DrunkenMaster

Come on guys, this LEOCLERCtm is obviously just to show the world that Germans and French can indeed cooperate on tank design, how small and lack of innovation of this LEOCLERCtm is. Let us see what they have in store in a couple years, granted that the cooperation lasts...

What design solutions would you propose instead of what the teams working on the Leopard 2 and Leclerc did?
 
That is, considering you just made some really irrelevant points "against" the Leo 2 not based on its structure or capabilities at all.

I don't think anybody ever claimed a Leopard 2's hull side or bustle armor would survive an ATGM.

Your drawing is missing some parts of the armor, you are looking at the tank from the front, but ignore that a large part of the sloped roof visible from the front actually belongs to the armor modules; therefore it should have a higher protection level. On the right side of the turret, the thicker roof armor would extend up to the commander's PERI R17, on the left side it is a bit shorter. Furthermore the steel elements used to mount the gun trunions are not part of your armor scheme. Here illustrated with your old CAD drawing:
 
 
That would reduce the vulnerable area of the roof and slightly reduce the size of the weakened zone of the gun mantlet.
 
As for the Swiss trials, I don't think they said anything about the protection level of the Leopard 2. Spielberger just wrote that the protection of the Abrams was better, the official report does clarify this by using different, more exact wording: the protection of the M1 Abrams was found to be "umfassender" ("wider", "more comprehensive"), which is probably a statement made in relation to the different armor coverage (Leopard 2 has shorter heavy ballistic skirts, no composite armor at the turret bustle, etc.). 
 
You also write that the protection level is achieved against 1970s ammunition, yet the Swedish documents do not mention what type of ammunition was used to establish the protection level. Given that the values are taken from a comparison with more modern Leopard 2 variants, it seems rather unlikely that they reference 1970s ammo (if you want to compare the protection values of various tanks, it makes most sense to use the same ammo for all tanks).
 
Regarding the hull side armor, it seems that the crew compartment is better protected (thicker side armor) than the rear section of the hull. In case of the Leopard 2K and Experimentalentwicklung Keiler, the frontal section was quite a bit thicker. Keiler had 40 mm side armor at the crew compartment (lower section) and 29 mm at the engine compartment. The Leopard 2K had 39 mm at the crew compartment and 29 mm at the engine compartment. The lowermost section that you have labeled with 25 mm steel-equivalent protection against KE ammo is highly sloped (just compare it to the front view), which IMO suggests that it should be a bit thicker when hit from the side.
 

Nyet we are criticising this one
http://sensha-manual.blogspot.com.au/2017/09/the-ho-ri-tank-destroyer.html

I'm Miller Z from Waffentrager's personal blog as well as Warthunder forum. I once argued about the Japanese WWII Type 5 gun tank with Waffentrager in his blog and because I post out the correct information, not his fake ones, he deleted my replies. For details and more info you guys here can visit this link(post), it's in Chinese but you can still understand what I said with the help of translators or something else, or from the screenshots I gave. Just want every of you here know that this guy is a FAKE, a totally ignorant one.
 
Here is the link:
http://www.zhuangjiacheliang.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=797&extra=page%3D1
If you can't see the pictures in the link above, here is an alternative way. It's the same article I post somewhere else:
https://www.weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404213101531682050

Guys, it's not over yet. 

And yes, I do have the original file, but for some obvious reasons I add some watermarks. 
 
Waffentrager is doing the same thing as he did on Warthunder forum. 
He is just bluffing with unknown source screenshots or photoshopped fake “documents”.
He deleted every post arguing the pictures' authenticity to make himself “invulnurable”. 

Waffentrager YOU FAKE BULLSXXT and FXXK OFF

In case you guys here cannot read Japanese:
It says "Height of lens assembly is about 380 mm"
May be taken from a manual of digital camera or sth. else.