Geo-politics and doctrine equals different SAM system specs...
I have always pondered why there are such differences in SAM systems from Russia versus the US. I have to guess that alot of different things have made this a reality. Doctrine, strategy, tactics, weaponary, technology, geography, political, financial and national pride all among them. The sheer number of SAM systems produced by the Soviet bloc and current Russian Federation is astonishing when compared to the relatively few systems the West has fielded.
From the SA-2 Guideline to the S-400 Triumf there has been all different types, sizes and approaches to SAM systems produced by the Soviet bloc. I would have to guess that the main few reasons for this is that Russia is a huge land area which is surrounded by potentially hostile nations, while the US is large also, it is protected by two giant Oceans to either side and the only real threat from aircraft comes from the North over the Arctic from Russia. The US doctrine and weaponary sees them gaining air superiority in a conflict and they are usually seen as the side on the offense rather than the defense. The Communist system allowed for development of multiple systems at once, little or no accountability and no worries about financial or political constraints or problems, while the Democratic system witnessed public industry developing one dependable system with a budget to follow and a doctrine to adhere to which limited SAM systems importance in our battle theory. We instead depended on fighter aircraft, electronic warfare and other means to protect our airspace and interests. As for the much better range of Russian systems, I would say that had alot to do with countering our air launched guided weapons which could be launched far from the target area and also because of their geographic situation and the massive amount of airspace they have to defend. Snap to reality, to nowadays and look at the record of SAM systems. The Patriot has a much envied record and the Naval Standard series is extremely capable, even shooting a satellite out of space. When MEADS comes online it will be a true 21st Century SAM system. The Patriot has a range of 100mi, the Standard 90mi, the S-300 120mi, the S-400 250mi, even the older SA-5/S-200 has a range of 190mi. The Russians had to worry about U-2, SR-71 and other spy aircraft overflying their territory and alot of the reasons for building systems with long ranges, high speeds and high altitudes is due to that. As an off-shoot of SAM systems, Anti-Ballisitc Missile systems are the next step in air defense, now giving us the ability to defend against the previously untouchable threat posed by ballistic missiles. The US is the undisputed leader in the this field. The Patriot PAC-3 has a 100% success rate during OIF against short and medium range ballistic missiles. Currently the Patriot PAC-2/3, THAAD, Aegis SM-2/3 and limited GMD forces make up missile defense assets. In the future NCADE, kinetic energy interceptor, API ABM technologies, MEADS ABM component, HELLADS, possible YAL airborne laser technology mature comeback and HEMPAM-DL high energy multi-phase anti-missile defense laser technologies could become major systems.
) and European NATO SAM sites. Note this doesn't include inactive sites, or mobile SAMs. It also doesn't include other GBAD such as radars or EW units.