You do realize that Leo2A4 and challenger take the same frontal damage from T-80Us, right? I mean, being a challenger doesn't magically give you 11 front armor or something. You just get more side armor, but if you're being shot at the side armor by a T-80U, they're both screwed.
Challengers are severly outperformed by Leo2A4 because of the difference in fuel efficiency and the 10 AP gun of Leo2A4.
Also, T-64BVs don't stand a chance against Leo2A4s. Are we playing the same game?
Abrams are severly outperformed by both challengers and Leo2
I wouldn't say that they're that inferior to Challengers, but whent they're getting shot by 11 AP shells, it sucks to be them. Even the T-64BV's, as I mentioned in the other thread, give them a run for their "money".