Sub 500m. Might depend on the exact ammo too - but that's not displayed in the game.
QOTD #8 - Impact of upgunning the M4 Sherman to 76mm?
- Thread starter Bootie
- Start date
Sub 500m. Might depend on the exact ammo too - but that's not displayed in the game.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2017
- Messages
- 808
- Reaction score
- 707
I have never seen a US 75mm penetrate a Panther frontally, with one exception. I lost a Panther to a 75mm shell that hit the commander's circle of vision blocks on my Panther and the game counted it as a "Top Hit."
You never saw it penetrate the front turret?
In CM the 76mm can penetrate the hull front on a Panther. You will definitely bounce more than you penetrate, and it may only be a partial, but the 76mm can KO a Panther without having to hit the turret.
Firing range test:
.
Firing range test:
.
Thanks for sharing the test. This is a Lower Front Hull hit though. The 'underbelly', not the glacis.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2017
- Messages
- 808
- Reaction score
- 707
Never in CMX1 or CMX2.
In CMX1......the US 76.2mm shredded Panthers, but the 75mm still did not work. I would gladly match 76mm US tanks vs Panthers.
With this thinking, when I started CMX2.....I sent 4 US Shermans (3 76mm and 1 75mm) against 1 @Meat Grinder Panther and lost all 4 tanks.
Battlefront has treated the 76.2mm gun differently in different games and different patches.
Someone was saying that tank HE rounds are also more powerful in the .03 patch.
If you mean the most recent patch? Then I've seen a Panther penetrate the front glacis of a Sherman with a HE round. That should not really happen I guess.
What happened was the Sherman was already knocked out, and the Panther was firing HE at some infantry behind it, but hit the Sherman.
The HE left a nice clean hole.
I have a savegame of it if anybody thinks I'm telling tall tales
Late war Panthers had poorer quality armour than those that were produced earlier due to Germany running out of the needed alloys to make the armour plates to the required toughness.
This may be what you are experiencing.
This may be what you are experiencing.
Haha, I remember that game. That was a fun game, even though you got a (minor) victory. You taught me a lesson about TRPs, if I remember correctly. I do remember you commenting about my "invulnerable" Panthers.
But anyway, yea, a US 76mm can definitely take out a Panther from the front in CM2 (maybe more so now since the latest patch.....I dunno as I haven't played many games recently), but I still don't recommend a Sherman V Panther duel from the front, if you are playing USA. A Sherman 75 can definitely take out a Panther from behind though. Just ask @Wellsonian .
Only if it first drives through an urban defense zone filled with multiple panzerfausts and a Panzerschreck that never fire though.
They all failed the morale check?Only if it first drives through an urban defense zone filled with multiple panzerfausts and a Panzerschreck that never fire though.
For me it all comes down to the British did actually do something right, which is seldom.
When they made the firefly and added one per platoon, it was the best and quickest answer to the issue and was about all that was needed considering the amount of times there was a chance to fight enemy armor direct.
What I always question is why didn't the Americans just start producing the same gun instead of going with the inferior 76.
That was a option and they choose not to do it, likely because of the time it would take to get lines ready to produce it.
When they made the firefly and added one per platoon, it was the best and quickest answer to the issue and was about all that was needed considering the amount of times there was a chance to fight enemy armor direct.
What I always question is why didn't the Americans just start producing the same gun instead of going with the inferior 76.
That was a option and they choose not to do it, likely because of the time it would take to get lines ready to produce it.
From what I understand it also had to do with the layout of the turret. With the 17pounder they'd lose one crewmen and the ergonomics wasn't up to par, which led to quite less rounds per minute. Also the accuracy of the 17pndr was less than the US 76mm.
Yup, the 17pdr hit harder than the 76mm, but was less accurate.
Also consider that if the USA had adopted the firefly despite its horrible ergonomics, that would be yet another line of ammo that would need to be supplied to the troops in field, the USA did not produce 17pdr ammo, so they'd either have to tool up for it or rely in the Brits to supply.
The USA going with the 90mm was the right decision, both guns are comparable and they already had the tooling ready for producing tubes and ammo.
Also consider that if the USA had adopted the firefly despite its horrible ergonomics, that would be yet another line of ammo that would need to be supplied to the troops in field, the USA did not produce 17pdr ammo, so they'd either have to tool up for it or rely in the Brits to supply.
The USA going with the 90mm was the right decision, both guns are comparable and they already had the tooling ready for producing tubes and ammo.
Yes, you are likely correct.
It sticks out in my mind they did try to stick the 90 in the Sherman but there was too many engineering issues and it was dropped.
Like was pointed out, they had the logic that the weapon was a tank destroyer instead, and they did have the M36 by July 44 but it was not like that is true either, because they had the M26 in design also, for some reason they held off until the battle of the bulge convinced them they needed tanks instead of tank destroyers.
It sticks out in my mind they did try to stick the 90 in the Sherman but there was too many engineering issues and it was dropped.
Like was pointed out, they had the logic that the weapon was a tank destroyer instead, and they did have the M36 by July 44 but it was not like that is true either, because they had the M26 in design also, for some reason they held off until the battle of the bulge convinced them they needed tanks instead of tank destroyers.
By my understanding the M36 was a stop-gap designed to both replace the M10 in the immediate term, and get a 90mm gun into the field while they worked out the bugs in the M26.
The boffins who were in charge of producing the M26 were adamant that it not go overseas until it had all the reliability and other issues sorted out, they did not want to end up in a situation like the Germans did with Panther.
The boffins who were in charge of producing the M26 were adamant that it not go overseas until it had all the reliability and other issues sorted out, they did not want to end up in a situation like the Germans did with Panther.
Have you got an article somewhere for the clueless like me about the Panther issue?
From 'Germany's Panther Tank' by Thomas Jentz.
Yes it's a cut and paste from Wikipedia, but the source checks out so saves me from having to type it out myself!
Basically the Germans rushed the Panther into action before working out all of the issues, hence the poor reliability on its debut.
I've wondered if this could be replicated in CM somewhat, you buy five Panthers but only three show up because the other two broke down trying to get to the battlefield - I can imagine it wouldn't be a popular change!
Yes it's a cut and paste from Wikipedia, but the source checks out so saves me from having to type it out myself!
Basically the Germans rushed the Panther into action before working out all of the issues, hence the poor reliability on its debut.
I've wondered if this could be replicated in CM somewhat, you buy five Panthers but only three show up because the other two broke down trying to get to the battlefield - I can imagine it wouldn't be a popular change!