Chobbam, so it has an advantage in weight that can be resumed as better performances in other domains like mobility. Now the "i can find is generally regarded as inferior", i now that you are honest by saying it, because when i look on internet, i often see the same thing, but never come from intelligent comparison basing on test but on pure speculations.

All you people who under-estimate our tanks.. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2905817.stm and I was in theatre

This whole "which armor is superior" thread is getting a little old. I think its been mentioned a couple of times, but I will do it again. The protective qualities of armor composites are closely guarded secrets. Therefore, its very likely that any "published" information is WRONG. Either its speculation (some times by people that have never actually been in a real tank) or purposefull missinformation. Since its unlikely that all the western tank manufactures will publish their trade secrets, the only proof is in the doing. Do your tanks survive combat or not?

Thanks to pugs for showing us the Beeb article on the Chally II. Only 386 or these are fielded, that's scant but given the tank's capabilities, would be probably sufficient to defend the British Isles or perform limited interventions abroad. However, a similar number of Leclercs in the "regretted" French army are a ridiculous quantity when it comes to a continental power's credibility. Samewise, there are only about 200 Ariete in the Italian army. (so few that nobody on this board even noticed it's existence?) Should I understand that Western Europe relies solely on the Jerry's 1,700 MBT's with their conscripted crews for it's land defense? If it is so, let's invade it! (once the Americans have left Germany in disgust, that is...) ;<)

Couac_attack wrote: "but never come from intelligent comparison basing on test but on pure speculations" But Couac, can't you see that you are doing the exact same thing. You are supposing that because French composite armor was developed after British Chobham that it is better, without a shred of proof from real tests to base that on. You are also guessing, based on what someone else wrote, that French armor performs better for it's weight than Chobham or US armor. So, tell me, how is there any difference? My assumption, which I think is a better one, is that French, German, British and American armor all performs at the same level and that the only real difference is the sloping and how thick it is. I think, given that none of us know anything more than what is publicly available on the internet, that we can't use any other basis for this discussion. Those who know differently are not going to discuss it because they don't want to go to jail for disclosing classified information. For example, on certain issues I am still under non-disclosure requirements from the US government, even though my knowledge is pre-1996.