View Single Post
Old 01-12-12, 05:32 PM   #10
Lieste
Soundman
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 142
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Those numbers sound pretty wrong...

While the 76mm APCBC round was not spectacular, it was potent enough to damage the 80mm front hull at ~1000m, but the 50mm turret front was vulnerable at ~2000m range, accuracy being more limiting than penetration.

The 75mm PzGr39 fired from an L43 or L48 gun would struggle to deal with the hull-front of a T34 (all marks have same protection) beyond 500m, and only the turret front was more vulnerable. This vulnerability was reduced with successive designs of turret, with the vulnerability range reducing from 2000m for the thinner 1940 model to ~1000m for the 1943 turret. The T34 85 was heavier, with turret front armour approaching that of the hull.

The 85mm gun was introduced to deal with the 100-110mm turret front armour of the Panther, and the 110mm frontal armour of the Tiger I, not to deal with the relatively weak PzIV.


The Tiger Fibel gives the 88mm gun as being 'good' for 800m for frontal engagements.
It also lists the Tiger flank & rear armour as being vulnerable inside 1500m against the T34 gun. It isn't made clear which T34 they refer to, but it is consistent with the later 85mm IMO (KV1 listed as 900m, Sherman 75mm as 800m). It should be noted that the protection is a limit for a clean hit near 90 degrees, and the vulnerable range is essentially zero near the oblique angles the driver was trained to adopt. These are the same as protection values of the frontal hull armour of the PzIV, so this should be considered vulnerable at 800-900m, with the turret much further... Frontal protection of the T34 should also be considered around 700-800m for the PzGr39 fired from the 75mm PaK or KwK L48

Last edited by Lieste; 01-12-12 at 08:28 PM.
Lieste is offline   Reply With Quote