M1A1 Abrams vs MAUS

[Nipah]

Who would win?

Pret sure the MAUS would have a chance of penning the M1A1 Abrams
If it was in the right angle and position?

[GoldenBears]

From the rear, maybe. M1A1 would pen Maus at any angle and any range and Maus would bounce from the front and probably from the side too.

[Bacon Cheeseburger Apocalypse]

Originally posted by 彡Tragopan:

Who would win?

Pret sure the MAUS would have a chance of penning the M1A1 Abrams
If it was in the right angle and position?

You realize that the M1A1 has an advanced gun stabilizer and sights that let it fire on the move at full speed and can hit targets at around 2.5km and farther. The MAUS on the other hand uses late WW2 tech, its not even close to a fair fight for the MAUS.

[Nipah]

Originally posted by Spent Casing:

Originally posted by 彡Tragopan:

Who would win?

Pret sure the MAUS would have a chance of penning the M1A1 Abrams
If it was in the right angle and position?

You realize that the M1A1 has an advanced gun stabilizer and sights that let it fire on the move at full speed and can hit targets at around 2.5km and farther. The MAUS on the other hand uses late WW2 tech, its not even close to a fair fight for the MAUS.

It's probably the only WW2 tank (does not include IS-3M or IS-4)
that has a chance at the M1A1 Abrams.

[Salvo Wolf]

Abrams is made out of classified armor, I don't think we will have any knowledge if an old ww2 gun can pen it or not not to mention all the advanced rounds of today...

[Nadlug]

Doubtfull. The M1A1 Had Burlington composit armor which has around 400 mm of effective thickness versus traditional AP shells.
Its difficult to say for sure though sicne theres no publicly avalible schematic that shows all the armor facins their angles and thickness. So who knows there may be a weakness somewhere.

Thats assuming the Crew of the Abrams even lets the Maus crew even see the abrams.

Originally posted by 彡Crest:

It's probably the only WW2 tank (does not include IS-3M or IS-4)
that has a chance at the M1A1 Abrams.

Well IS-3 and 4 are not ww2 tanks at all so dunno why you would include them. They entered production after germany surrended. Just in time to parade in Berlin.

[Schnittertm]

Originally posted by 彡Tragopan:

Originally posted by Spent Casing:

You realize that the M1A1 has an advanced gun stabilizer and sights that let it fire on the move at full speed and can hit targets at around 2.5km and farther. The MAUS on the other hand uses late WW2 tech, its not even close to a fair fight for the MAUS.

It's probably the only WW2 tank (does not include IS-3M or IS-4)
that has a chance at the M1A1 Abrams.

It still wouldn't have a chance, too slow, too little armor to do anything against what the German designed gun of the M1A1 could dish out, too little penetration on its own 128mm gun to reliably penetrate. Modern MBT wreck anything that was built before the 1980's and a lot of what was built after it. Case in point, M1A1 and Challengers against all what Sadam had and some of those tanks had much better guns and effective armor than the Maus.

[Handiry]

The Abrams uses Composite armour, has a modern-well designed gun, can fire on the move and it can outspeed a Maus. it'd be far from Fair for late-war Maus with his huge vehicle profile and vulnerability to an ammo rack which in modern day is not as dangerous due to blow out compartments. also shouldn't forget the sights, equipment, electronics, crew training and modern shells :P...

[Nadlug]

Originally posted by Schnittertm:

Originally posted by 彡Tragopan:

It's probably the only WW2 tank (does not include IS-3M or IS-4)
that has a chance at the M1A1 Abrams.

It still wouldn't have a chance, too slow, too little armor to do anything against what the German designed gun of the M1A1 could dish out, too little penetration on its own 128mm gun to reliably penetrate. Modern MBT wreck anything that was built before the 1980's and a lot of what was built after it. Case in point, M1A1 and Challengers against all what Sadam had and some of those tanks had much better guns and effective armor than the Maus.

Unless im mistaken not a single tank shell ever hit an abrams during that time period. Because of all the advanced stabilizers targeting and rangefinding eletronics that the Abrams possessed. They were Basicly Using ICBM's to nuke Civilizations still in the beginning era of Civ 4

[Bacon Cheeseburger Apocalypse]

Originally posted by 彡Tragopan:

Originally posted by Spent Casing:

You realize that the M1A1 has an advanced gun stabilizer and sights that let it fire on the move at full speed and can hit targets at around 2.5km and farther. The MAUS on the other hand uses late WW2 tech, its not even close to a fair fight for the MAUS.

It's probably the only WW2 tank (does not include IS-3M or IS-4)
that has a chance at the M1A1 Abrams.

It has 0 chance. Where do you get the idea that it would have any sort of chance against a modern tank. The M1A1 can fire effectivly on the move, has a top speed of around 72 km/h with its turbine engine. Advanced optics (infared, night vision, thermal, etc). And about 40 years of research and tank development behind it.

You might as well compare the Wright Brothers plane to a B2 bomber, its not in the same league.

[Nipah]

Everybody here is probably imaging a battle between the Abrams and MAUS straight on..

But let's say this..

There is a ABRAMS in the suburbs of Aghanistan or something
And the Taliban managed to get a MAUS captured by the Soviet Union in 1945
And during the battle with Russia and Afghan, it was captured.

So they manage to flank this M1A1 Abrams.
And get really close to the back

And manages to fire a very well placed shot at the back of the tank.
Up close
AP Round.

?

[Supreme Corgi]

It would be a TUSK then for the M1A1 if it's in the city

[Nadlug]

Originally posted by 彡Crest:

Everybody here is probably imaging a battle between the Abrams and MAUS straight on..

But let's say this..

There is a ABRAMS in the suburbs of Aghanistan or something
And the Taliban managed to get a MAUS captured by the Soviet Union in 1945
And during the battle with Russia and Afghan, it was captured.

So they manage to flank this M1A1 Abrams.
And get really close to the back

And manages to fire a very well placed shot at the back of the tank.
Up close
AP Round.

?

Still no, The armor on the Abrams alone is completely differnet from Rolled Homogenous steel on the Maus. It uses composit materials with an effective thickness vastly greater than what a maus can punch through at point blank even into the abrams rear. Unless the Abrams has a top secret weak spot that the Maus crew knows about it just simply wont happen.

[Nipah]

Originally posted by Ivan Mykytovych Kozhedub:

Originally posted by Nadlug:

Still no, The armor on the Abrams alone is completely differnet from Rolled Homogenous steel on the Maus. It uses composit materials with an effective thickness vastly greater than what a maus can punch through at point blank even into the abrams rear. Unless the Abrams has a top secret weak spot that the Maus crew knows about it just simply wont happen.

Lmao the Maus wouldn't have any troubles taping them rear vents http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot-restricted/tanks/tanks-m/m1a1_abrams-43062.jpg
http://www.williammaloney.com/Aviation/PattonMuseum/M1A1Abrams/images/07M1A1AbramsRear.jpg

Never noticed that before.
I think we've found a weakness

[Nadlug]

Probably would destroy the engine but it wouldent get past the engine block thus the M1A1-T stationary turret will be born, and promptly destory its creator with extreme prejudice. Assuming the Maus could lumber into positionb Behind the Abrams of course.

Honestly with the crap that goes into building and protecting modern MBT's There isnt a whole hell of a lot that can destroy them outright. Disable most definately but the vehicle itself would still be serviceable once recovered.

I wouldent be suprised if one could sit inside a Nuclear blast and have the engine fired up again with just spare parts considering how resistant to heat most of that armor is.

[NAF-5th.Legion-Waffen.Div]

silly thread