Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Not being a tank expert but aren't the M4A3 and Pz IVH/J seen as being fairly even in performance? As in penetration? Armour? etc.

Basically - yes.
The PZIV F2 through J had a more powerful 75 than the standard 75mm gunned Sherman - but this was negated by the fact that both antagonists could shoot holes in each other at the same ranges.
The 76 gunned Sherman’s had a more powerful gun than their German counterpart - but the same equation still held true that both tanks could kill each other, but the late Sherman’s with the 76 were more capable tanks overall.

Notably absent from the account is any whining about the alleged inferiority of the 76mm gun.

Waddya mean [:'(]

two rounds of AP shell that hit and bounced off the front armor of the Ferdinand 250 yards east of us.

Ample proof it was an inadequate piece of junk! [;)]

but was not a ferdinand also known as an Elefant? ala huge?

That was a very interesting story - two M-10s stopping a deliberate attack by four Tiger IE's and two Ferdinands,
knocking out three of the Tigers and a Ferdinand in the course of a prolonged fight...all at ranges of 250 to 550 yards.[;)]

I suppose the tank destroyer men made up and imagined the entire affair... we all know it was the field artillery and the Air Corps which must have really gotten the German tanks...[8|]

but was not a ferdinand also known as an Elefant? ala huge?

Paul was being ironic. Paul was pointing out that a person with a really selective reading habit would ignore the several k-o'd PzVIs and Ferdinands in that account and instead grip rigidly to the part where a couple of rounds bounce.

we all know it was the field artillery and the Air Corps which must have really gotten the German tanks...

The Ferdinand was obviously ko'd by a fast-moving coconut disloged into low earth orbit by a shell from Yamato.

Yeha ferdinands were monsters. The germans pooled up their materials for a year and built about 3 of im. I paid 800 beans for one in Close Combat and it don't even come w/ a machinegun [8|]

That was a very interesting story - two M-10s stopping a deliberate attack by four Tiger IE's and two Ferdinands,

Some day I'm gonna print up some T-shirts in XL and sell them to ASL gamers.

The shirt front has image of an M10 counter (obverse) and above it the phrase "Got Rate?"

The back of the T-shirt is two reverse (wreck side) 5/8" PzIVJ counters.

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

That was a very interesting story - two M-10s stopping a deliberate attack by four Tiger IE's and two Ferdinands,

Some day I'm gonna print up some T-shirts in XL and sell them to ASL gamers.

The shirt front has image of an M10 counter (obverse) and above it the phrase "Got Rate?"

The back of the T-shirt is two reverse (wreck side) 5/8" PzIVJ counters.

As an old ASL player - THAT would be funny![:D]

You know mdiehl if everything you claim to be true were true WWII would have ended by may 1944 latest in Europe and in may 43 in the Pacific.

Wasn't the difference between an Elefant and Ferdinand was that one had MG's the other didn't?
 
Sherman vs Axis AFV's - So am I not thinking logically here that IF an M4A3 is pretty even vs an PZIVH/J and in general a Tiger or Panther is seeing as being superior to a PZIVH/J that they are superior to an M4A3 and or 76mm model?

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Wasn't the difference between an Elefant and Ferdinand was that one had MG's the other didn't?

Sherman vs Axis AFV's - So am I not thinking logically here that IF an M4A3 is pretty even vs an PZIVH/J and in general a Tiger or Panther is seeing as being superior to a PZIVH/J that they are superior to an M4A3 and or 76mm model?

I would say so - yes of course.
The only difference is that the later Sherman with a 76 finally had a weapon capable of killing a Tiger or Panther, and actually did a pretty decent job of killing Tigers and Panthers. Though the Tiger or Panther would still be considered a heavier tank.

Think of it as CL vs CA... but with the 76mm gun the Sherman became more of a Brooklyn class CL [;)]

mdiehl
record of killing the German equivalent (PzIV --- another tank designed in 1940 and upgraded through the years)

In 1935, Krupp after receiving order to produce its design, modified it by incorporating best features of existing designs. After further tests, Krupp was ready to start the production of Panzer IV Ausf A.
First Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf A was built in October of 1937 by Krupp-Gruson and its production ended in March of 1938 with total of 35 produced.

Source achtungpanzer.com

VS

On 18 April, 1941 the final design characteristics were approved at a conference at Aberdeen Proving Grounds attended by representatives of the Armored Force and the Ordnance Department.
The M4 was standardized and placed into production in February of 1942.

Source wikipedia.org

So which tank was designed in 40?

I could be exaggerating but are all of your posts so reliable?

edited with M4 data

ORIGINAL: Big B

That was a very interesting story - two M-10s stopping a deliberate attack by four Tiger IE's and two Ferdinands,
knocking out three of the Tigers and a Ferdinand in the course of a prolonged fight...all at ranges of 250 to 550 yards.[;)]

I suppose the tank destroyer men made up and imagined the entire affair... we all know it was the field artillery and the Air Corps which must have really gotten the German tanks...[8|]

a kill shot at 20-450 yards is very differrent than one at 1500 yards.. I think if you where in a open plains duel aqt 1500 to2500 yds, you would never everr want a allied gun less than the fireflies 25 lb or the german panther high vel 75 or those 88s.. remmeber tactics, vs guns.. I can kill u with my knife if you cannot see me in the fog and u have a 12 guage.

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Now ask yourself, with what gun was the M10 tank destroyer, whose doctrinal job was to kill enemy tanks, armed? Answer, in the 3rd AD, it was armed with the same 76mm gun used on the M4A3E8.

Not quite. The M10 had a 3 inch gun (modified AA gun put in a turret), while the M18 had the same 76mm they put in the Sherm. 3rd Army used the M18 for a large part of it´s TD battlions anyway, so it´s not like they didn´t have the 76mm in numbers.

ORIGINAL: freeboy


a kill shot at 20-450 yards is very differrent than one at 1500 yards.. I think if you where in a open plains duel aqt 1500 to2500 yds, you would never everr want a allied gun less than the fireflies 25 lb or the german panther high vel 75 or those 88s.. remmeber tactics, vs guns.. I can kill u with my knife if you cannot see me in the fog and u have a 12 guage.

The funny thing is, that you don´t really find many examples of long range duels in the tactical narratives very much (apart from AT guns whose doctrinal role it was to duel at long range anyway), apart from a few instances (Brits in Normandy for exemple). Each time the germans did bring out sizeable number of Kats, they did so in either inclement weather (snow, morning fog, rain) or in constrcited terrain (Ardennes. Mortain to a degree). Which suggests that accuracy and killing power above 1000 meters, while certainly nice to have, was not necessarily decisive in a majority of cases.

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Now ask yourself, with what gun was the M10 tank destroyer, whose doctrinal job was to kill enemy tanks, armed? Answer, in the 3rd AD, it was armed with the same 76mm gun used on the M4A3E8.

Not quite. The M10 had a 3 inch gun (modified AA gun put in a turret), while the M18 had the same 76mm they put in the Sherm. 3rd Army used the M18 for a large part of it´s TD battlions anyway, so it´s not like they didn´t have the 76mm in numbers.

True, but the overriding point is that both M-10 and M4(76) fired the same shell, at the same velocities and ballistics. Even though the Sherman's gun was of a diferent construction, this made zero diference on the recieving end.

ORIGINAL: freeboy

ORIGINAL: Big B

That was a very interesting story - two M-10s stopping a deliberate attack by four Tiger IE's and two Ferdinands,
knocking out three of the Tigers and a Ferdinand in the course of a prolonged fight...all at ranges of 250 to 550 yards.[;)]

I suppose the tank destroyer men made up and imagined the entire affair... we all know it was the field artillery and the Air Corps which must have really gotten the German tanks...[8|]

a kill shot at 20-450 yards is very differrent than one at 1500 yards.. I think if you where in a open plains duel aqt 1500 to2500 yds, you would never everr want a allied gun less than the fireflies 25 lb or the german panther high vel 75 or those 88s.. remmeber tactics, vs guns.. I can kill u with my knife if you cannot see me in the fog and u have a 12 guage.

No - it's still a kill shot - and you should also take note that the Tigers and Ferdinands were unable to return a kill shot at the same range.

Furthermore, vialbe tank duel range in Europe (I have read) was seldom over 700 yards due to terrain.

So yes, the ability to hit a target at longer range is always a good thing, but not necessairly a deceisive thing, and in WWII that proved to be the case.

Tiger can destroy any tank in 1000 m distance,especially sherman.[:D]
Sherman must approach Tiger within 400 m to even try to put hole in Tiger.


This "any tank" exclude IS tanks[8D]

Here is nice thought:

Wow. Just becuase they made more of them, doesnt mean it was a better tank. It just means they made more of them. They make a helluva lot more toyotas than they do ferraris, but could you call the toyota the better car just based on that?


A sherman has a small chance if it attacks a tiger from behind without the tiger knowing about the sherman's possition. The rear is pretty soft like with all tanks, but still.. the M10 comes way closer tot the tiger and even that is no match against it. The tiger is a class on it's own and can not, and will not ever be matched. Specially since nothing good has seen the tiger in battle and really had the change to fight it 1 on 1. Dumb to make a show about this without knowing the facts. sorry to say so.

[:D][:D]

right, so we are talkingtactics, I AGREE here.. these where great gunned tanks if Gerry had fought aroung PAris and where they could hve these battles as in eastern front, thaat you are making a point is that they where USED in a poor way...