Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Panthers frontal armor is 80mm where Pershings is 100mm, but Panthers is much more heavily angled and its RHA instead of cast armor. RHA tends to better for a given thickness. Frontal armor is equal for our purposes.
102mm to be specific.
Yes, the Panther's armor was angled to about 65 degrees, as opposed to 46 degrees for the M26. However, the quality of the Panther's armor varied considerably, as demonstrated by combat reports. I have read where the 76mm HVAP-T penetrated the frontal armor of a Panther at 1,500 yards. I have also seen where the same round failed to penetrate at half that distance. According to the writer, the Army found that armor on late-war German tanks was of inconsistant quality.
As for the gun the gun I see you pretty much always use HVAP figures for your US gun performance figures, this is higly misleading as HVP was ALWAYS EXCEEDINGLY RARE, even in spring 45.
I used the best figures for each gun.
As to HVAP being "ALWAYS EXCEEDINGLY RARE", that is going way too far. By the fall of 1944, HVAP ammunition was being distributed to Tank Destroyer Battalions as part of their basic load-out. Yes, it was in very short supply initially. That is why it was limited to TD units at first. Typically, a TD might have anywhere between 2 and 6 HVAP-T rounds aboard. They were husbanded for confrontations with Panthers and Tigers. Oddly, the Army issued some HVAP to towed anti-tank gun units, and to 90mm anti-aircraft batteries (supposedly for fighting armor should the need arise). These were quickly bartered off to M10 and M36 crews as the case may be. Indeed, being issued a dozen HVAP rounds meant that a 90mm AA battery was going to have a sudden influx of goodies from M36 crews desperate to get more of the hot ammo.
My father was attached to the 307th FA, 78th Infantry Division. He told me that it was commonplace for artillery personnel to steal the new "hot" tank (HVAP) ammo from the resupply depot while loading up with 105mm. They did this because they knew that they could trade it for Lugers, Thompsons and any number of other goodies from tank units.
As HVAP became more available (it was never as common as APC, due to the tungsten shortage in the U.S.), TD crews would barter with tank crews, trading a few rounds for whatever goodies the tank boys could provide. By January of 1945, virtually every 76mm Sherman in the ETO had a few HVAP rounds stowed away. However, by that time, HVAP was beginning to filter down to tank units anyway. Pershings were issued HVAP as part of their basic load. Up to 20% of their anti-tank rounds were HVAP. Of course, this was in February and March of 1945, when HVAP was becoming more available. Naturally, if you shoot all of your HVAP, you are back to using APC.
Firing standard APC ammunition including the T33, and M82 (early and late) AP shot the Panther is superior to Pershing.
HVAP very very very rare, it is not representative to use ONLY HVAP figures. It distorts the argument. Dont do that its not representative of the gun overall performance.
Firing standard APC ammo the Panthers gun is better plus the entire 90mm round weighs almost 50% more than the 75mm. 31 vs 43 lbs. Panther ROF is higher.
Hold the phone.... Shall we compare all the varying types of ammo used by the German tanks as well, or just stick to the best types, which were also rarely found in German usage. Typically, the Panther would load out with a mix of APCBC, HVAP and HE, with APCBC being the more common AP round. In that regard, it was inferior to 90mm M82 APCBC and about equal to the M77 APC. That is why I elected to use the best ammunition available for all three guns. Virtually every Tiger, Panther and Pershing carried a few (at the minimum) of the best in their load-out. Typically, by the end of the war, the M26 was receiving HVAP ammo as part of its standard load-out, just as was the M36.
And yes Hunnicut did compare more than just armor and firepower. Its stupid to do that, by that standard Jagdtiger would be the best service tank in WW2. But we know its not.
Other things are important too.
(snip)
Military historians still regard Panther as being better overall, and best tank of WW2 overall.
You disagree and thats OK.
Actually, I don't disagree. My opinion is that the M26 had some noteworthy limitations. Indeed, it would not be until the arrival of the M46 that this basic design would be considered markedly superior to the Panther. However, the M46 (essentially a rebuilt M26 with many improvements) did not show up until late in the 1940s.
My argument is simple: The M26 has thicker armor, and a more powerful gun than the Panther. I never stated that it was an overall better tank.
My regards,
Widewing
[ 01-10-2002: Message edited by: Widewing ]
