I've only suggested two things: switching the mothballed M1's 105mm (or 120mm in some cases) with the A-10 fighter's GAU-8 30mm gattling cannon, and changing the two existing M1 treads into four half tracks.
What costly problems are these changes frought with, specifically?
5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires
What is needed is the right tool for the job. The Stryker program has some things in the works, and other programs are in R&D that would better serve the needs addressed.
The M1 abrams is a tank killer, primary mission, to attempt to change horses in midstream with it would be to invite problems that could cost lives. I wouldn't want that on my head.
Bump for later read.
>>. . .changing the two existing M1 treads into four half tracks.
>>
>> What costly problems are these changes frought with, specifically?
Well, that one requires total replacement of the existing drive/transmission system, and would add significant mechanical complication, with added unreliability the natural follow-on. There's a reason there are no existing AFVs with the system you propose.
To mount the fire control system you are suggesting is another large engineering change that is costly and time consuming. I'm not sure it is even feasable. The Abrams is an engineering marvel, intended to kill enemy tanks on the battlefield. That it does very well. Again, the right tool for the job is needed the Abrams is not that tool in this case(my opinion).