Jump to content

Comparison of Russian 85mm HVAP with American 76mm HVAP


Recommended Posts

The following data pertains to WW II Russian 85mm and American 76mm HVAP rounds:

Russian 85mm HVAP

=================

Fired at 1040 m/s

0.65 kg tungsten core

27.94mm core diameter in American analysis, 27.77mm from Russian data.

100m, 1009 m/s, 165mm vertical target penetration

300m, 947 m/s, 150mm

500m, 887 m/s, 137mm

1000m, 744 m/s, 107mm

1500m, 614 m/s, 81mm

American 76mm HVAP

==================

Fired at 1037 m/s

1.765 kg tungsten core

38.1mm core diameter

100m, 1018 m/s, 240mm vertical target penetration

300m, 981 m/s, 226mm

500m, 939 m/s, 211mm

1000m, 848 m/s, 179mm

1500m, 756 m/s 149mm

Comparing the two HVAP rounds the American 76mm ammunition holds a greater percentage of its muzzle velocity at range and also outpenetrates 85mm HVAP by a significant amount. The American HVAP tungsten core is larger and heavier than the Russian core.

The British 17 pdr APDS tungsten core had similar dimensions and weight when compared to the American 76mm HVAP.

The above data shows that larger guns did not always fire more effective tungsten core ammo during WW II.

The American HVAP penetration velocity and penetration data is from TM9-1907, the Russian 85mm HVAP figures were provided by Miles Krogfus.

If the Russian tungsten core data and velocity is used for penetration estimates based on the U.S. 76mm HVAP at 0m and 0 degrees (247mm penetration at 1037 m/s), the resulting DeMarre equation estimates are:

100m, 163mm predicted (165mm actual)

300m, 149mm predicted (150mm actual)

500m, 136mm predicted (137mm actual)

1000m, 106mm predicted (107mm actual)

1500m, 80mm predicted (81mm actual)

The Russian 85mm HVAP tungsten core was expected to perform with the same ballistic characteristics as the American 76mm HVAP, which suggests a similarity of material quality.

Previous posts on this forum regarding Russian 45mm and 76.2mm HAVP (or APCR) showed that the ammunition performed with the same ballistic penetration characteristics as American 76mm HVAP beyond close range, but the Russian tungsten cores appeared to perform in an inferior manner once the impact velocity exceeded about 700 m/s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The U.S. 76mm HVAP and British APDS rounds (combat and experimental) used tungsten cores which were half the diameter of the carrier (76.2mm 17 pdr APDS fired a 38.1mm tungsten core). Russian tungsten core diameters appear to assume a lower percentage of the carrier diameter as the gun size increases:

45mm: 19.1mm core and 45mm carrier, 42.4% core-to-carrier percentage

57mm: 24.1mm core and 57mm carrier, 42.3%

76.2mm: 27.94mm core and 76.2mm carrier, 36.7%

85mm: 27.77mm core and 85mm carrier, 32.7%

The relationship between core and carrier diameter may have been related to tungsten conservation, although other factors are possible.

The Russian 76.2mm tungsten core round used a 0.484 kg tungsten core with a 0.149 kg steel follow-up plug which would add its full weight to the penetration of vertical plates as if it were tungsten, and which may have been a conservation effort.

It is also noted that the Russians stayed with the arrowhead type of tungsten core HVAP round after the Germans switched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by John Kettler:

rexford,

Can't speak for the rest of the troops, but that is certainly not the intuitive result I'd expect. How do the guns stack up in terms of penetration with the typical AP shell for each?

Keep up the great work!

Regards,

John Kettler

The U.S. 76mm APCBC round was compared to the 85mm APBC during a Russian firing trial against a captured Tiger II, and the U.S. gun was significantly better at penetrating the Tiger II.

The report is published on the Russian Battlefield site.

Comparing Russian 85mm HVAP to 85mm APBC against vertical targets results in:

100m: 165mm for HVAP, 139mm for APBC

500m: 137mm for HVAP, 123mm for APBC

1000m: 107mm for HVAP, 105mm for APBC

1500m: 81mm for HVAP, 91mm for APBC

Inside 500m, 85mm HVAP has a higher probability to defeat the Tiger mantlet than 85mm APBC.

For U.S. 76mm APCBC:

100m: 239mm for HVAP, 125mm for APCBC

500m: 208mm for HVAP, 116mm for APCBC

1000m: 175mm for HVAP, 106mm for APCBC

1500m: 147mm for HVAP, 97mm for APCBC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, it is rather amazing that the US standard AP round is better than the Russian one. The Russian one is not only heavier, according to the data in CMBB it also has a slightly higher muzzle velocity. I would certainly expect it to penetrate better than the 76mm AP round, just because its kinetic energy should be somewhat higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Russian website http://www.battlefield.ru/ one of the authors states that russian designers failed in trying to increase muzzle velocity. Instead, the designers increased the weight of the shell by increasing the calibre. I would guess that's why Russian tanks guns were so commonly huge--sheer weight of shot performes the equivalent of "them fine German guns."

Also, really large calibre guns work well against infantry, which is what the ammo load of most Russian tanks had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems, the US 76mm with wolfram/tungsten ammo does not need to worry about to engage a KTiger frontaly.... it would easy defeat the Turret front from 0-700 meter.

Also, the Performance with tungsten is nearly the same like from the 75/L70... does this mean the US Ammo was better in this case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by meldorian:

Still, it is rather amazing that the US standard AP round is better than the Russian one. The Russian one is not only heavier, according to the data in CMBB it also has a slightly higher muzzle velocity. I would certainly expect it to penetrate better than the 76mm AP round, just because its kinetic energy should be somewhat higher.

Russian 85mm APBC does out penetrate US 76mm APCBC, at least in the data given by rexford above.

However, all AP shells are not created equal. Note that the 76mm shell is capped whereas the 85mm projectile only has a ballistic cap. This means that the 76mm shell would be more effective against face-hardened armour. Other things like shell quality and sharpness of the nose comes into play as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...