WWII Tank Gun Specifications

I've gathered all the data Soren has presented and posted it here, rank ordered by penetration at 500m:


17 pdr APDS against vertical 240 BHN RHA plates:
500m = 256mm
1,000m = 233
1,500m = 213
2,000m = 194
2,500m = 178
3,000m = 162

___________________

12.8cm PaK44 L/55

Projectile weight: 28.3 kg PzGr.43 APCBC(HE)
Sectional Density: 1.727
Muzzle Velocity: 880 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 10957 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 85.15 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 253mm
1,000m = 237mm
1,500m = 222mm
2,000m = 208mm
2,500m = 195mm
3,000m = 182mm

__________________________

8.8cm KwK43 L/71

Projectile weight: 10.4 kg PzGr.39/43 APCBC(HE)
Sectional Density: 1.342
Muzzle Velocity: 1000 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 5200 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 85.49 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 219mm
1,000m = 204mm
1,500m = 190mm
2,000m = 176mm
2,500m = 164mm
3,000m = 153mm
_________________________________________________

10cm D-10

Projectile weight: 15.88 kg BR-412D APBC
Sectional Denisty: 1.588
Muzzle velocity: 887 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 6246 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 79.52 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 211mm
1,000m = 185mm
1,500m = 161mm
2,000m = 141mm
2,500m = 123mm
3,000m = 108mm
_________________

12.2cm D-25T L/43

Projectile weight: 25 kg BR-471B APC
Sectional Density: 1.679
Muzzle Velocity: 780 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 7605 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 65 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 183mm
1,000m = 162mm
1,500m = 144mm
2,000m = 129mm
2,500m = 118mm
3,000m = 108mm
________________

76.2cm 17pdr with AP
Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:

500m = 175mm
1000m = 147mm
2000m = 105mm
2500m = 88mm
3000m = 74mm
________________________

7.5cm KwK42 L/70

Projectile weight: 7.2 kg PzGr.39/42 APCBC(HE)
Sectional Density: 1.280
Muzzle Velocity: 925 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 3080 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 69.7 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 168mm
1,000m = 149mm
1,500m = 132mm
2,000m = 116mm
2,500m = 103mm
3,000m = 91mm
______________________

9.0cm M3 L/53

Projectile Weight: 10.94 kg M82 APCBC
Sectional Density: 1.350
Muzzle Velocity: 853 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 3980 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 62.56 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 164mm
1,000m = 151mm
1,500m = 138mm
2,000m = 127mm
2,500m = 115mm
3,000m = 104mm
______________________

7.62cm 17pdr

Projectile weight: 7.7 kg Mk.8T APCBC
Sectional Density: 1.326
Muzzle Velocity: 883 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 3001 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 65.8 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 163mm
1,000m = 150mm
1,500m = 137mm
2,000m = 126mm
2,500m = 116mm
3,000m = 107mm
________________________

5.7cm 6pdr L/52 APDS against vertical 240 BHN RHA plates:
500m = 160mm
1,000m = 140mm
1,500m = 123mm
2,000m = 108mm
2,500m = 95mm
3,000m = 83mm

_________________

8.8cm KwK36 FlaK18/36 L/56

Projectile weight: 10.2 kg PzGr.39-1 APCBC(HE)
Sectional Density: 1.317
Muzzle Velocity: 773 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 3107 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 51.09 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 151mm
1,000m = 138mm
1,500m = 126mm
2,000m = 116mm
2,500m = 106mm
3,000m = 97mm
_________________________________________________


77mm HV APCBC projectile against vertical 240 BHN RHA plates:
500m = 137mm
1,000m = 126mm
1,500m = 116mm
2,000m = 106mm
2,500m = 98mm
3,000m = 90mm

______________________

7.5cm KwK40 L/48

Projectile weight: 6.8 kg PzGr.39 APCBC(HE)
Sectional Density: 1.208
Muzzle Velocity: 790 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 2122 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 48.03 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 123mm
1,000m = 109mm
1,500m = 97mm
2,000m = 86mm
2,500m = 76mm
3,000m = 68mm

__________________________________

7.6cm M1 L/55

Projectile weight: 7.0 kg M62 APCBC(HE)
Sectional Density: 1.211
Muzzle Velocity: 792 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 2195 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 48.38 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 116mm
1,000m = 106mm
1,500m = 97mm
2,000m = 89mm
2,500m = 81mm
3,000m = 74mm
____________________

5cm KwK39 L/60 penetration performance against vertical 240 BHN RHA armour:
APCR projectile:
500m = 108mm
1,000m = 72mm
1,500m = 48mm
2,000m = 32mm
2,500m = 21mm
3,000m = 14mm

_________________________________________________

5.7cm 6 pdr L/52

Projectile weight: 3.23 kg Mk.9T APCBC
Secional Density: 1.005
Muzzle Velocity: 831 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 1115 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 43.69 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 103mm
1,000m = 90mm
1,500m = 78mm
2,000m = 68mm
2,500m = 60mm
3,000m = 52mm

________________________

5cm KwK39 L/60 penetration performance against vertical 240 BHN RHA armour:

APC projectile:
500m = 82mm
1,000m = 64mm
1,500m = 49mm
2,000m = 38mm
2,500m = 30mm
3,000m = 23mm
___________________

7.5cm M3 L/38.5 penetration performance against vertical 240 BHN RHA armour:

M72 APCBC, MV = 2,030 fps:
500m = 81mm
1,000m = 73mm
1,500m = 65mm
2,000m = 59mm
2,500m = 53mm
3,000m = 47mm

_____________________

US 7.5cm M1 L/31 gun's performance against vertical 240 BHN RHA armour for comparison:

APCBC projectile: MV= 1850fps
500m = 72mm
1,000m = 65mm
1,500m = 58mm
2,000m = 52mm
2,500m = 47mm
3,000m = 42mm
_______________________

dunmunro1 said:

I've gathered all the data Soren has presented and posted it here, rank ordered by penetration at 500m:


17 pdr APDS against vertical 240 BHN RHA plates:
500m = 256mm
1,000m = 233
1,500m = 213
2,000m = 194
2,500m = 178
3,000m = 162

Click to expand...

i'm again w/o words

this is from Soren post nr 1:

7.62cm 17pdr

Projectile weight: 7.7 kg Mk.8T APCBC
Sectional Density: 1.326
Muzzle Velocity: 883 m/s
Total Kinetic Energy: 3001 KJ
Kinetic Energy pr. cm^2: 65.8 KJ

Performance against 90 degree 240 BHN RHA armour:
500m = 163mm
1,000m = 150mm
1,500m = 137mm
2,000m = 126mm
2,500m = 116mm
3,000m = 107mm

Soren posted the data for the 17pdr APDS ammo here:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/ww2-general/best-tank-ww2-20189-12.html#post618532

The data on the 17 pdr APCBC is futher down the list.

other guns have "high penetration" shell put in a list the only apds of 17 pdr it's a distortion, give a false impression.

I posted the data that he has presented, including the APCR data for the 5cm gun.

if you interessed to that test somewhere, in this forum, there are a large scan of data posted some time ago

It's a big forum, but if you or anyone can point me to it, I'd appreciate it.

Dunmunro,

The other guns were tested with APCR rounds aswell, but seeing as APCR APDS rounds lacked the destructive power of APCBC rounds I didn't add them. Loaded with APCR the KwK43 penetrated over 282mm of armour at 500m and 177mm at 3km.

Sigh, a round that doesn't penetrate is unlikely to be very destructive.

You are certainly welcome to add more data.

dunmunro1 said:

Sigh, a round that doesn't penetrate is unlikely to be very destructive.

Click to expand...

Well dumunro the funny thing here is that the 6 pdr was the only gun which at all benefitted from the APDS design during the war. So while I might understand you adding it into the list for the 6 pdr, esp. since it seems the 6 pdr could actually hit something with this round, I can't understand why you'd want to add the 17 pdr APDS data seeing as it was near useless for this gun. And again it was in short supply.

You are certainly welcome to add more data.

Click to expand...

Well I could add all APCR results, but these were also in short supply, and like with the APDS round their performance against sloped armour wasn't as good as that of APCBC rounds for similar 90 degree penetration power.


8.8cm KwK43 L/71 performance against vertical 240 BHN RHA armour:
Projectile: 7.3 kg PzGr.40/43 APCR
MV: 1,130 m/s
500m = 282mm
1,000m = 257mm
1,500m = 234mm
2,000m = 213mm
2,500m = 194mm
3,000m = 177mm

dunmunro1 said:

It's a big forum, but if you or anyone can point me to it, I'd appreciate it.

Click to expand...

sorry i rememebr to saw it but i don't remember where, i just saw all best tank thread but aren't there

Soren said:

I can't understand why you'd want to add the 17 pdr APDS data seeing as it was near useless for this gun. And again it was in short supply.

Click to expand...

For the 17pdr 37,000 rounds in 1944 and 140,000 in 1945.
There were roughly 600+ 17pdr A/T guns and 500 Firefly guns available in the late summer of 1944 in France.

In terms of actual penetrative power possessed by the guns in question at the muzzle, measured in KJ pr. cm^2, they rank as follows:

1.12.8cm Pak44 L/55
2. 8.8cm KwK43 L/71
3. 10cm D-10
4. 7.5cm KwK42 L/70
5. 7.62cm 17 pdr
6. 12.2cm D-25T
7. 9cm M3 L/53
8. 8.8cm KwK36 L/56
10. 7.7cm HV
11. 8.5cm D-5T L/54
12. 7.6cm M1 L/55
13. 7.5cm KwK40 L/48
14. 5.7cm 6 pdr
15. 5cm KwK39 L/60
16. 7.62cm F34 Zis-5 L/41.4
17. 7.5cm M3 L/38.5

Hello Soren
As Balleroy test showed, 17pdr APDS shot could hit and penetrate Panther's glacis from reasonable ETO distance from which 17pdr APCBC may well not penetrate. Sabot was less accurate, so British choices were when engaged Panther head on, use Sabot and hoped a hit or use APCBC and aim at much smaller targets at the front of the turret. 17pdr Sabot was rare in 44 but not much so in 45. Production in 44 37,000 and in 45 up to 31.5.44 140,000.

Now APCR for 8.8cm KwK43 was very rare but on the other hand it didn't usually need it, it was powerful enough with APCBC.

On APDS lethality, now British penetrators were bigger than German ones when compared to the size of complete round, that of 6pdr APDS had same diameter than that of 8,8cm APCR. And after all APDS was the round of 60s and 70s before smooth bore arrow penetrators game in fashion. So post-war it was seen that main point was to achieve penetration and after all APDS has enough lethality with the splinters of armour it took with it inside the tank.

Juha

m kenny said:

Fotr the 17pdr 37,000 rounds in 1944 and 140,000 in 1945.

Click to expand...

And yet it was still rare on the battlefield.

Juha said:

On APDS lethality, now British penetrators were bigger than German ones when compared to the size of complete round,

Click to expand...

That only goes in comparison to APCR rounds. APCBC penetrators are the same diameter as the barrel.

And after all APDS was the round of 60s and 70s before smooth bore arrow penetrators game in fashion

Click to expand...

.

APDS is just the designation, there is a big difference between the WW2 APDS ammunition and that used in the 60's 70's.

So post-war it was seen that main point was to achieve penetration and after all APDS has enough lethality with the splinters of armour it took with it inside the tank.

Click to expand...

After the war tanks got thicker and thicker armour, nessecating the use of small diameter solid shot projectiles in order to achieve enough penetration power. Tanks also became more buttoned up, being designed to withstand chemical attacks, and this in turn increased the killing power of solid shot rounds when they succeeded in penetrating the armour, the increased internal air pressure temperature being as big a killer as splinters.

Soren said:

And yet it was still rare on the battlefield.

Click to expand...

No it wasn't rare but then 21st AG didn't meet much German armour after the 17 pdr APDS became readily available, so it was probably rarely used.

BTW, speaking of rare, do you have data on the 32 pdr/ 3.7" gun, with AP, APCBC and APDS ammo?

The British 3.7" gun was never tested against armour by the US, so no figures on that gun.

dunmunro1 said:

A slightly better ballistic performance doesn't explain the fact that the Panther starts out at 168mm and ends up at 91mm, while the 17 pdr starts out at 163mm and ends up at 107mm, since if the L/70 has better high target angle performance this should offset the increase in target angle at long range which occurs as a natural result of the projectile trajectory.

Click to expand...

It worth noting that British tank AP rounds were solid shots, ie. greater sectional density at the expense of lethality, whereas German AP rounds were shells with an small explosive filler.

Kurfürst said:

It worth noting that British tank AP rounds were solid shots, ie. greater sectional density at the expense of lethality, whereas German AP rounds were shells with an small explosive filler.

Click to expand...

It would be interesting to see the relative performance at 30 deg target angle.