Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
XM1 Abrams Main Battle Tank by DarkWizard83 XM1 Abrams Main Battle Tank by DarkWizard83
The original prototype vehicle that led to one of - if not the - most powerful tank in the world, and current backbone of Us armored forces, the M1 Abrams MBT. Born out of the failed German-American MBT-70 project, the XM1 was developed by the
Chrysler Motor Corporation, and in 1978 Chrysler delivered to the Army a sleek, low-silhouette heavy tank that incorporated every major technological feature of the day, including computerized controls and a laser rangefinder.

But the most significant design feature of the new tank was its use of Chobham composite armor on the hull and turret. While the exact nature and composition of Chobham armor remains a closely guarded secret, the evidence suggests that it utilizes a matrix of ceramic armor tiles, layered between the vehicle's internal steel and external armored plating. When a high-velocity projectile - such as a round fired from a tank or an anti-tank missile - hits the armor, the explosion produces a high-velocity jet of gas that shears through the armor plating. In normal armor, this jet of gas - once it had passed through the outer armor - would blast into the hull of the tank, causing irreprible damage and often killing the crewmen inside. However, with Chobham armor's interweaved layers of ceramic composite, the forces that would normally tear into a tank's hull are forced to spread out and dissipate over a much wider area, leaving the inner hull intact. This not to say that Chobham armor renders a tank invincible - any hit will still cause exterior damage, and a powerfiul direct hit could still damage or disable the tracks or sensitive electronic equipment. But it would keep the crew alive, and often protect the tank itself enough to keep fighting.

Another key crew safety feature is the vault-like armored compartment that houses the Abrams' primary ammunition. One of the primary causes of a tank's destruction has not been the direct result of armor-pierecing hits, but the inderict results of those hits ignigting and detonating the tank's munitions. To protect this, a kevlar and steel armored plate seperates the crew from the ammunition store. Same with the tank's fuel supply. Even if the compartments were pierced, and the ammunition or fuel ignited, the protective plates would insulate the crew from explosion and fire.

In combat, the Abrams has proven to be second to none. During Operation Desert Storm in 1991, M1s were able to take out Iraqi tanks at distances as long as 4km. Of the nearly 2,000 Abrams to see combat in the conflict, only 18 were ever taken out of service due to combat damage, and none resulted in any crew casulties. In 2003 and onwards during Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Abrams again demonstrated a mastery of the battlefield, driving to Baghdad virtually unopposed. However, the Abrams clearly showed its vulnerability to ambush attacks, with a number of M1s severly damaged and disabled from RPGs, and far more frequently by roadside IED bomb traps. However, even when caught in some of the largest IED explosions, crew casualties have so far been astoundingly low, a testament to the M1s protection and survivability.

While no future M1's are planned for production, a number of older models are currently slated for upgrade to current standards over the next few years, and the Abrams will continue to serve with the Us Army and Marine Corps. for mcuh of the century to come.

M1 Abrams Vehicle Stats:
Type: Main battle tank
Manufacturer: General Dynamics Land Systems
First deployed: 1980

Crew: 4
Length: 9.76 m
Width: 3.65 m
Height: 2.88 m
Weight: 61.4 tons

Armor: Classified
Armament, primary: 1 x 105mm M68 rifled tank gun; later models equipped with 120mm M256 smoothbore tank gun
Armament, secondary: 2 x 7.62mm FN-Browning M240 machineguns, 1 x .50-cal Browning M2 BMG machinegun
Ammo stowage, primary: 55 rounds
Ammo stowage, secondary: 11,000 rounds 7.62mm, 1,000 rounds .50-cal

Powerplant: Textron Lycoming AGT1500 1,500hp gas-turbine engine
Max speed: 72 km/h
Max range: 498km

Operators: Australia, Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, USA
Add a Comment:
CptWRogers Featured By Owner Edited Jan 16, 2016
after researching here are the armor densities from what I've found, I'm not 100% sure this is true but it seems logical after estimating the weight.

Armor composition
hull:260/100/60 F/S/R
turret:250/250/60 F/S/R
Composite armor
Composite armor, but later on reinforced with Depleted uranium.
Same armor as M1A1 however the armor is reinforced with advanced Depleted uranium reinforced composite armor.

The M1A1 in desert storm also reportedly could stop it's own 120mm APFDS shell on the front, but side armor could not stop the high speed Depleted Uranium dart.

In later versions it's planned for the Honeywell turbine to be replaced with a diesel engine, for more fuel efficency.

Also I should note, the T-72 it's advisary was easily defeated, 1,000 were destroyed in desert storm, with no known M1s lost, except to friendly fire incidents. The T-80, and T-90 all seem to be exactly the same vehicle just with a bit more armor reinfocment, it's strongly argueable between which tank is better, but frankly I think the Abrams beats it.
The M18 Hellcat can beat the M1 in a race.
But it can barely match the Abram's firepower and overall armour.
battlecruiser006 Featured By Owner Jan 13, 2016
True but it's still being used though (forgot which country still uses them).
Venezuela, I guess. They have 75 more Hellcats in reserve.
battlecruiser006 Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2016
I believe so.
Uponia Featured By Owner Edited Dec 3, 2015  Professional General Artist
One of the most Iconic MBTs of modern times. it might not be the best with every number on paper (like its British counterpart the challenger 2) but a combination of its strengths and its proven combat record make this tank loved and feared by so many. It can probably destroy any modern tank that's built in Russia today or any tank built in the former USSR (as it has proved during the gulf war where the Iraqis used outdated soviet medium tanks).
TempleGuardian Featured By Owner May 22, 2015
I have to deny the part "-if not the- (most powerful tank)". It is  one of the most powerful tank, but tanks like the Leopard 2 or the T-90 are better in some points. First, both have a diesel engine insteed a gas-turbine, so they don't make as much heat as the Abram while moving. The Abram has a 120mm L44 canon. The Leopard has a longer 120mm L55 canon, which allowed to destroy a target with more range. The T-90 has 125mm L51 canon and a auto-loader.
Tank-Dragon2014 Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
A grey Abrams? very unique :D
SirMauser Featured By Owner Oct 4, 2014  Student General Artist
Yeah, we have one of these up on Fort Leonardwood (Though it's not a prototype, it's an earlier version with a 105mm gun I think.)
Enrico1946 Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
DO I see the Atomic Annie on the Back ground :D ?
M47KingTigerAusfB Featured By Owner May 10, 2011
Perhaps, one of the best tanks.
mobius-118 Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2010  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
gray abrams?my life is complete:)
BlacktailFA Featured By Owner Apr 6, 2009
Is this a Chrysler XM1? Or a Generl Motors XM1?

The two are VERY different from one another, sharing only a few common elements such as their weapons and the same silhouette.
TITANOSAUR Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2007  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
AWSOME! I love the M1 Abrams. its awsome. the king of Tanks.
RBL-M1A2Tanker Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2006
Hey man, I've got some TUSK pictures from the recent Armor Conference at Knox. The new package for the M1 is rather interesting. I wish I had gotten a chance to get inside and look around though. Didn't have time though unfortunately.
Apoc-OC Featured By Owner Jan 13, 2007
Not trying hard enough soldier! Drop and give me 40!
RBL-M1A2Tanker Featured By Owner Jan 13, 2007
Not a soldier anymore. ;p Haven't been now for...over a year now. But guess what? DONE! :D
battlecruiser006 Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2015
I have had people in my family tree that were in the service in two wars Korea and US Civil war.
silentnight745 Featured By Owner Jun 3, 2006
I think the 2 battles in iraq say which tank is better.
700pss Featured By Owner Jun 3, 2006  Professional Photographer
He he, looks like you got an open forum on who's got the biggest tank!

Have to say that one British Tommy, with a SMLE in one hand an a cup of tea in the other, would wop the lot of ya girlie tanks! ;) Who needs ten ton of reactive armour when you got a tin helmet and a wooly cardigan?

Nice picture by the way =D
Samurai69 Featured By Owner Jun 1, 2006
How say my friend... He was tank driver in the army.
"In Abrams nice to be in arms. But be on the war is better on T-72".
Abrams has wery weak barrel mount. One shot and it can't fight. But it more comfortable =).
RBL-M1A2Tanker Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2006
There is NO tank on the planet that doesn't have a weak mount for the barrel. Hit the barrel and it can't fight. Not ONE tank has a 'super' barrel that can't be taken out. Besides, you don't aim for the barrel.

And what's this about it being more comfortable? It's cramped as hell. Maybe slightly roomier than a 72, but not by a whole lot.
Wisker Featured By Owner Jun 1, 2006
They aren't even in the same class. One SABOT and the T-72 would no longer be around.
Though they aren't actually meant to take the Sovist Tanks on one on one. Easier to produce simpler to maintain. Therefore an Abrams would end up being overwelmed by the number of them.
Samurai69 Featured By Owner Jun 1, 2006
In 2003 on the Kubinka russian tankodrome was simulated fight between 4 Abrams (2000year of build) and 3 T-80 (1999year of build). In the Abramses was US crew.

Score was 4-0 for Russian T-80 in the virtual fight and victory.
This frase was said there.
US officers was confused.

Anyway crew in a bad tank have more chances against bad crew in the good tank.
RBL-M1A2Tanker Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2006
I'd like to see some documentation on that. Not just your word. It's nothing personal, I just want to actually see the commentary for this supposed 'simulated fight' you say took place.

Plus, as Wisker said, the T-80 is NOT the T-72. They're not even the same model design. Plus you don't have US officers driving and fighting the tank. At most, you have ONE officer.

I think your info is off.
Samurai69 Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2006
I realy try to find docs about this.
Wisker Featured By Owner Jun 1, 2006
The T-80 is not the T-72.
In terms of average crew quality the US would be way ahead. The Russian Army has been a conscript one for years.
Add a Comment:


Submitted on
May 31, 2006
Image Size
855 KB


11,143 (5 today)
143 (who?)

Camera Data

PENTAX Corporation
PENTAX Optio 50
Shutter Speed
4052/1000000 second
Focal Length
5 mm
ISO Speed
Date Taken
Jan 8, 2006, 3:28:37 PM