You faggots will argue about anything

You faggots will argue about anything.

No we fucking won't. Are you retarded?

The Tigers have no fucking chance, unless they're at the Abram's side.

yea we will 10 tiger 2's would destroy an abrams

Don't listen to this guy, he doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about!

muggle?

let's make it more original
Abrams vs Stridsvagn 103

>Stridsvagn
>Streitwagen

What a faggy name.

King Tigers shells cannot pierce throught Abrams armor, Abrams shells can pierce mighty krupp stahl.
End of the fight.

1 Abrams VS 1000000 ants.

Who wins?

the moment the wizarding world would be discovered, the US government would grab a bunch of magic kids and figure out how the fuck magic works, then weaponize a bunch of Obscurous' and drop them on all known mage sites.

And all of this before any real war broke out. Then the US would do their usual spin of setting up some pearl harbor thing to justify it.

well i just posted in the wrong thread.

>he doesn't like Norse names
stridsvagn's the level of cool that Germans wanted to achieve during ww2, unfortunately German language misses half the sounds

The US got rekt in iraq during the 2003 invasion. The major reason was that the Abrams would be unusable after getting hit by a single IED.

So I'll go with Tiger, and don't forget that German quality is the best. A Mercedes from 1940 is better than a Ford in 2017, because the Germans do things to last. Amerifags create shitty stuff that will break, so people will keep buying more.

Depends on the battlefield. If it was in the open fields and flat lands of central europe, it wod be the abrams that prevails. But if it was in the heavy forests, hills and mountains in sweeden, then the Stridsvagn would be on top.

The Abrams wins even against all 10 at once, not even counting the fact that 8 of them will break down before getting into range anyways

True, wehraboos always forget the fact that both Tigers were always breaking down.

Abrahams because USA kicks ass

An IED would hit a tank in the belly. The armour is thin there. An abrams/challenger/leopard/leclerc all have composite reactive armour. That can negate modern tank rounds and anti tank weapons. A tiger wouldnt have a chance in a straight fight

But, what about incendiary rounds ?

Incendiary rounds dont penetrate armour

just farted

That tank is an accurate representation of my body to dick ratio.

10 against one so the odds are not in the Abrams favour. It's gonna get it's shit kicked in.

Tiger II can pen the Abrams' rear and rear sides at fairly long range, while the Abrams will pen the Tiger II with any hit. In fact a HE shell might be enough to obliterate it.
They are also far less mobile, so an Abrams should be able to keep the tactical advantage.
It'll be hit quite a few times, but only in the frontal arc where damage would be minimal.

This is just fucking retarded lol Jesus Christ

Situational. In general, Abrams, though.

stupid fag

Pretty ridiculous considering the Abrams uses a German gun and is influenced by WW2 German as well as post war tank design.
Not to mention its composite armor.

/thread