Soviet Heavy Tank for sale...
- Thread starter Roughneck
- Start date
Postage would have been a bit on the high side 
Kingfisher
Here Zombie, Zombie, Zombie...
Look here.
http://www.khakicorpsimports.com/
And here you can buy a Mig-21 and a Modern Soviet Tank, a t-72
http://www.tanksforsale.co.uk/Tanks_Trucks_Jeeps_for_sale.htm
I'd like to see anybody cut me off in one of those.
http://www.khakicorpsimports.com/
And here you can buy a Mig-21 and a Modern Soviet Tank, a t-72
http://www.tanksforsale.co.uk/Tanks_Trucks_Jeeps_for_sale.htm
I'd like to see anybody cut me off in one of those.
Postage was actually free...Postage would have been a bit on the high side
cheers,
Mr. Daystar
In a bell tower, watching you through cross hairs.
I think Imma gonna start talking to the wife about next Christmas.
I'd love to see the postman struggle with it ..must be collection only
The postman would have to get certified to pilot that thing to your mail bo.. err no.. parking space.
I wouldn't buy a T-72, I saw on TV what those things look like after running into an M1 Abrams
T-72 was never a "heavy tank". The concept of heavy tanks was falling out of favor with the end of WWII - the final nail in the coffin was the Arab-Israeli wars.
It's kinda silly to compare the T-72 to an Abrams. A better comparison would be the M-60, Chieftain or Leopard 1.
And it wasn't a bad tank either - decent combination of armor, firepower and mobility. Not to mention affordable and a smaller logistic footprint!
cheers,
It's kinda silly to compare the T-72 to an Abrams. A better comparison would be the M-60, Chieftain or Leopard 1.
And it wasn't a bad tank either - decent combination of armor, firepower and mobility. Not to mention affordable and a smaller logistic footprint!
cheers,
Turrent and hull were to be shipped separate and assembled upon delivery.
cheers,
I dont suppose they threw in a couple hundred shells, eh? Some extra tread/tracks? Did they fuel 'er up and top off the oil?
The JS III could hold 520 liters of diesel.
Range on road: 149 km (0.28 km/lit)
Range off road: 116 km (0.22 km/lit)
That is ofcourse, assuming ideal conditions.
So it would take less than 2 gallons of fuel to cover one mile
Now if you thought THAT was bad, take a peek at the gas turbine powered Abrams: 0.6 gallons/mile. The M1 needs about 300 gallons every 8 hours or so. But refueling the tank only takes about 10 minutes (to top off it's 500 gallon fuel tank).
60 years on and we're still struggling with fuel economy
cheers,
The JS III could hold 520 liters of diesel.
Range on road: 149 km (0.28 km/lit)
Range off road: 116 km (0.22 km/lit)
That is ofcourse, assuming ideal conditions.
So it would take less than 2 gallons of fuel to cover one mile
Now if you thought THAT was bad, take a peek at the gas turbine powered Abrams: 0.6 gallons/mile. The M1 needs about 300 gallons every 8 hours or so. But refueling the tank only takes about 10 minutes (to top off it's 500 gallon fuel tank).
60 years on and we're still struggling with fuel economy
cheers,
Fuel has always been one of the tanks’ biggest weaknesses. They relay a lot on infantry and a good supply chain also.
I agree, it's kind of like comparing a lion (T-72) to a T-rex (M1 Abrams). I put my money on the rex. Not only that but I read some place that the Iraqui T-72's were what the Russians called the "monkey model", lower quality armaments made for export only, plus add to that the inadequate training of the iraqui troops and you get a whole bunch of tank plinking by our side. If it's a tank that was once used by the Russian army, it sounds okay.
I wouldn't buy a T-72, I saw on TV what those things look like after running into an M1 Abrams
No shit.
I was going to ask if the ad was in an Iraqi newspaper.
Low miles
Only shot once :rofl:
