Summary and Key Points: The Leopard 2A8 arrives as a mature, fieldable upgrade: an L55A1 gun, deeper digitization, and factory-integrated Trophy hard-kill active protection. The M1E3 is a heavier lift—a redesign aimed at shedding weight, building APS and counter-drone tools into the core, and running on a hybrid powerplant with a modular open-systems backbone.
-That makes the comparison a timing problem as much as a capability debate.
M1E3 Tank at the Detroit Auto Show. Image Credit: 19FortyFive.
M1E3 Tank at the Detroit Auto Show. Image Credit: 19FortyFive.
M1E3 Tank at the Detroit Auto Show. Image Credit: 19FortyFive.
-Right now, the 2A8 offers immediate, standardized survivability and readiness. If the M1E3 delivers on its unmanned-turret, hybrid, and MOSA-driven growth path, it could surpass the 2A8 later—but it is not here yet.
Germany’s Leopard 2A8 Has Trophy APS Now—Can the M1E3 Catch Up?
The U.S. M1 Abrams and the German Leopard 2 are two tanks with a shared history. Both originated from the failed MBT-70 project—they were developed alongside each other. As time went by, each tank evolved to meet different strategic needs.
The Leopard 2A8 is the newest variant of the Leopard 2, with improved armor and a fully integrated active protective system (APS). The latest iteration of the Abrams is currently undergoing development: the M1E3.
But which tank is better? Has the Abrams retained its spot as one of the best in the world, or has the Leopard finally surpassed its American counterpart?
The M1E3 vs. the Leopard 2A8
The M1E3 project was born after the cancellation of the M1A2 SEPv4 upgrade, which was canned in 2023.
The U.S. Army candidly admitted it could not add any more external packages to an already heavy tank—it opted to take a different approach.
Leopard 2 Tank. Leopard 2 Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Leopard 2 Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Leopard 2 Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Canada Military Leopard C2 Tank.
The new project seeks to reduce the weight of the tank while significantly improving its digital backbone through a modular open-systems approach; the M1E3 is now in its pre-prototype phase. Its technology-demonstrator model was revealed in January, featuring an unmanned turret and hybrid diesel-electric drive system.
The Leopard 2, on the other hand, has been around since the M1 Abrams. It has incorporated continual modernization efforts culminating in the Leopard 2A8. The A8’s defining move is making the Trophy hard-kill APS a factory-standard baseline across multiple European fleets, while digitizing power distribution, fire control, and crew interfaces for future growth.
The first 2A8 tank was delivered in November 2025 and was the first new tank Germany has built for its own forces since 1992. Since then, a number of contracts have been issued for new tanks, parts, and engines as part of a broader effort to strengthen NATO’s eastern flank.
Survivability and Electronics
When it comes to survivability, both tanks turn to APS. The Leopard 2A8’s Trophy APS is natively integrated at the factory level across multiple national fleets, with common training, spares, and electronics.
The U.S. Army has fielded Trophy on the M1A2 SEPv3 as a bolt-on kit, but the M1E3 will reportedly build APS and counter-unmanned aerial system (UAS) capabilities into the core design to improve coverage, power, and sensor fusion.
Both tanks are also reacting to top-attack and first-person-view drone threats with roof packages and electronic counter-UAS systems. The crucial difference is timing: the Leopard 2A8’s integrated APS is here now; the M1E3 is still moving through pre-prototypes and soldier touchpoints.
Digitalization and networked warfare are a major focus for both tanks. The Leopard 2A8 fields a mature set of fully integrated digital systems. Centered on NATO-standard battlefield management systems, the tank possesses third-generation thermal sights for both commander and gunner, as well as distributed 360-degree situational awareness sensors.
By contrast, the M1E3 Abrams is being redesigned around a modular open-systems approach rather than a fixed suite. The Army intends to integrate APS, counter-drone sensors, electronic warfare functions, and AI-assisted target cueing natively into a higher-power digital backbone.
Firepower and Mobility
When it comes to firepower, neither tank offers anything revolutionary. The Leopard 2A8 uses the Rheinmetall L55A1 120-mm smoothbore paired with the latest programmable and long-rod KE ammunition. The M1E3, meanwhile, retains the tried-and-true M256 smoothbore.
Granted, this design is subject to change, but for the time being, it seems the Army is content to retain the M256. The tank will likely receive newer ammunition to boost its lethality, with some reports suggesting it might be capable of firing missiles. For secondary armament, both tanks appear to use a remote weapon system sporting an M2 Browning machine gun.
In terms of mobility, the Leopard 2 retains the MTU MB 873 Ka-501 1,500-hp diesel engine with the Renk HSWL 354 transmission. This combination is an efficient, serviceable powerpack that European armies can rapidly swap in the field.
In December 2025, Rolls-Royce Power Systems announced an order for more than 300 MB 873 engines to support the surge of new Leopard 2 builds for several European customers beginning in 2026.
Meanwhile, the M1E3 does away with the Honeywell AGT1500 gas turbine in exchange for a hybrid powerplant. The tank reportedly uses a CAT C13D engine that provides roughly 1,000–1,500 horsepower. This not only improves the fuel efficiency of the Abrams, but also reduces its weight, which is a major goal of the M1E3 project.
Which Tank Is Better?
The Abrams and the Leopard 2 have always been neck-and-neck in terms of overall quality. In my opinion, the Leopard 2A8 is more advanced than the M1A2 SEPv3 in terms of firepower, mobility, and digital systems.
Comparing the Leopard 2 to the M1E3, on the other hand, is more difficult, because the U.S. tank is still early in its development life. It is hard to compare two tanks when one of their designs is not even final.
With the information we currently have about the M1E3, however, I think it is safe to say that the tank would surpass the Leopard 2A8. With its unmanned turret, advanced digital systems, and hybrid engine, the E3 is likely to offer better protection and networked capability, along with reduced weight.
While the Leopard 2A8 is a more mature concept, the M1E3 promises to offer more than its German counterpart—once it arrives.
About the Author: Isaac Seitz
Isaac Seitz, a Defense Columnist, graduated from Patrick Henry College’s Strategic Intelligence and National Security program. He has also studied Russian at Middlebury Language Schools and has worked as an intelligence Analyst in the private sector.
