Talk:TR-85

Untitled
You know... There is not that much information on the English web about this tank. I think we shoudl ask our Romanian freinds to please provide us some info. It seems like a very interesting specimen.

As far as I know the tank has just entered the Romanian armed forces so it is very new and has shown a good performance according to those familiar with it, however it is also very rare and most Romanian units still have to do with the older tanks.Constantzeanu 03:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I have a book about all the armored vehicles that have been in military service in the 20th century as well as the developments for the 21st century. This includes the TR-85 M1 and it goes into some detail of the tank (slightly more then the article provides.  However, the book also states the the TR-85 M1 is not the most advanced tank in Romanian service.  That would be the TR-125, a license produced T-72, as well as the TM-800, an upgraded TR-580 (the Romanian license-built T-55).  While the TR-85 M1 may be the most NATO compatible ,as it uses Leopard 2 engine,it is not the most advanced version and probably not the pride of Romanian formations as the article notes.  Should I correct this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SAWGunner89 (talk • contribs)

The TR-85 entered service in 1987. The TR-85 M1 with the lengthened turret is an upgrade of old vehicles, not a new tank. The TR-125 is a lengthened T-72 developed in 1989, but apparently did not enter mass production. —Michael Z. 2007-10-13 23:42 Z 

The armored engineer vehicle is called DMT-85M1 (Dragor de Mine pe sasiu de Tanc), not DTM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulttras (talk • contribs) 13:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

misinformation?
I saw that user Gigi12121w1gdh made a few changes that seem to be wrong, namely the addition of a new variant that features a 130 mm gun. The source given for that is a Jane's article of which only half was readable freely before deletion (makes "we once had half of it" actually an acceptable source?) and in which such a new variant is not mentioned at all, or at least hinted at for that matter. Same seems to be true for the rest of the internet. I'm not totally sure if this is vandalism, or real new information that's just missing a source, but without a proper source I'd take my bet on the former. So I hope an admin will look into this soon and possibly revert to the state of the 29th of August.--91.41.47.165 (talk) 02:08, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

I have also seen this from user Gigi12121w1gdh, and after reviewing their other edits and seeing no one else respond to them, I have had to assume that they are misinformation. Since no admins have done anything about these un-sourced changes, I will be undoing his edits on this page. Ironarcher13 (talk) 23:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)