T-72 vs T-64

[chinawhite]

- We need refer with causion for 30-40 years old designation.

I was thinking in the context of the question or what "cold war" era. Thats why i did not give a comparison since there was a big difference in service times.

But if you compare each year the T-64 and T-72 variants were in service prior to 1990. The T-64 was the better tank in terms of performace and technology in each year of service

 

[extern]

... if you compare each year the T-64 and T-72 variants were in service prior to 1990. The T-64 was the better tank in terms of performace and technology in each year of service

Agree with u ('before 1990') but this fact had got clear explanation: from UVZ the SU goverment asked only 'economic class' export-oriented tank with extremally low cost. After this restriction was taken away, UVZ exelent designers capability was emerged with T-90 program. They put the russian 'last and best' on the well proved (and slightly improved) T-72 chassis-powerplant platform and gain their new highly competitive product: the tank T-90.

Is Pakistan still working on a tank with the Chineese, how much of that technology comes from the T-72 besides the main gun.

- First, Pakistan is still working on Al-Khalid with Ukraine with more depth that with China (FCS, gun, ERA, composite armor, power plant and transmission, ADS, mashin gun etc.) Indeed, only the chassis/hull/turret mainframe is come via China. Second, also the gun, the ukrainian 'shtora-like' ADS, chinese chassis - are also unlicension monkey copies of Russian stuff, and we have to be educated about the difference between true Rollex and 'made in Hong-Kong Rollex' yeah? However the engine, the FCS, the last variant of ERA ('Nozh'), - are relative independently developed Ukrainian stuff .

 

[Waylander]

The russian diesel is better than the MTU diesels?
Or did pakistan don't use them because they won't get it?

 

[extern]

The russian diesel is better than the MTU diesels?
Or did pakistan don't use them because they won't get it?

In this class the Ukrainian 6TD-2 and the Russian V-92s tank diesel have much better power/weight and power/space ration that MTU Europowerplant. Their weight is ~1050 kg with 1200 and 1000 hp respectively, when the weight of MTU 883 diesel with its 1500 hp is 3 times more and it has some 2.5 times bigger volume. Also the torque backup of the Russian V-92 engine is extremally high and it's close to 30%. It means very good smoothness of moving. MTU tank diesels usually have torque backup 2 times less. Also the price of germany diesels is higher some folds.
Pakistan does have an access to western military market as well, it has a problem only with access to Russian stuff. I think, its choice was very rational after all.

 

[Waylander]

This was just a small joke. No need for a discussion, I know that russian diesels are no crap.

 

[tatra]

In this class the Ukrainian 6TD-2 and the Russian V-92s tank diesel have much better power/weight and power/space ration that MTU Europowerplant. Their weight is ~1050 kg with 1200 and 1000 hp respectively, when the weight of MTU 883 diesel with its 1500 hp is 3 times more and it has some 2.5 times bigger volume. Also the torque backup of the Russian V-92 engine is extremally high and it's close to 30%. It means very good smoothness of moving. MTU tank diesels usually have torque backup 2 times less. Also the price of germany diesels is higher some folds.
Pakistan does have an access to western military market as well, it has a problem only with access to Russian stuff. I think, its choice was very rational after all.

6TD-1 (1000hp) and 6TD2 (1200hp) engines were creacted in 1983. Leo 1 used MTU MB 838 Ca-M500 from the 1960s; 10-cilinder 830 hp while Leo 2 engine is the 1500 hp MTU MB 873 diesel engine from the 1970s. Only recently has it become available with the much smaller, lighter and more fuel efficient 1,650 hp MTU MT883 engine (Europack). MTU's current 4th generation (the MTU 890 series) is again 50% smaller and lighter as the thusfar smallest 880 series. How does that compare with the top of the line 6TD3 (1500hp) engine?

 

[extern]

6TD-1 (1000hp) and 6TD2 (1200hp) engines were creacted in 1983. Leo 1 used MTU MB 838 Ca-M500 from the 1960s; 10-cilinder 830 hp while Leo 2 engine is the 1500 hp MTU MB 873 diesel engine from the 1970s. Only recently has it become available with the much smaller, lighter and more fuel efficient 1,650 hp MTU MT883 engine (Europack). MTU's current 4th generation (the MTU 890 series) is again 50% smaller and lighter as the thusfar smallest 880 series. How does that compare with the top of the line 6TD3 (1500hp) engine?

M883 europack has 0.66 kw/kg and 1050 kw/m3.

6ТD-3 has 0.93 kw/kg and 1240 kw/m3
its dimentions:
1102.5 kw (1500 hp)
mass 1180 kg
lenth 1602 mm
Width 955
height 581
Volume 0,887 м3

About MTU 890 I have not relible information. If its dimention can fit T-72 chassis after all?
MTU only says ( http://www.mtu-online.com/en/prod-services/proddies/proddiesspec/proddies890/ ) that it has 4250 rpm - i think it is very bad for tanks because so high rpm rises wear and tear in dusty condition. For example, the Russian V92 and V99 tank diesel give their maximum output on 2000 rpm and the V92 is proved to be very relible in the hot and dusty condition. The ukranian 6TD-2 has 2600 rpm.