BTR(RUSSIAN ARMOURED PERSONNEL CARRIER) 

the sound of the engines would have been preferred over the elevator music

Halt schwienhundt, you're forgetting the updated ceramic armor, and counter blast plates and the totally awsome air conditioned troop quarters. both are NBC capable. I think I'd still take the striker over the bimpy or BTR any day

These were sitting all around the Junkyards in Afghanistan. No kidding - thousands of these mostly stripped down on rotting tires. Russian's must have wasted a fortune in Afghanistan.

and to add to that, the BTR at least has a back up 7.62, which the stryker doesn't and has the ability to add a 30mm grenade launcher too. plus the ammunition feed for the 30mm or 14.5mm and the 7.62mm and even the optional 30mm grenade launcher is internal, meaning no unlucky bastard has to climb up on the vehicle to replace the spent ammo box and belt every 50 or 100 rounds.

Поступала бы она еще на вооружение.... не по три машины в год...

what is the music please?

@patrikasLTL Which are miniature BMP-3's, or vice versa, carrying only a handful of dismounts. Not being better than the Stryker, I don't see your point in mentioning that. Yes. Russian infantrymen are issued shovels and would likely dig foxholes rather than sleep in pup tents during the night. The Kornet, being a crew-served tripod ATGM, could surely manage that. Javelins, being man-portable, is issued to the Anti Armor Specialist in each of a Stryker rifle platoon's three squads.

one word : BEAUTIFUL

I can see someone being wet at 1:43

.БТР-80 автомобилей в год в 1994 во время службы в турецкой армии на границе с Сирией используется в течение длительного времени. Был очень гористая область, мы были очень грязные и дождливая погода и бедными полевых условиях. Мы работали в регионе, где земля с ручьями и реками найдено. БТР-80 транспортных средств, которые не могут Брук очень отчаянно в этих условиях. После того, как в воде, у нас было много трудностей, потому что это инструмент, который не может приземлиться без твердой земле. Если кран проходит очень быстро затонул на мелководье из-за мягкой вала Пег транспортное средство не может быть освобожден из трясины мы вынуждены принимать отчаянные средства, как гусеничных машин. Я сделал персонал перевозку оборудования оружия 10 10 4 очка в комфорте требований водителя и оценка 4. землепользования для пользователей. Следует проконсультироваться с пользователей научных исследований и разработок. Мне нравится российской индустрии вооружений. Если у вас есть успех вполне в оборонной промышленности. Поздравляю.

@Boljev6 Some 15 pieces of BTR-90 were made in 20 years since first prototype was revealed back in 1992, as I remember. Russian Armed Forces did not field it. They require new APC. The project is started and called "Bumerang". In order to save money I suggest Russians to buy licence to produce modern Western design APCs from the West (Patria, Piranha), or from Ukraine (BTR-4).

eight wheel drive - new standart for real man lifestyle !

woah, woah, woah..... the US military has reactive armor as well as additional plates, and ceramic armor invented for direct contact with war heads, much different than the Russian steel BTR. It also can mount anything from an automated 50 caliber m2HB to a 105 mm anti tank gun. Weaker armor and weapons my ass...

Ilyet használnak a magyarok is

Wikipedia. In Russia btr-60 (2000) btr-70 (2000) btr-80 (3500-4000)

BMP's do not compare with Strykers and neither the BMP-3 nor the BTR-90 are air droppable (in practice, I'll grant you. You can drop ANYTHING with enough parachutes), as evidenced by the existance of the BMD deliberately built to fill that role. I do know that conscription is getting phased out, but the RF still has to build up its contract force. Also I'm not sure what you mean with that last phrase.

Magnificos vehiculos de combate los mejores👍👍👍🇷🇺

That is the most beautiful piece of machinery I have seen. Hard to believe that this thing was out before the USA Striker, yet the BTR seems just as good if not better. I would love to go off-roading in that thing. I think I would trust my life in that APC more than I would in U.S. Apc. Great Video,. I hope to see more video footage of this APC in the future.

@YellowBigLemon Which Stryker? The MGS? The ATGM carrier? The mortar carrier? The Mk19 ICV? The M2 ICV? The recon vehicle? The ambulence? Sure, its better at blowing up a hard target than the Strykers which aren't designed to fight hard targets. But against the MGS or ATGM, the scenario plays out quite differently. Or the recon vehicle just lases the BTR for an Apache; the real tank-killers in the US army. Its apples and oranges.

cool music i like it

At 1:44 did that BTR sink? it went in and didn't come up

i was 11 years old when sited on the chair and pressed the button. BTR-80 the best!

@nunchuck19 Whats wrong with suspension there? Try to show me Stryker going so hard as those BTRs and not loosing any wheels. Not to mention that Stryker will simply drown in water obstacles. As for noise - i bet you simply never saw any diesel armored vehicle in real life. In fact Stryker at least just as noisy as BTR in addition due center of mass placed so high - its prone to rolllover watch?v=rh-JWzq0_fo And watch Blacktaildefense videos i gave watch?v=Ekw5if3xn78

@nunchuck19 "personal bubble made up of info you made" Looks like you have no facts to provide so you use this childish trolling instead)) " it seems you havnt answered the part of where i said they can kill their own crew." Really?)) How EXACTLY?))) "russian tanks barely have any computers" In your dreamworld only)) In fact we use ballistic computers and even RC weapon stations since 1969 (T-64A) in addition we use ATGM for 35 years while your tanks still does not have it)))

@nunchuck19 "look at what its made of. look at other version with the frikin tracks" You comparing oranges and apples)) Want tracks? Look at BMP-3 then "understand your BTRs can kill its own men and and compare the interiors and im thinking u might change ur mind" Its you who need to do a bit more research))) watch?v=yKZAKsm96XM watch?v=R3HyhL6WYso watch?v=uolh9mCE6GA watch?v=O2CXTJ1wYVQ

@CEMOLTU dont telling bullshit please.. in 1941 when nazi started that war in russia they had MORE troops than russki. in 1945 russki desrtoyed nazi army. And only in the end of the 1944 they got more troops than nazi. Even in loses german lost more, than russki, if you will not enclude there soldiers who died in first weeks of agression and in berlin fight. Cause germans didnt fight for the russki capital and never lost soldiers under russi planes like russki in 1941.

@CEMOLTU Actualy till 1944 role of "allies" was insignificant - almost all and all of the best of nazi divisions was on the eastern front. Do not forget that USSR also needed to keep troops in the east. Down below i gave total numbers of men in the armies. As for mistakes - whole idea invading to Russia was know to be naturaly flawed for many centuries. How many times do we have to give that lesson? Hitler NEVER had any minor chance to win over USSR

In reality there was 21 mln men participated in Axis armies against USSR. and 28 mln men participated in actions against the Axis. Soviet army lost 8,668 mln men - out of them 2,73 mln died in nazi captivity Axis armies lost 5,076 mln - out of them 0,7 mln died in Soviet captity So in direct combat nazi lost 4,37 mln and USSR lost 5,938 mln - 1/4 more And thats normal because Soviet army ATTACKED most of the time - and attacker almost ALWAYS suffer greater losses Thats the true story

@NikovK No NATO did not planned a defencive war. You can google for example Operations Dropshot, Charioter, Unthinkable e t c USSR in opposite NEVER planned preventive war. And paratropers is NOT a weapon of aggression - it just a valuable TACTICAL tool. Having a bases hear USSR does not mean there was no need in paratroopers. USSR also was near buy but had VDV That means that most fierce and capable regiments of Soviet army could apear any where any time

@NikovK Actualy you better research how many times Rome was plundered before you talk about effectiveness of its legions. As for Soviet Empire - it fallen not because of its conscript system. Actualy that exact conscript system won WW2. And NOT because they feared execution - that your statement is rediculous. Conscripts for your information is NOT means "non-professionals" - officers in Soviet army ALSO was basicaly a conscripts. Also mercenary does NOT automaticaly means professional

@NikovK Roman empire FALLEN For one and simple reason: contractors serve until somebody is paying money. And NOBODY will DIE for money. Kill for money - YES - but NOT DIE for. Conscripts in opposite have naturaly differet motivations - all they need it good teachers during training and education. As for airlifting - sorry but USA has 100s of bases all abroad - incl western europe so it wasnt a problem. The just failed to develop such stuff - and thats so.

@CEMOLTU As for France - it is irrelevant how they did it - they DID - which NOT happened with USSR where nazi had a LOT more freedom of manuver - over 5000 km front line from white sea to black sea and there was no any Maginot Line at all - so whats the matter? Answer is simple - SOVIET PEOPLE AND STALIN was our infinite and undefeatable Maginot Line

Not anything and de-facto US army does NOT drop any of APC, IFV on parachutes asp with crews inside. Russian parachute systems are best - even France use them in Arian. And cintactors never win any wars - ONLY conscrit army when people know what they fight for (not money) win wars. Local conflicts is not wars i`m talking about

@nunchuck19 "besides 260 hp is weak hahahahaha" Yeah aspecialy mentioning that Stryker`s power to weign rate is around 15HP/tonne - with all that bird cage and armor addons))) while BTR-80 enjoys 19))) Just watch links i gave))

@CEMOLTU As for Napoleon - actualy we allowed him to enter Moscow on 14 sept 1812 - and winter has ABSOLUTELY nothing to his defeat - we simply let his army to decay in plundering Moscow and then BURNED it with Napoleon inside.

Stryker MGS is NOT an infantry carrier you should compare is to Sprut-SD with its 125 mm gun same as on T-90 Not to mention that Sprut , BMP-3 and BMD-4 is AIRDROPABLE weapons capable to fight right after airdrop because it drops with crews inside

THE US ARMY Stryker looks alot this ,probally better than this because it has a whoole family of different versions

@NikovK Actualy Georgian army was turned to panic flee in after 4 days of fighting only with 800 men from 58th army 800 men against 13000 Other 4000 arived AFTER cease fire - after 12th august

that song ise werry good,bath any army of the world is shame for all peolple on earth! whta they lornd ass too hate people!? why? fack pliticans! peace too ewerybothy!

im guessing you are an eighteen year old brit who has never had any type of military experience and just thinks he knows more than everybody else about country affairs?

why are we all comparing US to Russian weapons? i mean we should be comparing us to chinese or russian to chinese weapons because that is a more likely war scenario

The side exit door for the infantry makes it inferior compared to the Ukrainian version of the BTR which has more sensible rear opening doors for infantry exit.

secret armor my ass, you basic high nickel tool steel. aluminum layers with some rubber spacing.

This APC looks not only scary .... better you fight whit it not against it. very nice movie

Ещё, даже, в древних цивилизациях во время войны так с флагами бегали. Не знаю, зачем. Может, для того, чтобы союзники издали могли найти своих. =)

yes, my vid is of the BMP-3M, but it uses the exact same 2A72 30mm cannon, demonstrating much better accuracy than in your video of either the BTR-80A or the BMP-3. as for Popovkin's remarks, he is a general in strategic missile defense so take his opinions on the platform with a grain of salt and he doesn't speak for the entire russian military. the VDV are more than glad to buy BMD-4s. any sidelining of the BMP-3 will be done by the proposed Kurgantes-25 IFV.

and yet, in this video at 2:42 - 2:44 it demonstrates much better accuracy and there are many videos of BMP-3 firing the same gun on russian polygons being much more accurate than the BTR in the video you linked and the BMP-3 later on in that video. (e.g. /watch?v=CjJzvwPLb84 0:51, 5:45, 6:17) it's almost like there's something not quite right about footage from an international tender, like for instance foreign crews who received only bare bones training or poor ammunition.

barrel bounce? what exactly are you talking about? if you are referring to the 30mm barrel resonating upon firing, that is not special or unique. the M2HB has the same "issue" the only difference being that it is less visible on it's comparatively shorter and under less stress barrel. furthermore, have you observed that the barrel retracts backwards upon firing almost as if into a buffer system...

MatoVuc is right americans arm strikers with either a .50 or a 105mm cannon, mostly the .50 cal, and as I recall it is not amphibious. BTRs have a damn 20mm auto cannon similar to that of what American IFV LAVs like the m2 bradley. A 20mm would tear critically damage but not completely destroy a Stryker because of better armor, but a 50 cal will do minimum damage at best to a BTR btw I'm American and no amount of national pride will stop me from being biased and saying "well it's better cuz

Google for Stryker criticism. The family simply doesn't do what it was intended for(and the whole idea was flawed to begin with): 1) It has no strattegical transportability advantage over Bradley or even Abrams. 2) It is not protected against any kind of threat except firearms. 3) Modular system doesn't work because conversion is too difficult in the remote theatre(may as well bring Abrams instead of MGS). 4) Low TechSpecs of the LAV chasiss. And that is only the begining.

the stryker can shoot a 105 mm gun that will slice throug your ¨Armored Vehicles¨ like a hot knife true butter Mr. and it can also become a mortar platform ,a medical vehicle ,a command vehicle, anti tank guided missile vehicle,nuclear, biolagical,chemical, reconnaissance vehicle and much more.it has better armor and better protection against IEDs ,the guns are remote so you operate them from inside plus the tech in them surpasses by far the btr

@erer270 Dear erer270! BTR-82 is also seen on this video. Basically, BTR-80, with 30 mm gun is called BTR-80A. BTR-82 is BTR-80A with stabilized gun. To see pictures go to this URL: //army.lv/ru/btr-82/foto/1505/720/1 Unfortunately, this gun is extremely shaky while firing. Ukrainians did better job by incasing similar gun (produced in Ukraine) on so calle BTR-3 (Ukrainian APC similar to BTR-80) the barrel into a frame that significantly improves accuracy. Type BTR-3E1 on RU-vid to see.

Unfortunately, Russians lost their lead in armored vehicle production. At a time BTR-60 was a revolutionary APC. Now, situation is so that BTR-90 after 20 years of development was accepted to the army service. Outdated design. Russians pursue upgrade of BTR-80 - it is BTR-82 now. However, 30 mm gun is trembling during fire making it inacurate, engine still in the rear... New project "Bumerang" promises new APC in 2015. But, better buy Ukrainian BTR-4: Western design, powerful, and cheap!

@srheadshot1 Dear srheadshot1! Patriotic feelings are excellent things, but don't help to see the real picture. Unfortunately, Russian BTRs are becoming outdated and needed to be replaced with new developments. BTR-90 was ment to replace BTR-80. But, 19 years of development demostrated its handicaps. "Gilza' was another project. Then, it was also abandoned. Now, Russians develop "Boomerang". Let's see what would come out! ...And produce upgraded BTR-80 named BTR-82. Not the best...

@Boljev6 All of them are legacy of the Soviet Union. It's way too many! They are decent vehicles. But, not the best in the world and the most modern. Ukraine does maintenance and very little upgrages. No need to buy new. Although, new and powerful BTR-4 is developed. What Russians do? They do continue to produce not the most modern equipment like BTR-80 (or, sorry, BTR-82)! This year around 240 units for Russian Army. Because they do not have better model! They only develop it!

@Boljev6 Dear Russian friend, unfortunately, you're totally misinformed. Please use Google and search for "Oplot" (tank), BTR-3 and BTR-4 (APCs), An-140, An-70, An-148, An-124 (passenger and cargo planes). All these things are designed and made in Ukraine. Yes, Ukraine doesn't make helicopters and fighter jets. However, most of the systems from engine through electronics, avionics, radars to weapons are made in Ukraine. ...and installed (suprise!) on Russian jets and helicopters. :-)

@Boljev6 Nope, no BTR-90 in Indian or Iranian armed forces. Unfortunately, you're wrong... Can't tell anything about Su-50 (what's that?) and Ka-50 - not interested. Unfortunately, T-95 project also canceled. Long time ago. Omsk plant is bankrupt, hopefully, can start making railroad cars this year. No tanks. BTR-90 is also canceled. I think it is cheaper for Russia to buy Ukrainian BTR-4 instead of developing new BTR. BTR-4 is ready and in mass production.

@Alexander1068 i know for M113 but he is old man and with m2 mahicne gun he cant go in battle.Also most number of lost vehicles in afgan chechnia and georgia is BTR.But good thing is russians have tham inafe to thay can destroy 10 on day all the year thay will have again lot of tham.Also bmp-2 is am am sure vehicle wich use most of country on world.He have good performance and ic easy for servis when ic needed.Also BTR-90 is out idk where you see to he is canceled and gogle BMP-4:)

@Boljev6 Soviet APCs and IFVs are widely proliferated. It's true. Do you know why? Because they were given out for free. Western countries were also supporting their friends with free cookies, but not that much. Although, some of the Western vehicles enjoyed high rate production and use. For example, over 80 000 M113s were made in all versions! And it was used by 50 or more countries. Assymetric conflicts require MRAP type vehicles. That's why you see few Breadly in Afghanistan, Sir.

@Boljev6 Western APCs vs. BTR-60/70/80/90: location of the engine: Western APC in the front/middle, Soviet/Russian in the rear. Result: Western APCs - entrance from the rear, S/R - from the top and sides. HUGE advantage of Western vehicles! Ammo and fuel: Western APCs outside crew compartment, R/S - mostly inside crew compartment. That's mostly a reason, why Russian MOD decided to stop development of BTR-90. BMP-4: what's that? No such vehicle I know...

@JanJanych Where was my grandfather? My grandfather was driving a bus during the war. We didn't have to defend our homeland because we listened and followed dictators. By the way, he didn't eat dogs or horses or other humans which seemed to happen in those cities fought over. Quite frankly I don't even think they had ration cards. But alot did die moving supplies to russia and the other commie countries.

@Bryso21 Actually, during most of the cold war when russian leaders were saying that they would be washing their armour in the English Channel in 21 days, (coined from Hitler by the way) in fact they did not have the fuel to reach the channel. When the russians hit France they would run as they did from Napoleon. The fact of the matter is the only medal for killing the enemy in russia should be old man winter. They are all crooks or cowards, or both.

@123A1231 The first true paratroop drop was carried out by Italy in November 1927. Within a few years several battalions had been raised and were eventually formed into the two elite Folgore and Nembo divisions. Although these would later fight with distinction in World War II. Men drawn from the Italian parachute forces were dropped in a special forces operation in North Africa in 1943 in an attempt to destroy parked aircraft of the USAAF. sorry, your fucking wrong

@MarshallJukov defender not need constructed emplacement line like castle. it is a medieval defence idea.Ottoman Empire changed this idea for a long time ago since 1453.defender need long distance defence batlle field.we won against greece in 1922(Great Attack) ,"There is no line of defense. There are surface-defense. that surface is all homeland. Author ,MUSTAFA KEMAL ATATÜRK " UNDEFEATABLE COMMANDER.

nazi lose because of cold weather .when german army soldier was attack against russian border they are wearing summer suit . on the other hand battle field too far for german logistic support .cold wheather always support russia in history . example against Napoleon's France Army, Ottoman Army and German / Nazi Army. Defeating 49 days by thunderattack over the Belgium border.Marne border defence out of order.

@MarshallJukov Funny how Rome endured hundreds of years and multiple sackings yet the USSR fell apart without Moscow being captured once. Yeah, the conscript system that won WW2 by giving Russia countless thousands to throw at German lines until the enemy literally ran out of artillery shells and wore out the barrels. Conscripts are forced-service soldiers. Professionals are paid volunteers. Mercenaries are paid volunteers. Learn English, and calm down already. You're shouting your head off.

@MarshallJukov And yes, the USA has hundreds of bases abroad. Russia only has bases in its immediate sphere of influence. Why would the USA need to be airlifting anything if we already have bases where the units need to be? And wasn't NATO planning a defensive war? Aren't paratroopers sort of... offensive? America had no need for air-deployed heavy formations and never developed them accordingly.

@MarshallJukov Roman empire didn't fall until the 1400's, and the Soviets fell apart after a half-dozen decades. Your refutation doesn't really stand on anything. Conscripts are motivated by the fact they are coerced into fighting by force and will be executed if they desert. Professionals are fighting because they like the job and keep fighting because they will be executed if they desert. So we have a mass of people who don't want to fight versus people who do want to fight. Go on. Please.

@MarshallJukov Russia did pour into air-deployable mechanized forces, but the US never bothered since air-lifting and parachuting a battalion from North America to Europe is nigh-impossible. From Eastern Europe to Western Europe is a different matter. And 'cintactors', by which I think you mean contractors, are not what I'm talking about. 'Contract' troops, IE professional, career soldiers, are the core of successful armies. A good example is the Roman legionnaire.

You mean Motor Rifles? Three year short service conscripts are being given digital radio headsets when they have to beg for rent money in the capital? Somehow I doubt they're issued something so valuable. But you dodged the Javelin / Konkurs discussion. I'd expect as much. I'd also point out the SBCT is air-transportable anywhere in the world in three days, landed out of a short-runway cargo plane. A motor rifle brigade can't be transported without rail or major airfields.

@patrikasLTL I wouldn't make such broad comparisons. The BTR-90, for example, might be more powerful than a Stryker ICV. However the infantry squad carried in the ICV is not only larger but carries the anti-tank firepower; a Javelin ATGM. You couldn't say the outdated Konkurs SACLOS system is greater than fire and forget Javelin, could you? Or that a Russian dismount element of conscripts which doesn't have a radio is more tactically alert than LandWarrior equipped professional infantrymen?

yes I saw that they were dropped in sea near beach and swim to the beach shooting

actually, they do. depending on the exhibition, which is usually done as a competition of designs for possible purchase, but most of them have the vehicles and weapons crewed by the potential buyer nations own crew unless specified otherwise and ammunition used is the training or live ammunition provided by the country, unless they have none in stock

the stryker is kind of, sort of, but not really derived from it. add the Patria AMV to that list, though it has the same problem of RWS instead of a proper weapon turret as most other modern western 8x8-s APCs. still, it is easily the best western Armoured Modular Vehicle in terms of overall performance and has a LOT of variants.

how about you provide them, since you've already seen them. they were never built to be amphibious, their predecessors were. I've not seen one source that claimed the Stryker was amphibious. If you have a source that claims so I'd love to see it and an explanation why it doesn't have propellers or even a frontal barrier.

Wow, a BTR has gun ports you can fire a PK through? I know it's not very well armoured, but seriously it has the potential to pour out the firepower, plus it would be fielded in numbers. Que people waxing lyrical that "Bradley has firing ports etc", yeah well a Bradley is like 11ft tall, and a fully tracked Armoured fighting Vehicle.

not to mention that the BTR, for all it's flaws is far more maneuverable than the Stryker, since it is more stable, has wider tires and is amphibious, making it a more tactically and strategically versatile vehicle. in terms of armour, the stryker wouldn't survive particularly more if anything more than a BTR-80 would anyway, so your point is moot.

@Boljev6 Could you please use Google to see that there is no licence produced in Ukraine: all are Ukrainian developments. We are not making BMP-2, BTR-70: we make Oplot, BTR-3, BTR-4. Oplot all systems are made in Ukraine. Even gun, that Ukraine never produced before independence is Ukrainian development KBA-3!

@Alexander1068 Dear american friend or whatever are you.Ukraina dosent first make any btr.russia first make btr.Ukraina have only licence to thay can make russia made btr's.Actualy thay just copy russian btr's.Like my country got licence from russia to make bmp-2,btr-70 and more things or russian ak-series weapons.

@Bryso21 I don't hate the country, it is the people in it. I don't know if it is true or not but I heard the russian APC's have one gear forward and ten for reverse. Of course reason is if they are attacked from behind they can also run away.............. Man you commies make it easy, and by the way I am not american. Just hate commies.

@Bryso21 You see there is where you are wrong. Tell me about a battle the russians won. Anytime they were faced with any opposition they ran. The only reason they were sucessful during the second WW was that Stalin had a no retreat rule. Read your gutless history you dumb commie.You are all crooks or cowards.....

@rusbp This is what I thought a few days ago, when i read about plenty of destroyd merkavas by the paletinians with the AT 13 Saxhorn from Iran. If the Afghans or the Iraqis had support by any real country, the US troops would not face 50 year old wepons, and would be faster out of there than speedy gonzalez

@MarshallJukov I dont think so . Nazi armed force separated very large area in europe africa and asia ,so nazi got lots of frontline (battlefield) .west uk east russia.I think hitler was make mistake ,he attacked early against russia.firstly he must defeat uk. than turn his face east.But God does not give the opportunity to harm.

I've heard from a US Army officer a firsthand account from a Georgian army officer. Apparently in a battalion-sized night attack on entrenched Russians, US-trained Georgian troops inflicted some 180 Russian casualties for a handful of their own. Its quite impressive to chew up two whole infantry companies in one night.

That tree was a small one, a sapling, but not quite. Thus popping up because the tree's wood is still flexible and not matured. I'm not going to go into tree structure, etc, because that would be stupid and useless, I'm pretty positive you have enough smarts to compute the answer to why that tree poped right back up.

Same shit just like any wheeled apc. A death trap and a target for ied and rockets. Stryker is better in terms of comfort but lacks a firepower, speed and an ability to swim comparing to 90 series btr. So, btr might be a way better choice as a unit. I think earlier btr was kept in mind by those who designed stryker either.

buff THE BEST EXPERT!! BTR80 of course is a APC, similar US counterpart is, M113!! APC!! M3 bradley my friend is a IFV LIKE russian IFV BMP3 with 100mm missilelauncher/canon, secundary weapon are 30mm canon (the same like in BMP2,another rusian IFV) and finaly 3 PKT 7,62 machine guns,one or two of this can replace by 30mm granade launcher! read more! my friend!

none of these are BTR-70's actually... they are the BTR-80, BTR-80A, and BTR-90

still does not account for the substantially better accuracy demonstrated in this video at the time frame i mentioned and it still doesn't account for inaccuracy on the tender, since later on in the video the BMP-3 demonstrates almost the same level of inaccuracy as the BTR-80A

no it is not. the stryker and the LAV-III are too heavy to do so. it has never demonstrated that ability and a good indicator of this is the lack of propellers for propulsion in water. a feature it's contemporaries capable of said feat have (Btr, Patria AMV...)

@RyleyAshford Low rate high-displacement V8+ engines giving almost all their 200hp on an initial rate without pushing a gas pedal are way more powerful than 400hp Mini which won't even take-off on it's initial rate producing 0.1hp without pushing a gas to the limit.

Yeah buth chinees and russian ppl arent stupid and How more ppl say it on the internet already how more known Factor it is what is feard by ppl so to be veryy honnest war vs china russia never happens we got to mutch to work to do and Our Economie buzniss ar to close to eachother

M3 bradley my friend is a IFV LIKE russian IFV BMP3 with 100mm missilelauncher/canon, secundary weapon are 30mm canon (the same like in BMP2,another rusian IFV) and finaly 3 PKT 7,62 machine guns,one or two of this can replace by 30mm granade launcher! read more! my friend!

well its not really safe to be in there,after you blow the tires up,its an easy target for a RPG.

so let me get this straight, the BTR is lighter, more maneuverable, amphibious, has a considerably more powerful weapons system, but the Stryker would beat it because of a more modern radio and GPS? clearly, it is I who is making jokes here...

@dekster14LP No. Generally speaking not all 8x8 chasis are from Tatra. :-) Or more correctly, only Tatra 8x8 chasis is Tatra's. Others are not: on BTR-60/70/80, Piranha, LAV, Stryker, Puma, BTR-4, Patria, you name! :-) Thank you.

BTR-80, in BTR-80A version is nice. BTR-82 and BTR-82A even better - they get stabilized weapon stations! Finally. However, Ukrainian BTR-3 is better in many respects. Russians need something more modern to repalce aging technology.

Not a bad vehicle, there should be no problem running away from your next bungled invasion in these. You never see any fighting from these commies. Just driving around and shooting targets. Great stuff if you never have to use it for the proper purpose.....

@RedRabbit100 Are you an american? Russian engineering is all about simpicity,durability and cost efficency.. whats wrong about that? This concept won ww2 (back then american weapon systems were constructed with the same principle) and the vietnam war.

@Z971 @Z971 Just for the record 1. we do have our own apc 2. Russia couldnt pay the score to Hungary so they gave us 500 btr80s - and we accepted it :((( by the way what tells the fact that all u could do is play the racist card lol u have no real defence