Pud Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 This may seem a silly question but I recall others saying that the turret of the Tiger has effectively 200+mm because of the mantlet, so does that mean other tanks also have more becuase of the mantlet, eg PzIVH have effectively 100mm because of its mantlet or is this only speciaifc to Tigers? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 It depends - IIRC much of the Tiger mantlet covered existing turret armour - effectively doubling the thickness (armour grogs will slay me for that!! ). Most other tanks didn't have this - their mantlets covered the hole for the gun plus only a relatively small overlap of the turret armour, if any. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardaukar Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 There is quite good discussion about Tiger mantlet here: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=009899 Quote from rexford: "While the Tiger is a 1942 tank, the mantlet armor would not be matched or exceeded by very many turreted tanks during the war. The Tiger mantlet ranges in effective thickness from 135mm to 197mm (while the minimum thickness is 97mm on the upper and lower edges, that armor is backed up by a spaced 100mm armor area), and is only exceeded by: King Tiger Jumbo Sherman Super Pershing" As it's said, most tanks had quite a large hole in turret front, covered by mantlet. Tiger had it backed up with armour. Cheers, M.S. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Unfortunately the Pz IV doesn't only miss this kind of bonus, it also has a larger than in reality turret. Since the turret is very thin that makes it more vulnerable than it should be. There are a gazillion of threads on the issue if you are interested. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Mantlet thicknesses/protection is a really touchy isue. Some mantlets were a consistent thickness, some were milled from behind to fit equipment, some had an excess of flaps and openings on the front, some had turret armor/spall liners behind them, and some were inefficiently designed and allowed splinters to enter the fighting compartment through cracks! In CMBB one visual difference between the Ferdinand and upgraded Elefant was its reversed gun shield. This was done to close the large gap between the shield and the gun opening, reducing the threat from splinters sneaking past. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Mikey That is true grogdom. BTW has anybody chosen one for a QB? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THumpre Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 I have used a Ferdinand several times in QBs. They are a hoot I only bought one, had it trundle itself up onto a handy hill and terrorize the enenmy armor until it gets gun hit or tracked. Then it becomes a big hunk of useless steel..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pud Posted August 3, 2004 Author Share Posted August 3, 2004 Thanks for the replies fellas. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.