M 10

[Bruceov]

The M10 has 57 mm of 95% armor at 45% is this the equvalent of the shermans 89 MM of 85% armor

[gunnergoz]

Ballistically - I doubt it. I'm sure the armor grogs of which Rexford is a grand master, can clarify this. But from a practical standpoint, the armor on the US TD's was mainly meant to make them proof against typical infantry weapons of the day. They were not expected to go toe-to-toe and trade blows with enemy tanks, but rather to defeat them by movement, surprise, positioning and rapid redeploying before they themselves became targets.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by gunnergoz:

They were not expected to go toe-to-toe and trade blows with enemy tanks, but rather to defeat them by movement, surprise, positioning and rapid redeploying before they themselves became targets.

Exactly. Think of highly mobile AT guns, not land dreadnoughts.

Michael

[Redwolf]

The angle effect are different depending on who shoots what how at the armor.

Why don't you study the different gun penetration charts to get a feel for it?

[CombinedArms]

BTW, I find myself liking the M-10 a lot more in CMAK than I did in CMBO. Is this just me or a more general feeling?

I'm not exactly sure why, but with fewer Uber-Cats about, it seems more able to kill pretty much anything it sees and its also cheaper on a relative scale than, say, Shermans or PzIVs. Also, comparing it to early war AFVs, it seems pretty capable. I have new respect for the Sherman, too, in this regard.

[Redwolf]

The M10 doesn't die that easily from autocannon fire anymore since those' accuracy has been reduced and not every penetration means a kill.

Cover arcs also help against the slow turret.

[rexford]

In terms of survivability, the M10 gun shield would resist 50mm and 75mm hits with vertical resistances of 101mm and 95mm, which is somewhat higher than the Sherman mantlet for the 75mm gun when it is treated as one average thickness.

In reality, the Sherman mantlet (75mm gun) was curved, and consisted of two thicknesses, with an 51mm cast outer rotor shield spaced over an 89mm cast inner gun shield. While it looks like 140mm total on paper, the combo is spaced, cast, quality deficient and has lots of holes and edge effects.

Some time ago we did a detailed analysis of the expected resistance from the Sherman mantlet for the 75mm gun and found that while the average resistance was about 89mm of good quality rolled armor, a wide range of results applied to individual hits depending upon where they landed and the impact angle (mantlet is curved):

8% hit 45mm effective

6% hit 65mm effective

22% hit 75mm

25% hit 85mm

18% hit 95mm

6% hit 105mm

4% hit 115mm

3% hit 125mm

4% hit 145mm

1% hit 155mm

3% hit 165mm

Above figures consider impact angle, cast deficiency to rolled armor, armor quality, edge effects, etc.

But even on defeated hits, problems could occur for the Sherman since hits that stuck in the outer and innner shield could result in keying, where the gun could not be elevated or depressed due to the stuck projectile.

[MikeyD]

Considering the normal combat ranges in the game and your expected opponents you probably could consider the M10 and M4 Sherman to have equivalent armor... only because they're both HIGHLY likely to be holed by anything above 50mm that's pointed at 'em! You might as well add the Stuart to that list while you're at it because 'light 'swiss cheese is still swiss cheese.