Iron-Man(Tony Stark) vs Batman(Bruce Wayne)

Started by omgchos4 pages

It doesn't matter what my opinion is. Whatever he punched through was not armor. It broke as if it was some very thin plywood. And not only did it break a big chunk came off. Any armor worth its salt has tensile strength. Which means it doesnt break off in chunks, it rips or bends when enough force is applied. Go find some sheet metal and hit it with a sledge hammer. It will never ever break a chunk off. It bends or tears it doesn't shatter. So to cap off this post, Iron mans armor being able to withstand a tank shell is much to strong for the mere mortal batman to punch through.

Originally posted by omgchos
It doesn't matter what my opinion is. Whatever he punched through was not armor. It broke as if it was some very thin plywood. And not only did it break a big chunk came off. Any armor worth its salt has tensile strength. Which means it doesnt break off in chunks, it rips or bends when enough force is applied. Go find some sheet metal and hit it with a sledge hammer. It will never ever break a chunk off. It bends or tears it doesn't shatter. So to cap off this post, Iron mans armor being able to withstand a tank shell is much to strong for the mere mortal batman to punch through.

So just so that we are clear you are saying the Batmobile that survived massive explosion, gun fire, car wrecks etc is made of a substance weaker then low grade steel. Not only is this ridiculas by it very nature, but flies in the face of the evidence in the film(s). Such as the above decribed durability feats.

By your logic we could just as easily claim that the tank shell was made of rubber or generated by a computer? See the problem with this line of reasoning?

Originally posted by Nightstick
So just so that we are clear you are saying the Batmobile that survived massive explosion, gun fire, car wrecks etc is made of a substance weaker then low grade steel. Not only is this ridiculas by it very nature, but flies in the face of the evidence in the film(s). Such as the above decribed durability feats.

By your logic we could just as easily claim that the tank shell was made of rubber or generated by a computer? See the problem with this line of reasoning?


Ok look mr. "i know the movies so well my logic must be right". Why is it that when he leaves the car he has to push a button and activate the armor if its so indestructible in the first place. Because if he doesn't put on the armor its as weak as a regular car. And not once has the batmobile survived an explosion. It has always managed to avoid them. I don't understand why you are so dead set against admitting that batman can in no way punch through iron man's armor. You have only one instance where batman punched through anything and it was the undercarriage of a car. In none of the movies was the bottom of the car shown to be armored. Unless the car is stationary and he presses the magic armor button. Which in this instance armor wasn't even present. And that whole condescending attitude thing does not make your argument any more valid.

And that last part about the tank shell is so irrelavent that it doesn't deserve a response.

Originally posted by omgchos
Ok look mr. "i know the movies so well my logic must be right". Why is it that when he leaves the car he has to push a button and activate the armor if its so indestructible in the first place. Because if he doesn't put on the armor its as weak as a regular car. And not once has the batmobile survived an explosion. It has always managed to avoid them. I don't understand why you are so dead set against admitting that batman can in no way punch through iron man's armor. You have only one instance where batman punched through anything and it was the undercarriage of a car. In none of the movies was the bottom of the car shown to be armored. Unless the car is stationary and he presses the magic armor button. Which in this instance armor wasn't even present. And that whole condescending attitude thing does not make your argument any more valid.

And that last part about the tank shell is so irrelavent that it doesn't deserve a response.

Look back at the video you yourself posted. The Batmobile crashed threw a dozen cars with no damage, no denting, I don't think it was even scratched. So it is obviously armored more then your average car. In other words just because he has extra armor when he is not on site. Doesn't mean the car isn't armored already.

Lets look at some other videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyxv9qcJluY

Yes this is a different model Batmobile, but it the same tech base and even when a bag of grenades go off inside it. The exterior while damaged still survives. The their are scenes in this clip where the Batmobile drives threw an exploding chemical plant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UneXTUhsjyY

Please excuse the non-Batman parts it was the only video I could find with the needed clips.

Let me close by asking again do you think the Batmobile is weaker then low grade steel?