BF2S Forums Is the Challenger 2 really the best tank in the world?

Wow, lot of fanboyism going on here.

First of all, I am obviously slanted in favour of anything British. Just like an American would favour American etc.
I'm also in Leeds, not that far away from Vickers... (where they make the Challenger)

The UK has had a long history of tank innovation, read up on the history of the Chieftain tank for example. We were the first to implement composite armour (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chobham_armour).

That said, the early Challengers were total and utter garbage with the exception of the armour. The gun, range finders etc were all junk.

It deserves to be said that the current Challenger has been pretty much redesigned from the ground up and I believe an earlier poster is correct that it does hold the current longest range kill by a tank. (first gulf war I believe, sorry.. can't be arsed to find a link)

It is the most heavilly armoured tank in the world and has only suffered one casualty from friendly fire during gulf war 2. (another Challenger 2 fired upon another Challenger 2 amid the heat of a battle)

If we're talking about operationally deployed tanks of western nations (lets count Israel too, though not technically western) then we can only realistically compare the M1, Challenger and Merkava.

First of all, the M1.

It saw deployment in the first and second gulf wars and has suffered a number of casaulties as a result of multiple rpg hits. It was a tank designed for tank vs. tank warfare (against warsaw pact T-72s etc) and not in a support role. As such it does have an armour weakness that insurgents in Iraq have discovered which is around the middle bottom at the tracks where a few well placed rpgs will penetrate the armour and kill the crew.
It has an absolutely excellent electronics warfare battlefield system. Apparently the best in the world.
The engine for the M1 was designed for a different kind of warfare where petrol/diesel would be expected to be in short supply. The upside to the engine is that it can deliver relatively high speeds for a tank, the downsides are that it has a shorter range than just about every other tank out there, the engine radiates a massive amount of heat so makes for a glowing target for any thermal based imagining systems and it can't realistically spend any long periods at high speeds or else it will literally shake itself apart.

The Challenger (current) is the best armoured tank in the world and has suffered zero casualties from enemy fire. It's not as fast as most other western tanks because of the heavy armour, however realistically most tanks never go above 30mph. The downsides to this tank are its history, it has a history which makes even the M1's history look good in comparison. Originally designed as a tank made for the Shah of Iran, it soon became the MBT for the British army when the Shah was overthrown. Unfortunately they were given a substandard tank in all but Armour at the time, it was only the years just before the first Gulf War that they made important improvements. (primarilly the range finder)

It's only in the most recent Challenger 2 revision that it saw a major overhaul and redesign.


The Merkava was a tank designed to act more in a support role, in comparison to the M1 or Challenger it is a very lightly armoured tank. However it does have the unique innovation of being the only tank in the world which has its engine at the front. It is now known to have an armour weakness on its underside which has been taken advantage of by Palestinian militants who have managed to destroy Merkavas by planting shaped charges hidden in the ground and waiting for one to drive over the charge.
The Merkava relies upon its main gun (similar in accuracy to all western tanks) for any tank killing at long range, it is unknown how it would fair against other tanks however its armour might be its weakness especially if up against other tanks with a similary capable main gun.


As to other tanks like the Leclerc, Leopard etc. The Leclerc isn't truly battle tested and is in comparison to tanks like the Leopard, M1 and Challenger is lightly armoured. It is supposedly the fastest tank in the world. As to how useful that speed is in a tank battle is debatable.
The Leopard is probably best described as the best all round tank, it is extremely reliable, easy to maintain, has an excellent main gun and relatively good armour.


As to the mention of ERA (explosive reactive armour) earlier by another poster, ALL western tanks can have ERA fitted if needed. (infact, some Challenger 1 tanks during the first Gulf War as well as Chieftain tanks did have ERA fitted)

The T-84 actually has better armour protection than the T-90.


Obviously i'm going to say i'd prefer to be in a Challenger because i'm British. However, you also need to take into account none have ever been lost to enemy fire. So which would you feel more safer in, an M1, a Challenger or a Merkava?