War Thunder's best Abrams MBT might not even be an Abrams. What even is this tank? Let's find out. The M60 120S in War Thunder! ↓ Social Links ↓ ➤ Twitch: / panzerpaw ➤ Twitter: / panzerpaw ➤ Discord: / discord ---
The confusion was from seeing the crew members not take damage. But looking back at it, I'm now just realising that the turret crew were probably already knocked out.
That would be an interesting addition for manual loading tanks, where it’s random. That would be a bit annoying though, so it’d probably be better if they added like a fatigue system or something where they reload really fast for the first few goes, but slows down with each reload. And then the reload speed shortens after not firing for a bit or something.
6:01 “slight changes” the M256 has the length of the L/44 which would infer worse penitration indeed yet that slight difference in breech is infac that the M256 breech is rated for 140mm rounds giving it even more chamber pressure than the L/55 only the L/55A1 is on par with the pressure of the M256 and can take the same ammo, an Abrams can take DM53 but a leopard can’t take M829A2 because its breech will fucking explode, sorry if I come across passive aggressive but one has good pen because it eeks out the energy from the combustion of the round, the other one just uses bigger explosion to achieve the same performance, hope this helped
One feature you didn’t mention this tank has over a normal Abrams or other nato tanks is a lack there of is the infamous NATO hump so you can shoot behind you
how does the ttd have "top tier rounds" and a "top tier turret"? the same shell can be found at 9.0 on an m60 (the CM11), and the turret isnt too special either
On the topic of the Abrams and Leopard 2 having different loading times the loader position in the Abrams appears to be quite a bit more spacious and almost the entirety of the ammunition is stored within the bustle with the few rounds in the hull rarely being loaded. Compare tgis to the Leopard 2's comparatively more cramped loader position and a large portion of it's ammo being stored in the hull front which hardly seems all that convenient of a spot for both purposes of quick follow up shots and overall long term fatigue on the loader because of this and you'll start to see why a rate of fire difference would occur. These are just my observations of each tank. While I know a lot about them I have not had the chance to work with them...yet. But speaking theoretically these factors should lend the Abrams both a faster "burst" and "sustained" rate of fire with the main gun. The comparatively spacious interior and almost all the rounds being located directly behind the loader would presumably mean less precious moments spent looking for/fishing for a shell or bending down to access hull stored ammunition and also save you seconds later on in a prolonged fight as the loader isn't straining themselves bending down and then lifting tge round up so it can be fit into the breach and sent home.
The reason I mentioned it is because of experience with the Leo. It's possible to load both guns at a similar rate but simulating a manual loader accurately is tricky regardless. Also, just a sidenote, you almost never fight loading from the hull rack. In the case of the Leopard, it's not really even possible unless you rotate the turret a certain way.
Trail and competition shows it is possible to sustain both at a similar rate. I do agree Abrams will likely have a higher max rate simply by having more space to move around. But Abrams has 18 ready round while Leo2 has 15. That's 3 round difference. It is a difference but not a huge amount. Abrams commander has to be out of the seat to access the commander side rack. Opening the door of the secondary stowage will also block access to ready rack. So the location of secondary storage should not have any effect on anything.
@@PanzerPaw gaijin has a long history of balancing with reloads to avoid changing brs the abrams has a larger weakspot than other top mbts and american players complained enough about the DU debacle that they gave the abrams that 5s reload
11:30 The reason a human loader is some times faster than an auto loader is the human loader in the M1A1-A2 variants are on a raised platform slightly above the breach so they dont have to raise the round as high and auto loaders have to raise or lower the gun and have a set reload time but experienced Abrams loader can do it quite quick Pumpkin skew
I know this might seem a bit annoyinh but it was never proven the abrams had an upgraded hull. Red effect made a video on it and explored the sources that are available and they simply pointed to that only 2 were intended to have their hull upgraded and never happened so they never did actually upgrade the hull.
the upper hull of the M60 is still surprisingly strong on this thing and will probably deflect quite a few shots but the lower hull and neck are then the problems still
On the topic of Challengers being slow, i do hope we get rid of the hulls irl if we really wanna stick with the CR3 turrets, switch it out for the Leopard 2A7V/2A8 or KF51 hulls (since RBSL would be the manufacturer)
I don't know if anybody else would be interested, but i would be if you made a video about the real life tanks and their capabilities and explaining about how they work
Dunno who all have said it, but if you have it, try the M60 AMBT, its this, but better overall in my opinion, yes its a M60 turret, but you have the 120mm, much better transmission and engine, and a grenade launcher, though it lacks a rapid aim .50, the commanders cupola .50 does have a fast RoF, but it is a event vehicle, which does mean the AMBT isnt available for everyone like this is
Hello mr. Panzer i love your videos cause you are funny and chill. And they helps a lot with my mental. What country did you serve for when you were a tank commander?
I do wonder if they'll consider giving it the proposed 1200hp engine upgrade (or 1000hp can't remember which), but I'm fine with it staying this historical depiction, but who knows, Gaijin's rules on historical depictions of prototypes/proposed upgrades are a bit all over the place so it could happen
I think many players at 10.0 would benefit if they didnt have a fast vehicle, to have them actually play abrams using its stronger aspects instead of bum rushing. that reload buff did the opposite for most ive encountered this month, theyve become more aggressive. rate of fire is for balancing reason, gaijin gave US mains 5sec reload for abrams after abit of crying and none of them appreciate that now they changed to whinging on the armor. abrams is not a bad tank if someone plays its strenghts. they even managed to be upset about extra ERA on the sides because ''no one uses heat at toptier'', i think they forgot helicopters and atgms and abrams is really annoying to deal with playing them.
I expected this tank to be mid at best and knew it would be slow. I am not joking you that this was EASILY the most BRUTAL stock grind I've had so far. I almost had to stop it was that bad. After you get the big 3 in t4 modifications I am happy to report that it is worthy of the efforts given to get to that point. It's still slow spaded but it's a little more manageable It's slow speed has actually helped me play more patiently in it and my God when you can find a spot to hunker down this tank absolutely POOPS on everything with ease. I am pleasantly surprised at it's capabilities. Anyone that isn't patient will get rocked often and swiftly just know that. This is a sniper and only a sniper.
Driving this vehicle is weird. The firepower is right, but there's just that tickle on your nipple that something about it moving and its overall body is just wrong in every single way lmao
the 120S was made so US to propose for sale on turkey that looked for an update on the M60 they had.. as a proposal to upgrade was to put on a M1 turret .. on the other hand.. the Chrysler propose another tank.. and thats the one that the turkish and israeli stole to make the AMBT-60 that won..so same purpose 2 tanks similar but so different ... as for the M1A1 + tanks in game...... the 5 second reload is the response of the gaijin cause they did not fix the armor on the tank......
What? The AMBT has nothing to do with anything, that thing never even entered service anywhere. The Israelites made the Sabra which they then used to modernize Turkeys M60s. Also the M60 120S wasn’t made for turkey, it was made for countries that have a lot of M60s which they want to be modernized. Egypt and Turkey were the main targets in this project.
