What is the best tank Leopard 2 or Abrams M1A2?

Answer 1

'Leopard 2' is not sufficient.

The original Leopard 2 entered service in 1979. The M1A2 came online in the middle 90s. The SEP which is the main modernization upgrade, around 2000.

At the time of Leopard introduction, the M1P was the standard U.S. Abrams and was equipped with a 105mm M68 weapon which was not capable of penetrating the T-72 with BDD armor at over about 800-1,000m. Which is okay in a way because there were few places in our chunk of Germany where that would have mattered.

The initial Leo2 production lot was little more than a preseries development tank rushed into production for which most of the intended sighting package was not yet available. This effected the capability of the 120mm cannon which -could- penetrate, out to about 2,000m but did not always hit, especially at night or in weather (we had TI they had I2).

The Leo2A2/A3 quickly remedied this and, together with the commanders sight, proved to be an all round superior tank for extended range gunnery.

However; then the M1A1 came along and by adopting the same Rheinmetall weapon, became the basis of a fair comparison with the Leopard 2A4.

Where the Leo falls down a bit is in the lack of the Abrams composite armor or dual-angle sloping (though the turret front was narrower and so the basic RHA steel was thicker) and it's chosen sight location which holed the turret front which was generally seen as a very bad move. It's frontal arc was also seen as poorly protected until thicker sideskirts were developed and the glacis reshaped.

Where the mid-series Leopard really wins out is in the automotive end where it is more reliable and less thirsty.

The U.S. then fielded the 'M1A1HA' or Heavy Armor with the DU lattice facing and this again tipped the scales towards the Abrams as now both tanks could kill at range but the Abrams had a noteable front sector overmatch advantage at the shorter LOS ranges of Fulda and the Hopf. The Germans who are past masters of the moving ambush, tend to take a lot of flank shots so this may not have mattered as much to them. On the North German Plain facing Hamburg and the like, they can and do kill from the horizon.

The 1A2 added more armor and some automotive improvements as well as the CITV which finally provided the Abrams with equal hunter-killer capabilities to the Leopard in a better protected tank which weighed almost 15 tons more than the Leopard 2A4.

If you want to compare the M1A2 and Leopard 2, evenly, you need to chose the SEP model Abrams and Leopard 2A5 or A6 as your baseline and there the game is about evenly matched.

The chisel-nose turret of the 2A6 with the raised GPS box fixes the armor issues, though it brings the Leopard fully into the 60 ton class and so it is not a agile as it once was. While the (2A6 mounted) long-barreled L55 gun provides a 1,750m/sec muzzle velocity (roughly 5,800fps) which gives the LM53 LRP round as much as 1,100mm of penetration in comparison with the M829A3 which offers perhaps 900-950mm. The latter is a superior round, being denser (DU vs. tungsten) but only comes out of the barrel at about 1,500m/sec (or 5,000fps).

This is because the Abrams retains the shorter barrel L44 version of the Rheinmetall main tube and so could theoretically (it's a very long barrel and subject to heat droop as well as certain issues in close terrain) upgun for a match, ballistically, to the Leopard 2a6.

But where the M1A2 was intended to go was towards over the horizon guided shots for which the XM1111 MRM and digital communications links were vital in providing shared targeting and a smart top attack capability to go -beyond- the frontal arc protection of a threat.

Both the 1A2SEP and the 2A6 are better protected for the urban fight, though the TUSK II package has better layering. Neither vehicle has an active APS intercept capability at the moment, though the AMAP-ADS and Quick Kill options are available. These could theoretically 'remission' 20 tons of dead weight in armor by themselves.

The 2A6 also has air conditioning and an APU which makes fighting in hot climates easier.

If it comes to the open field tank fight, the Leo2A6 is probably the better ranged killer with less dependence on fuel and air filter cleanings (the Abrams gas turbine leaves it a roughly 2hr fighter in movement based actions).

If it comes to a MOUT fight where the threat is at close range and/or you have multiple friendlies intermixed, you have to give the nod to the Abrams which has the better passive protection suite, better close in weapons (RWS or turreted protection for gunner and TC) and superior networking to sort the sheep from the goats.

The Abrams really suffers in the tank vs. tank fight for want of an over-hill capability as guided rounds (MRM was cancelled) to exploit it's network shooter package however and if you look at the 'next gen' Leo2A7, not yet fielded, with massive add on side-armor packages, the decision probably flips back to the Leopard, even in urban fights.