How good is the Leopard 2 armor compared to the M1/M1IP?

[dfebruary]

The Leopard 2A3/2A1 is going to be added to the game someday so i wonder what it's armor is? I know that it's less angled and there is an area of the turret where the armor is 10-20% weaker, but overall how is it compared to the M1 and M1IP?

I know that one of the developers called it mid but i am not sure if that's in comparison to the M1 or M1IP

["ABT.510"-WarUlf]

in that aspect The M1A1 Heavy (1988) is very similar to the LATE version of The Leopard 2A4. (1989)
Even the very early Leopard 2 A1/A2/A3 (1980) had an very much better armor protection against both APFSDS-T and HEAT compared to the M1, M1IP AND M1A1 BUT the M1A1 HA  is better then the EARLY versions of the Leopard 2A4 as the Leopard 2A4 had 3 different armour matrixes  A, B and D...as reference  You can read more regarding this this in Hilmes and Krapke's books..

[dfebruary]

Originally posted by "ABT.510"-WarUlf:

in that aspect The M1A1 Heavy (1988) is very similar to the LATE version of The Leopard 2A4. (1989)
Even the very early Leopard 2 A1/A2/A3 (1980) had an very much better armor protection against both APFSDS-T and HEAT compared to the M1, M1IP AND M1A1 BUT the M1A1 HA  is better then the EARLY versions of the Leopard 2A4 as the Leopard 2A4 had 3 different armour matrixes  A, B and D...as reference  You can read more regarding this this in Hilmes and Krapke's books..

But the developers described the 2A1/2A3 armor as "mid" (but i am unsure if this is in comparison to the M1 or M1IP? Or maybe it's taking into account weakpoints and post-pen survivability?), do you have sources backing the armor being superior to the M1IP? Because i have seen a West German manual describing optimal ranges against different warsaw pact tanks and did not get the impression it was basically invulnerable against APFSDS (which having better armor than the M1IP would make it)

[ActionScripter]

Leopard 2 armor in GHPC will be an early version (B-tech) and will likely perform equal to or slightly worse than the base model M1.

[harry]

The distribution is different. Lower glacis of the Leopard 2 is pretty bad. Cheeks are OK. It's not as protected as an Abrams overall.

[SpottedTeuton]

Originally posted by harry:

The distribution is different. Lower glacis of the Leopard 2 is pretty bad. Cheeks are OK. It's not as protected as an Abrams overall.

What are your sources that the Abrams is better protected than the Leopard 2 because according to military simulation and real combat reports it is a different story.

[dfebruary]

Originally posted by SpottedTeuton:

Originally posted by harry:

The distribution is different. Lower glacis of the Leopard 2 is pretty bad. Cheeks are OK. It's not as protected as an Abrams overall.

What are your sources that the Abrams is better protected than the Leopard 2 because according to military simulation and real combat reports it is a different story.

Huh? I don't think the M1 and M1IP ever saw combat

And neither did the Leopard 2A1/A2/A3

[SpottedTeuton]

Originally posted by dfebruary:

Originally posted by SpottedTeuton:

What are your sources that the Abrams is better protected than the Leopard 2 because according to military simulation and real combat reports it is a different story.

Huh? I don't think the M1 and M1IP ever saw combat

And neither did the Leopard 2A1/A2/A3

you are correct but i was thinking more about Leopard 2 A4 and the M1A1 in comparison because there are more accurate data on these versions. but comparing the M1 M1IP and the Leopard 2A1/A2/A3 it really depends where the tanks get hit and wich distance. There are both cons and pros with the early versions of the Leopard 2 and the M1 in Armour protection in comparison.

[Urk_da_WAAAGH!]

Originally posted by SpottedTeuton:

Originally posted by harry:

The distribution is different. Lower glacis of the Leopard 2 is pretty bad. Cheeks are OK. It's not as protected as an Abrams overall.

What are your sources that the Abrams is better protected than the Leopard 2 because according to military simulation and real combat reports it is a different story.

The 2A4 being a few tons under the M1A1's weight isn't enough to prove it has quite a bit less armor than the Abrams?

Well, one can cite the british RARDE that evaluated the leopard 2A4 as having about 300mm of kinetic protection on it's hull.

Or we can call your argument off entirely because neither the M1A1 or the Leopard 2A4 were the subjects of the post.

[R1NK4]

Originally posted by Josh:

Leopard 2 armor in GHPC will be an early version (B-tech) and will likely perform equal to or slightly worse than the base model M1.

What model of Leopard 2 will be added?

[Dooby]

Originally posted by Rockdownes:

Originally posted by Josh:

Leopard 2 armor in GHPC will be an early version (B-tech) and will likely perform equal to or slightly worse than the base model M1.

What model of Leopard 2 will be added?

I dont think it has been specified other than being a model prior to leopard 2a4, so 2a3 is likely.

[orcbuster]

Its a moot point as all production leopard 2s up to the early 2A4 production models had identical protection with the improved C-tech armor packages not being introduced until the later 2A4s.

[Andy Mil]

were bout to say was German already Leopard 2 during the time of M1IP?? the M1 employing in this game and since dev follow time line then I feel like more of first of series and prototype of M1A1 and not even close to become HC soo are those Leopard 2 are coming??

[harry]

Originally posted by SpottedTeuton:

Originally posted by harry:

The distribution is different. Lower glacis of the Leopard 2 is pretty bad. Cheeks are OK. It's not as protected as an Abrams overall.

What are your sources that the Abrams is better protected than the Leopard 2 because according to military simulation and real combat reports it is a different story.

I'm not trying to convince you. If you want to convince us, you need to provide *your* source.

[1156978923]

Originally posted by Josh:

Leopard 2 armor in GHPC will be an early version (B-tech) and will likely perform equal to or slightly worse than the base model M1.

Will the Leopard 2 in the game be the Leopard 2A4 type?

[SpottedTeuton]

Originally posted by harry:

Originally posted by SpottedTeuton:

What are your sources that the Abrams is better protected than the Leopard 2 because according to military simulation and real combat reports it is a different story.

I'm not trying to convince you. If you want to convince us, you need to provide *your* source.

One general indication regarding this is from TRADOC's : Worldwide Equipment Guide

Source: Worldwide Equipment Guide from early 2000. (page 4-9)

Note: It is highly likely that TRADOC is referring to the latest 2A4...but it will give the developers a good reference.
So the important question is how much better was 2A4 late compared to early..

Note; In the later version of the WEG this information was deleted which could be an indication that older data was real/good