Guest tero Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 At http://www.wargamer.org/GvA/weapons/usa_turret4.html I found this bit of data: "9. M4A3E2. Source: Hunnicutt, R. P.: Sherman: A History of the American Medium Tank. Also known as the Jumbo. Some had the main gun replaced with the 76mm M1 (exact version unknown) by the workshops of the 3rd Army from late February 1945 to April 1945. The M4A3E2 had wet stowage for the ammunition, but its designation did not include the “W” suffix. A total of 254 were built from May 1944 to July 1944. " In CM the Jumbo 76 is available way before that. Why ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 Who cares... they suck now with 152mm front turret armour and slow speed. Who wants a 200 point tank that can't stand up to a Panther. Your better off buying the 75mm Jumbo and using it like a Churchill VIII. If you want a Panther killer buy a Jackson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 It's still lethal against the light stuff like the Hetzer and the Tiger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tero Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 >Who cares... BTS is dedicated to historically accurate modelling, right ? >they suck now with 152mm front turret armour and slow speed. I ran a v1.12 test recently with 4 Jumbos against a Tiger and the Jumbos shrugged off 88 AP fired at the turret side at 25 meters. All four Jumbos did die eventually but some of the shots they shrugged off left me wondering about the accuracy of the 88 penetration and the Jumbo armour modelling in CM. I checked around and draw different data on the Jumbo armour: According to Squadron/Signal "Sherman in action" (and a few other sources) the turret front armour was 3", mantlet 7" (note: the matlet does not extend over the entire width of the turret front), sides 6" and rear 2½". These differ rather substantially from the CM figures. I did find a source that has the same 152mm around the entire turret. >Who wants a 200 point tank that can't stand up to a Panther. All German tank are not Panthers or Tigers. And since in CM the Germans do not seem to carry the PzGr40 tungsten rounds they are fighting one hand tied behind their back. The 88 PzGR40 can penetrate 171mm armour at 30º at 100 meters. The Jumbo is quite usefull, to put it mildly. Especially if it comes with the 76mm gun and tungsten rounds. Even toned down they tend to be a bit too resilent to be quite accuratelly modelled. [This message has been edited by tero (edited 02-21-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 Well I used to buy the Jumbo 76 for use agianst Panthers... whch are the most common tank you will face as an Allies player in QB's. 152mm will not save you agianst that wicked 75mm/L70 gun so you might as well just buy a Jackson, at least its 90mm can cut threw the Panther's turret with reasonable ease. But I agree.. 152mm is still a useful amount of armour. It will stop the 75/L48 and anything below. However for 200 points its rather expensive. Thats why I think it's better to buy the cheaper 75mm version, which is dealy vs AT guns, infantry, and light armour. If you buy a Jumbo 76mm and get no/low tugsten and your enemy buys a Panther... your in the poo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 Originally posted by tero: According to Squadron/Signal "Sherman in action" (and a few other sources) the turret front armour was 3", mantlet 7" (note: the matlet does not extend over the entire width of the turret front), Actually, it comes pretty close, at least to my eye. 3"= 76mm 7"= 178mm Looks like the front turret armor should be increased, not decreased. I certainly hope you're not suggesting BTS knock the from turret armor of the Jumbo down to 76mm. That's less that a regular Sherman (89mm). The only other figure that differs from the CM number is the rear turret, which is vastly different. I did find a source that has the same 152mm around the entire turret. Which source was that? And since in CM the Germans do not seem to carry the PzGr40 tungsten rounds they are fighting one hand tied behind their back. Yeah, kinda like they were in real life ------------------ What a bunch of horsecrap. -Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 ...A total of 254 were built from May 1944 to July 1944. " "In CM the Jumbo 76 is available way before that. Why ?" Huh? Doesn't CM cover the period between June 6th, 1944 and May, 1945? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tero Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 >Huh? Doesn't CM cover the period between June 6th, 1944 and May, 1945? Read my lips: "Some had the main gun replaced with the 76mm M1 (exact version unknown) by the workshops of the 3rd Army from late February 1945 to April 1945." Currently the Jumbo armed with the 76mm gun is available before the date mentioned in the source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tero Posted February 21, 2001 Share Posted February 21, 2001 >Actually, it comes pretty close, at least to my eye. 3"= 76mm 7"= 178mm I am not too concerned about the FRONT armour as the rest of the turret. >Looks like the front turret armor should be increased, not decreased. If there is a way to make the mantlet stand out from the rest of the turret front, yes. >The only other figure that differs from the CM number is the rear turret, which is vastly different. Concur. But as I said I have seen the uniform armour all around the turret figure as well so I wonder what are the actual figures. >Which source was that? www.onwar.com (?) >Yeah, kinda like they were in real life At least in real life they did carry them once in a blue moon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tero Posted February 22, 2001 Share Posted February 22, 2001 "Anybody have an answer ?" bump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaka Posted February 22, 2001 Share Posted February 22, 2001 I hope this helps, http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/014647.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tero Posted February 23, 2001 Share Posted February 23, 2001 >I hope this helps, Thanks. There is still one thing that is not quite clear. I thought the armour field mods made were included in the "Sherman +" model and all "straight from the production line" models in the game are "as is" modelled straight from their historical counterparts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts