Author Topic: Difference between Bf-109E-1 and E-3? (Read 1167 times)

frank3 · « **on:** August 30, 2005, 12:01:50 PM »

Does anyone know what new "features" the Bf-109E-3 has above the E-1 version?
I would also like to know all other differences.

Thanks in advance,

Frank

Angus · « **Reply #1 on:** August 30, 2005, 12:28:13 PM »

I am sure that some of our LW characters will pop in and give this in detail. Many people on this forum have very much knowledge on the 109.
I can only say that within the 109E series you'd have gradual improvements of various sorts, mostly increased engine power, but also the drop tank feature (109E-7???)

Then the beautiful 109F is another issue,,,,enough for a thread.

frank3 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 30, 2005, 02:53:28 PM »

I'm sure of that, but I would like the E-1 vs E-3 only please

butch2k · « **Reply #3 on:** August 30, 2005, 03:19:34 PM »

E-1 has MG-17 in the wings while the E-3 has MG-FF (and E-4 MG-FFM)

LLv34_Snefens · « **Reply #4 on:** August 30, 2005, 04:54:30 PM »

From http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/Me109.htm it looks like it added a bit more armour and also changed engine from "DB 601 A" to "DB 601 Aa" as well.
What the difference between those is I have no idea.

Eagler · « **Reply #5 on:** August 30, 2005, 05:37:39 PM »

Wilbus · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2005, 03:34:08 AM »

Not a whole lot of difference.

The E3 was equiped with the DB601A engine and had the wing mounted MG17
's replaced by MG FF 20mm cannon instead. The E3 also had a slightly different kind of pilot seat. Max speed was 348mph compared to 334 of the E1.

frank3 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 31, 2005, 08:38:06 AM »

Thanks guys, this is what I wanted to know

!

EDIT: oh, one more thing, was the E-1 capable of carrying a bomb?
And did the E-1 had an armored windshield? Or were both these features added on the E-3?

Wilbus · « **Reply #8 on:** August 31, 2005, 08:55:00 AM »

The possibly to carry bombs was not added untill the E4/B Jabo version and the armored windscreen wasn't added till E4 version either.
However, the E3 was the first version with pilot armor, the seat behind the pilot recieved 8mm pilot armor and then another 28.6 lbs of armor was added behind and above the pilot seat in a curved form (the anoying thing obscuring top view in the E4 )

These armor modifications were made to some E1's aswell once the E3's were starting to get it.

frank3 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 31, 2005, 08:57:36 AM »

I see I see, thanks Wilbus!

Kurfürst · « **Reply #10 on:** September 01, 2005, 10:32:52 AM »

The only difference between the E-1 and E-3 was the guns iirc. The former had 4x 7,92mm, the latter 2x7,92 + 2x20mm MG FF.

I am not sure about the armor, so far no literature on it was clear and free of controversies; I believe both the E-1 and E-3 had the pilot armor from the start, the up armoring was in fact adding the pilot`s head armor after the Battle of France to all models.

Neither there was any difference between the engine models. All Emils, except the /N versions which mounted the DB 601N (from June/July 40) , had either the DB 601A-1, the A-1 with improved supercharger or the slightly more powerful DB 601Aa with higher boost (1.35ata for 5mins and 1.45ata for 1min vs. previous 1.3/1.4ata).

The front armor glass was also available for certain, but you don`t see it often until the F-4; I guess it had more to do with the lack of enemy daylight bomber presence rather than supply issues.

RTR · « **Reply #11 on:** September 01, 2005, 10:41:22 AM »

Dang!
Eagler beat me to it

RTR

Krusty · « **Reply #12 on:** September 05, 2005, 03:33:58 PM »

Well I asked the same question a while back but got no response. Good to see it was finally answered. I'd hope that HTC adds a 4x 7mm option to the 109E (to simulate an E-1). It would be interesting to have more ammo but smaller caliber to try to bring down planes with, eh?

frank3 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 08, 2005, 11:19:55 AM »

Hmm Im not so sure about that, 4 x .303's would do relatively no damage in a dogfight..

I usually use the 7.76mm's for spray 'n pray (or when not sure I'll hit) and the 20mm for certain hits, works perfectly!

One just needs a big calibre for swift kills, 4 x .303 won't do you any good IMO

Squire · « **Reply #14 on:** September 08, 2005, 05:14:58 PM »

Kind of a moot point if your talking about the MA. Nobody flies the older types anyways.

If you are looking to add a 109E varient for Scenarios or ToD for a 1939-40 period than I could maybe see adding the 109E-1. Personally I dont think there is a big need for it unless you were going to have the Polish and French 1940 campaign included.

On a side note, regarding the armament of 4 x 30 cal MGs. Many fighters of the period were armed similarily, they were not 44-45 fighters that had to contend with engaging 4 engined bombers, or a/c with more armor and self sealing fuel tanks.

For 1939 4 x 30 cal MGs is not heavy, no, but it would be adequate in most air combats to bring down a bomber or fighter.