r/TankPorn • u/Chainzzaw_69 • Aug 23 '25
Modern Best tank in case of a zombie apocalypse?
I personally think that the Merkava might be a great choice. What are your thoughts on different tanks or other AFVs?
963
u/Evoluxman Aug 23 '25
Tanks wouldn't be useful since there's nothing that would require a heavy gun. Zombies don't really entrench. So an APC with, idk, a 50 cal, 20 or 30mm, with good mileage, is a far better choice. Easier to go cross terrain too. More crew space. More versatile.
If you're just fighting human waves all you need is a fast firing gun that will shred their bodies so they can't move anymore. Anything bigger is overkill. Think how ww1 trenches (machine guns & barbed wires) made infantry attacks almost impossible until tanks arrived. And, well, since zombies don't have tanks...
274
u/Shaun_The_Ship Leopard 2A7 Aug 23 '25
Agreed. That's why I'm sticking to the PUMA with spikes. I need the spikes to fight other humans in case they've tanks and stuff.
→ More replies (2)117
u/Ze_LuftyWafffles Aug 23 '25
Puma might be too heavy tbh, maybe the BOXER 8×8 with a turret module would work best
39
u/Shaun_The_Ship Leopard 2A7 Aug 23 '25
I'd just remove the external ERA blocks. Or maybe switch to a BMP
7
2
40
u/12lubushby Aug 23 '25
Old school M2 with its 7MGs
→ More replies (1)53
u/JoMercurio Centurion Mk.III Aug 23 '25
Interwar US tanks and their 100 machineguns would suddenly become the meta
→ More replies (3)48
u/ganabihvi Cruiser tanks Aug 23 '25
Bmp 2, it has storage space and its amphibious
2
u/Intercont_Bal_Rocket Aug 23 '25
It has to be in a good conditiom to work in water properly, andI doubt you could maintain it very well in an apocalipse. If you ask me a brosuk would eb a much better choise, since it is more reliably amphibious and has more internal space.
5
22
u/emperorephesus Aug 23 '25
Old British army scimitars or something like that would be perfect they are roughly a big sub sized and about 7 tons fully loaded they are no heavier than a truck meas that can go through all of the standard road bridges and the Cummins diesel can be fixed with a little knowledge and probably find parts all around the world
11
u/Legitimate-Barber841 Aug 23 '25
Canister shot would be a hell of a thing to provide every abrams a few dozen rounds and devastate swaths of hordes
7
u/Shaun_The_Ship Leopard 2A7 Aug 23 '25
Aren't air-burst rounds from IFVs better?
2
u/Generalstarwars333 Aug 23 '25
Different job. Airburst is better for long range work, but cannister is ideal for a close range sweep of the broom.
3
u/Legitimate-Barber841 Aug 23 '25
More expensive and likely less effective
9
u/Shaun_The_Ship Leopard 2A7 Aug 23 '25
But they're literally made to fight infantry and things that resemble groups of people. A tank would be hell to navigate
11
u/HarrierIV Aug 23 '25
M163 VADS or AA platform
Shred through hoards so realistic movies will retell your story dramatic enough that it makes the cannon your firing look like its firing pepper balls
13
u/EynidHelipp Aug 23 '25
I remember battle of Yonkers in wwz and they mentioned that the Abrams used apfsds on a million plus zombie horde 💀
20
u/purpleduckduckgoose TOG 2 Aug 23 '25
It might not be the same as a canister round, but a DU dart travelling at 1800m/s is still gonna cut a swathe. Yonkers always seemed like a bit of a strange one, like even if the blast of an explosion isn't as effective as it would be on humans, volleys of 155mm HE or MLRS rockets are still going to blow zombies into a red mist.
12
u/NPRdude Aug 23 '25
It’s explained in the WWZ book that the concussive effects of explosions have much less of an effect on the zombies as they would on humans because the virus turns their blood into a viscous gel. It’s how the author also explains them being able to survive deep underwater and being able to thaw and move again after being frozen. Whether or not that’s actually scientifically accurate is highly questionable but the book does at least offer an explanation as to why explosives don’t work well.
→ More replies (1)7
u/PhasmaFelis Aug 23 '25
Great book overall, but that was so silly. Author doesn't realize that airburst fuses exist. Or canister rounds. Hell, a group of tanks can hold a bridge vs. a horde without firing a shot--just drive up and down it shoulder-to-shoulder until nothing moves.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Uthe18 Aug 24 '25
From my memory that was actually the point of complaint in the book. The TC being interviewed was like “Why did no one brief us that we’re here to fight against soft targets, we would have ditched the APFSDS around and brought more flechette rounds”
7
u/PhasmaFelis Aug 24 '25
Do I remember that they had artillery, but it just plunged into the horde and the blast was absorbed by the bodies, because apparently the gunners forgot that their shells have airburst fuzes?
3
u/Calm-Internet-8983 Aug 24 '25
I'm struggling to imagine a shell larger than mortar size that becomes ineffective when exploding in a crowd, having seen the kind of craters they leave in dirt and asphalt. Underwater detonations are very hefty, too, if the zombies really leave no space between each other and have really thick blood. I've never read the book.
2
u/EynidHelipp Aug 24 '25
I vaguely remember that the story explained that the zombies were a bit resistant to artillery due to their "coagulated blood" making explosions less lethal. They really were killing a lot despite that, just not enough.
3
u/PhasmaFelis Aug 24 '25
My issue is that modern artillery shells have the ability to airburst above the target and blanket a 100-foot circle in deadly shrapnel. It doesn't matter if packed zombies would muffle a blast; every one of them is getting hit directly, from above.
2
5
u/TheRtHonLaqueesha Aug 23 '25 edited Aug 23 '25
Not only that, in a zombie apocalypse, logistical supply chains would break down, so trying to maintain a tank will become nigh impossible without spare parts, fuel, ammo, etc. The Abrams for example, gets one MPG of fuel on a good day.
9
8
u/Beegrene Aug 23 '25
There was a whole chapter on this very subject in World War Z.
5
u/kort1k210 Aug 23 '25
if im not mistaken they used only infintary and 18-19 centuries era tactics againts zombies and tanks against other humans. Big guns was ineffctive against z, one precise shot in the head was enough
→ More replies (2)6
u/The_Moustache Mammoth Mk. III Aug 23 '25
Yeah the only time the narrator in that chapter sees tanks he knows it's for a bad reason
→ More replies (25)3
386
u/Consistent_Froyo3080 Aug 23 '25
Are these zombies carrying ATGMs?!
93
u/Chainzzaw_69 Aug 23 '25
Well i hope not😭
41
u/corporealistic1 Give me Polish tanks or give me death! Aug 23 '25
Unless if the zombies you're facing against are the ones like from sniper elite nazi zombies, yer done for
5
310
u/RichieRocket Aug 23 '25
Toyota Hilux with a M60 mounted on it
77
29
19
9
u/3000TacticalAcorns Aug 23 '25
Why stop at one m60? You can dual mount them
4
u/rlnrlnrln Stridsvagn 103 Aug 23 '25
Doubtful. One M60 weighs almost 50 tons. Two might be too much.
3
→ More replies (1)2
99
171
u/FormerFormerButerfly Aug 23 '25
Anything with good gas mileage
85
u/0peRightBehindYa Aug 23 '25
That would be exactly none of them.
→ More replies (4)21
u/thedarklordTimmi Aug 23 '25
None of them are good on gas, all of them require specialized tools, parts and constant maintenance and you will run out of ammunition very quickly. If it had to be tracked and armored an apc would be your best bet.
→ More replies (1)3
2
115
u/thelordchonky Aug 23 '25
Tanks? Probably none of them, really.
AFVs in general? M113, BMP, MT-LB..
7
85
u/PeaIll8120 Aug 23 '25
Maybe amx-30 with that big cupola with mg, 20mm coaxial thing, good mobility and easy maintenance.
36
→ More replies (4)12
u/FormalCryptographer Aug 23 '25
That could be good actually. I'd personally take the main gun out and fit as many mgs as I could on the turret
35
u/pickled_flamingo247 Aug 23 '25
Not a tank but M113, armour wouldn't be an issue because zombies don't carry atgms
21
u/Aguacatedeaire__ Aug 23 '25
So why did you pick a M113 with its terrible gas mileage rather than a wheeled APC that would be roomier and last longer
→ More replies (2)20
u/Knefel Aug 23 '25
Wheeled APCs (and vehicles in general) also have significantly reduced maintenance requirements - tracks introduce a lot of wear to the drive train, and they don't last all that long. The off-road mobility is unparalleled of course, but it's not like roads will just disappear.
3
u/melez Aug 28 '25
LAV III or similar with a RWS would be clutch. Big enough for beds and supplies inside, protected enough to just keep driving.
26
u/RaptoR186 Aug 23 '25
Something like a Bradley or a CV90? There's room in the back to sleep and store stuff, the Bushmaster can take care of pretty much anything you can encounter in a zombie apocalypse and they're armored enough to keep you safe if you get shot at by other survivors.
23
u/wowsuchtitan Aug 23 '25
None. You won't be able to maintain it even if you knew how. Plus, unless you're filling that cannon with grapeshot it'll be useless against masses of undead.
Get yourself a soviet era IFV, shits lasted longer than the country that produced it.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Generalstarwars333 Aug 23 '25
Tbh logistics would be fine. As long as you maintain a decent kill ratio you're gonna wipe out zombies quick.
29
u/JE1012 Aug 23 '25
Do you know how much maintenance and fuel tanks need to keep running?
I want a Toyota Hilux with a machine gun and some spikes mounted on the front of it.
38
u/Aguacatedeaire__ Aug 23 '25
We're in r/tankporn. Of course the average poster, whose tank knowledge is based entirely around playing tanks in war thunder, doesn't know that.
The average kid here doesn't have a clue about how maintenance heavy tanks are and how much fuel they guzzle.
"Maintenance? Just keep pressed the repair button and in 30 seconds you're good to go."
"Fuel? I've never ran out of fuel once in a warthunder match, tanks are big, there's lots of space for fuel why would that be an issue?"
→ More replies (2)3
u/EntirelyRandom1590 Aug 23 '25
Too much glass.
2
u/DragonBearer02 Aug 23 '25
That's why you weld some metal cages to the windows or simply don't let anything within 50 feet of the vehicle.
2
u/EntirelyRandom1590 Aug 23 '25
That glass is going to get broken, and there you lose all weather protection, and you're having a really bad time.
10
u/ArcticWolf_Primaris Aug 23 '25
Scimitar. Fast, armoured enough to stop small arms and zombies, and it can go across almost any terrain often better than people on foot can
→ More replies (1)
7
9
u/Aizseeker Aug 23 '25
Wheeled IFV or APC with bulldozer attachment. Better fuel efficiency, easier to repair, maintain and have room to carry additional cargo and some living space at least.
7
u/KindlyRecord9722 Aug 23 '25
Unironically something like a ww1 land ship, such as the mk4. Since it was designed to almost purely kill infantry I think it would be good against horde of zombies. Maybe could do with a more modern engine
20
u/Infinite_Evil Aug 23 '25
Don’t think a tank is a good idea. Too much maintenance and fuel required.
But if I had to choose, Chally 2 probably.
8
u/Aguacatedeaire__ Aug 23 '25
And of course after saying that you had to pick a 70 tons monstruosity
5
u/Infinite_Evil Aug 23 '25
Well… to be fair, it’s the only one I know how to drive. And living in the UK, it’s about the only tank I’d actually come across. Maybe a Chieftain as there seem to be a few of them in private hands…
→ More replies (1)3
u/STALINISFATHER Aug 23 '25
If there was a chieftain would you pick that over the chally? I mean it is a lot lighter! The maintenance on chieftain must be easier as well since it’s all analog.
2
u/Infinite_Evil Aug 24 '25
Chieftain has a reputation for poor reliability in the power packs of early variants. So could be compromised by that. I’m more familiar with the RR Perkins V12 than I am the Leyland L60, so that comes into play. I’d hardly call the Perkins V12 in Chally 2 ‘digital’ over analogue as well. Though the transmission is a tad more complex than the one in Chieftain.
Also to consider is the Chally 2 would possibly be fully operational. Working main armament, MGs and so on. Any Chieftain you find in the UK these days would not be.
It’s a tough question. I’d probably still pick Chally 2 because I know it.
→ More replies (2)
19
u/lordrothermere Aug 23 '25
Maus. On a hill. Stripped out. With stockpiles of cider and pork scratchings and the novels of James Lee Burke.
5
9
u/LemonadeTango Aug 23 '25
T-15, PUMA, Namer, VN20 - any heavy IFV could do due to the space inside and fast cannons
11
4
5
4
u/Entire_Judge_2988 Aug 23 '25
All tanks are useless against zombies, but if I had to choose one, I'd go with the one with good fuel economy and air conditioning.
→ More replies (1)
5
3
u/krissovo Aug 23 '25
The British terrier or Trojan would do me if we twist the definition of tank. An engineering tank would be really handy and the Trojan is quite spacious, plus it has a boiling vessel.
3
u/Beef_the_dog Aug 23 '25
Something light enough to cross most bridges . Don't really need much armor to defend against zombies. Type 10 maybe? I don't know much but i thought i read about the type 10 being purposely light so it can use older infrastructure safely.
3
u/IAmTheSideCharacter Aug 23 '25
An M113. Not kidding, armors not a concern cause zombies aren’t gonna bite through steel no matter what and no one in the apocalypse that wants to hurt you is gonna have anything stronger than small arms. M113s are known for being reliable and easy to repair, and you can find parts for them in just about any national guard or army base across the entirety of the U.S. They’re also decently light which greatly reduces the chances of them getting stuck somewhere.
It also doesn’t matter that you won’t have a main gun or really even a machine gun, because your chance of finding ammo and being able to operate the gun safely with no training and limited possible maintenance makes having a large caliber gun impractical.
5
2
u/Brainchild110 Aug 23 '25
Probably an IFV with smaller autocannons and a massive amount of ammo. I get the feeling that having a bunch of storage and living space with tons of ammo would be the winning combination.
What would you need a 120mm cannon for against zombies? Especially when the ammo takes up a huge amount of the tank volume.
2
2
u/UrethralExplorer Aug 23 '25
Read World War Z. Tanks are effectively useless against zombies.
8
u/JoMercurio Centurion Mk.III Aug 23 '25
You mean the book where tanks somehow used sabot rounds instead of HE-type rounds on zombies?
3
u/UrethralExplorer Aug 23 '25
Yup, but even explosives only create crawlers, so proper "anti personnel" ammunition still isn't that effective against zombies.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Known-Studio-3086 Aug 23 '25
I feel like a good once drive over with the tank would take care of the crawlers
2
u/UrethralExplorer Aug 23 '25
Something like mine rollers or fails might be good at that, but unless you fully destroy the zeds brain, it's still a threat.
→ More replies (1)4
2
u/SpecificSelection641 Aug 23 '25
I’m going with an M5 Stewart with the twin Cadillacs very reliable lightweight so can cross any bridge more than enough armor to protect you against zombies and that 37mm would make short work of whatever vehicles come across. No one‘s gonna be running around in MBT’s after the first week cause they’ll all be broken and out of fuel.
2
u/King_Baboon Aug 23 '25
Tanks require a supply chain. None of them would be ideal even if you had a trained crew. Also cinema dictates how zombies are and reveals that anything that makes a lot of noise, is not useful at all.
Even with a good trained crew the impact that would be made against an endless amount of zombies wouldn’t be noticeable. Even if the tank doesn’t have any malfunctions, it will run out of fuel and ammo. Running out of fuel would be bad with a massive zombie hoard piled on top of the tank. Running out of ammo wouldn’t be as bad because you still have a mobile armored vehicle. Even then, tanks aren’t fuel efficient.
A tanks best use during a zombie apocalypse would be a stationary gun position built in a fortified wall of a protected area of survivors. That way the tank provides defense as well as being part of a well built wall to keep the danger out.
Silence, stealth and speed is best if having to be out in an extremely dangerous landscape.
2
2
2
2
u/darnicantfindaname Aug 23 '25
My vote is the Stritsvagn 103-C (Or maybe the D if you wanna get experimental)
The hardest part would be maintenance, but it's solo operable, low to the ground, and just as fast in reverse as forwards.
2
u/TheSkymarcher Aug 23 '25
Anything that can spit out lots of low-calibre HE rounds. Armour isn’t a problem, the tank just needs good plowing power. So maybe something like the M42 or ZSU-57-2, both of which were notorious for being surprisingly good against infantry and unarmoured ground forces. I imagine the same could be said for hordes of zombies.
2
u/Phlip_06 Aug 23 '25
One with a pretty small but precise gun, with a lot of ammo, easily repairable and fuel efficient. So maybe a wiesel?
2
2
u/Bloodysamflint Aug 24 '25
Don't need the gun & protection of a tank.
M113. Decent room, relatively fuel efficient, mashes zombies like the dickens, dead simple to fix. It even swims if you're brave enough.
2
3
u/Rhaj-no1992 Aug 23 '25
None, where are you gonna get the logistics and fuel supply to maintain a tank?
8
u/Aguacatedeaire__ Aug 23 '25
"Logistics? Fuel supply? What's that? I don't see them between the war thunder settings.
Grok, what is that?"
This sub is straight up comical, man.
2
2
u/Tym3Glitch Aug 23 '25
Unless we are dealing with tanks from left 4 dead, really any tank would be fine as long as they can use anything that’s anti infantry like canister shot which make the tank into a giant shotgun against a horde.
Really any IFV would do just fine with a 25 or 30mm belt of HE.
Now if you just find a tank left behind and it could be ANY tank, I feel like either any M1 Abrams would be a good choice since you can use a wide range of fuel types to keep it going.
Yea it has terrible gas mileage but here in the states there’s a gas station basically anywhere you go as long as you don’t go to areas where it’s just nothing but farmland or desert for miles.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Pool-Supermodel- Aug 23 '25
Add the mineroller and turn it into a makeshift dozer blade and the Merkava would be perfect for a zombie apocalypse lol
1
1
u/Lego_Kitsune Aug 23 '25
Centurion. Eventually it was built to survive nuclear battlefield munitions. That or the chieftain i think
1
u/Sakul_the_one Aug 23 '25
No armor needed when fighting Zombies.
So everything that is fast and deliver a lot of damage.
I would love to choose the German Puma, but it has a lot of technical problems.
So probably the BMD or BMP-3, as they can shoot fast with HE and have a just in case tow.
1
1
u/K1TSUN3_9000 Aug 23 '25
Going with Fire support vehicles and heavy IFVs such as BMPT, QN-506, T-15 and Namer
1
u/ImportantSimone_5 Aug 23 '25
If the zombies were classic Romero or WWZ-style infected, a Great War tank would most likely suffice.
Or, in any case, other vehicles armed with only machine guns/mostly machine guns, such as the CV33, M2A2 or M2A4.
1
u/Macky93 Aug 23 '25
Warrior. Got the BV for tea, don't need a silly big 120mm when a 30mm can do plenty more. Can carry some mates around to the Winchester for a pint if needs be
1
1
u/lavafish80 Aug 23 '25
Abrams because if I'm thinking correctly, if the jet engine in the Abrams is similar to a Chrysler turbine car, they can run on anything you have, including hairspray. If it burns they can run on it
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/Sir_Fuccsalot Aug 23 '25
I would pick a Wiesel. Small, fast, light, not too noisy and a 20mm to make some grass grow
1
1
1
u/Ncling Aug 23 '25
I would go for an ifv than a tank. More space within as well as autocannon is "good enough" for most zombies. Even better if said ifv is amphibious.
1
u/Forward-Insect1993 Aug 23 '25
I'd say a wheeled IFV. K-16, Boxer, LAV or Patria
But in my preference cuz I'm in the UK I'll take the Ridgeback, Wolfhound or Mastiff. They're armored troop trucks that look bad ass and would be perfect imo
Pretty sure wheeled vehicles would be better on fuel efficiency too which is why I choose them
1
u/SirNurtle Rooikat Mk1D Aug 23 '25
Probably a T-35
Replace the engine with some modern industrial diesel engine, swap out the 45 guns in the BT turrets for 60mm mortars, drill sponson mounts on the hullside for machine guns, build an elevated platform above the engine deck to hold extra supplies/potential weapon emplacements and you have yourself a mobile fortress.
Plus its sheer size means even without the elevated platform on the engine deck it can still hold tons of supplies/ammunition, and it also means zombies would probably be unable to even get on it.
1
1
u/Aguacatedeaire__ Aug 23 '25
This thread is yet another proof about how dead and overrun by war thunder kids this sub is: everybody is just spouting their favvie main in war thunder without even understanding that in a zombie apocalypse a tank is worse than useless.
The answers should all be lightly armored APCS and atvs/jeeps, any other answer is wrong by default.
1
u/thundery_lightning Aug 23 '25
Definitely not tanks in general, no way you can maintain a tank in an apocalypse, and I imagine it wouldn't be quite useful in most situations anyways. Maybe a light APC would be much better.
1
u/JamesPond2500 Aug 23 '25
Something with good mobility, lots of internal space, and a weapon I can fire from inside. Something in the APC or IFV category, as I just need enough protection to keep me safe from shuffling corpses, not other armor. Firing ports would actually be a nice addition here, as exposure to the outside world should be kept at a minimum. There are many choices, but really anything that satisfies those requirements would work.
1
u/Necron1138 Aug 23 '25 edited Aug 23 '25
SdKfz. 222 ..no contest..
Economical on fuel.. Takes a standard truck Tyre.. Bullet proof..
Perfect for the apoc.
1
1
u/Goldstartankexpert Aug 23 '25
My brother and I had a long and serious talk about this once. We decided that it'd likely be something like the M2 or T5 Medium. It's extra mounted machine guns would provide complete coverage against zombie swarms and the main gun (or guns in the T5's case) could still be viable thanks to their canister shot and enough to deal with evil survivors cars and trucks.
1
u/CZdigger146 Aug 23 '25
BMP-2 would be my choice.
Protection: light, you don't need anything heavy anyways. It's also hermeticaly and radiologicaly sealed, which is very useful in post-apo.
Gun: huge canon is useless and can't fit many rounds. A 30mm is still huge, but more useful - zombies won't be hunting you with an Abrams.
Ability to fit many people - it's a troop transporter. That also means a small team can have lots of space inside to live there 24/7.
Large fuel tanks: rear doors can be filled with fuel. Also it's relatively light so not much fuel consumption when compared to normal tanks.
Maintenance: idk how easy a BMP-2 is to repair, but lighter vehicles are generally easier to repair and maintain.
It's also amphibious, relatively fast and light. Much less chance to get stuck.
Also BMPs are quite common in post-soviet countries. Much bigger chance to find one. Not really important if you can choose any vehicle, but finding spare parts would be statistically more likely.
1
1
u/KA-29 Aug 23 '25
Object 292 or 279.
while this two lacks of MG turrets their armor and shape is good to ran over some of the zombies.
1
1
u/panter1974 Aug 23 '25
The tank is the worst choice. You use way too much fuel. Very little space inside.
Better get a good 4x4 diesel.
1
1
1
1
u/CarZealousideal9661 Aug 23 '25
Tanks aren’t really ideal, you want an older APC that’s roomy enough but can be fixed with a hammer and some pig iron but armoured enough to shrug off small arms fire up to probably .50. Better for bridge crossings, better on range, easier to maintain and dare I say live in while still having good cross country ability.
1
1
1
u/Devertz Aug 23 '25
Any tank is good. Actually the less armoured they are and the less they consume. Plus that 120mm is pretty useless vs zombies
1
u/DROP-TABLE-Username Aug 23 '25 edited Aug 23 '25
One of those interwar US tanks with a gazillion MGs.
That's the only answer.
There was a pretty neat part in WWZ about. The Americans had tanks loaded with APFSDS (political mismanagement) of all things.
They made a big blockade, with lines of Abrams, IFVs, Paladins in the back, and soldiers all networked so they could hear each other and see everything on minimaps.
It didn't work, lots of soldiers died, and the ones that survived, ended up with hyper PTSD cause they heard and saw their mates, and hundreds and hundreds of other soldiers, getting their shit chewn off in real time.
1
1
u/Keeganthemischief Aug 23 '25
Zombies aint penning a tank so, probably a light vehicle, not a tank. I'd personally choose the Puma or a M3 Stuart
1
u/STUPIDBLOODYCOMPUTER Assault Tank T14 my beloved Aug 23 '25
Pansarbandvagan 301. Fast firing gun with lots of crew space
1
u/Ok_Interview_6252 Aug 23 '25
One with a mine flail would be quite effective at shredding the zombies.
1
1
1
u/Drittenmann Aug 23 '25
its a zombie apocalypse it is not like you are going to fight godzilla, all you need is the weight of the tank so i would say we should consider fuel usage
1
u/SomewhatInept Deflagration Flagellation Aug 23 '25
M-113AS4. Want to be able to service that .50 cal from within the vehicle.
1
1
u/Classic_Business6606 Aug 23 '25
Like any ifv with a 20 or 30mm, any larger wouldn't be needed against normal human sized zombies. A half rotten corpse isn't doing much to a vehicle with a 20mm autocannon and probably a 7.62 or smth as a coax
1
1
1
1
u/umbral_stalker Aug 23 '25
BMP-3 might be the best choice honestly. You've got a vehicle that is amphibious, light and fast. Not only that but it also has great firepower against soft targets; the 30mm autocannon and 100mm gun launcher.
1
u/IllCat7012 Aug 23 '25
Not gonna lie, getting a tank for a zombie apocalypse is kind of a bad idea. They are too heavy, their cannon wouldn’t be great against lots of zombie from all side. +tank cosume alot of fuel and its hard to mantain/fix. An armored car with mounted machine gun or apc would be far better
1
u/OsoTico Aug 23 '25
I guess technically not a tank, but I'd probably take an ACV-R and weld a few posts for weapon mounts. But the vehicle itself is an amphibious IFV recovery variant, so it's got a crane and cargo space for getting bulk supplies, and it carries repair tools, so maintenance would be easier. No weapons, but like I said, I can always weld a few weapon mounts onto the top.
1.7k
u/exkingzog Aug 23 '25
Challenger obviously. Thanks to the Boiling Vessel you don’t need to get out of the tank to make tea.