# Top Ten Tanks **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 23, 2006, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572 "2006-11-23T18:55:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572/21 "2006-11-24T17:25:57Z")
[QUOTE=ralph124c] I saw one of these a while back-why would anyone design a tank ith a fixed cannon? How would you be able to aim the gun quickly enough? [/QUOTE] I do not know this specific model but IIRC there were plenty of fixed weapon armored vehicles in WWII. Some things to consider: You can lay one hell of a slab of front armor without worrying about turret rotation Simpler to manufacture and maintain without turret rotation machinery. Larger and or longer barreled weapons can be used since you are not worried about fitting it into a turret. ---
**Author:** ![seenidog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f04885/32.png) [@seenidog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/seenidog)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572/22 "2006-11-24T19:19:39Z")
Lokij says: > [@](#): > > The first M1 was built in 1978, that’s a bit more than just ‘on the drawing board’ but I was talking about effective strength. Nevertheless, the writing was on the wall and the M60s were a stopgap until a completely new tank design could replace the venerable Patton series. In the 70s, when you say “the M-60 ruled” composite and reactive armor was coming onto the scene or was already there. The M-60 was an evolutionary design, it was made to defeat previous and or current threats as the result of upgrades. It was not revolutionary or cutting edge and it’s edge over the most current opposition was mainly in training and doctrine. The T-72 and the T-64 had composite armor, the M-60 had plain steel with the Russian tanks fielding depleted uranium rounds by the 70s in larger guns. The Patton series of tanks was never really the dominant force that the US army wanted, it was merely adequate. I stand by my belief that the tank that belongs in the top 10 is the Abrams, not the Patton series. I concede a couple of your points. First there is the Abrams, and then everything else. Second I agree, the M-60 was not the pinnacle of design, or any great break through in technology. Still, at the time it was the baddest boy on the block at the time, while during it’s own time the M-4 Sherman was outclassed by everything else out there. Yet the Sherman makes the top ten and the M-60 is ignored. A little dispute in the mideast during the 70’s confirmed the M-60 totally out classed the Soviet made alternatives. The only reason the Sherman made a difference was the huge numbers, and the exceptional bravery and skill of thier crews. The crews deserve all the praise than can be given them, but the machinery was second rate at best. And as a disclaimer, I was not a tread head, I was infantry. You could not have gotten me to get into one of those cans. To paraphrase Bill Mauldin, “A fifty two ton moving foxhole attracts a lot of artillery”. To further disclaim I was in from 80-86, and blessed with the only time in memory that we were not shooting at anybody, the closest I came to combat was a bar fight at Ft. Benning. And I never saw an M-1. I do not dispute your facts as far as one having been built in 78, but that hardly makes it a viable resource at the time. If all heck broke loose at the time, it would not be M-1’s holding the line, it would have been M-60s, and they were up to the task. Hope you all had a pleasant holiday! ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572/23 "2006-11-24T19:38:16Z")
[QUOTE=Bobotheoptimist] . 3. Tiger. Rocked on everything except ease of manufacture. [/QUOTE] Incredibly slow. Underpowered. And it hardly ever worked. A tank’s no good when it spends all its time being repaired. The Tiger was crap. Doesn’t belong on the list. ---
**Author:** ![Bobotheoptimist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/919ad9/32.png) [@Bobotheoptimist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bobotheoptimist)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572/24 "2006-11-24T22:00:37Z")
[QUOTE=RickJay] Incredibly slow. Underpowered. And it hardly ever worked. A tank’s no good when it spends all its time being repaired. The Tiger was crap. Doesn’t belong on the list. [/QUOTE] No no no no! We must worship all German tanks! They were the masters of all things tank related and must never say anything bad about them! ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572/25 "2006-11-25T02:43:58Z")
I haven’t had much (read anything) to do with the armed forces, or with armored forces in particular, since the mid 1980 when I left the Reserves. However, in one of those European Reforger war games in the mid-80s the Abrams had just been issued out to the US armored divisions in Europe and the fall games were the tankers first chance to use them in large scale maneuvers. The tankers were just ecstatic. They had nothing but praise for the new tank and were just about giddy when they started talking about encounters with M-60 and German Leopard equipped formations and British units. The guys who were using the Abrams were pretty enthusiastic about them. Encounters in Gulf I, albeit against an inferior adversary, seem to confirm their opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Bobotheoptimist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/919ad9/32.png) [@Bobotheoptimist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bobotheoptimist)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572/26 "2006-11-25T06:14:40Z")
Watching Sahara (Bogart, not McConaughey), no one wants to nominate the M3 Grant? ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572/27 "2006-11-25T08:02:35Z")
As I recall, these tanks were quite fast, with a rapid-firing cannon. How did they stack up? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-tanks/381572.md?page=1)