roqf77 Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 from what i know speaking to somebody in a cromwell tank in ww2 err not sure what unit it was one of my grandads friends, he said it was better than the sherman he was in previous. He said it was faster around 40mph but it may of been restricted to 32mph for reliability purposes i remember something about a speed restrictor anyway. its gun used 75mm ammo for the sherman but was not the 75mm on the sherman it was a 6 pounder enlarged to 75mm so it would of been a L 50 75mm it did have more firepower than the sherman. it was also smaller so it wasnt as tough but it was harder to hit. it may of only replaced recce tanks intialy but it was the most common tank by august 44. and did replace the 75mm shermans by the end of the war i was told. He told me that it was overall a superior tank to the 75mm shermans and 76mm but he said he would of rather been in a firefly. incidentaly 36% of all medium/ cruiser tanks were fireflys by august 44 according to mod documents i found on the internet i will try and leave the web address if i find it again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 ministry of defence that is 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 The British 75mm gun based on the 6pdr was nearly the same in all ballistic aspects as the American 75mm. Certainly the shell was the same, and any difference in MV was slight. The 6pdr was designed as a 50 calibre weapon - 57x50 = 2850mm A 75mm gun on the same mount would not be able to be significantly longer, so 2850/75 = 38. The US gun is also a 38 calibre weapon 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 well im not arguing i havnt read much on it only that when they originaly changed to the 75mm in north africa the tank crews demanded the 6 pounder back due to its inferior at performence. plus a cromwell tank crew a friend of my grandads stressed to me it was a better weapon ive read it was a rebored 6 pounder originaly therefore it must of been at least L43 probably L 50. plus the 57mm 6 pounder was a better at gun and had a he shell by 44 if the 75mm was so inedaquate why change the gun on a cruiser tank that primarly will be encountering armour? (i believe you may be right so please dont get offended just ive spoke to my grandad and a few of his friends and that what they said) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 I believe that you don't understand how the calibre measurement system works. The length of the gun barrel is measured in multiples of the bore of the gun. Thus, a gun with a calibre of 75mm will have a lower number to describe it's length than an equally long 57mm gun. A barrel of 57 L50 is exactly the same length as a 75 L38, as covered by my calcualtion above. Both are 2.85m long. The British 75mm was a rebored 6pdr (which had a calibre of 57mm) and so it must have been a comparable length. A 50 calibre 75mm gun would be 3.75m long - almost a full metre longer. It wasn't. The early US 75mm gun, as mounted on the first M3 medium tanks, was a shorter gun (less then 38 calibres), but it was quickly replaced by the longer ordnance. The Sherman never mounted the shorter gun. The 75mm gun was a far more effective dual-use (with a much more effective HE round) and as such was a superior weapon to be mounted on tanks liable to face more anti-tank guns than tanks than the marginal 6pdr. In any case, the only cruiser armed with the 6pdr was the Crusader III, which was a significantly inferior tank to the M4s, which had been in service since late '42. The nicest thing I've heard said about the Crusader by a Veteran was that it was fast. The Cruiser concept was largely outdated by '43, much less '44, and tank-on-tank combat was more of a rarity than is the common conception. Not to say that a decent AT gun wasn't necessary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 believe that you don't understand how the calibre measurement system works.no i understand, im just saying i spoke to an actual cromwell tank crew he nticed a difference. plus why replace it with the 6 pounder which was a superior at gun over the 75mm on the sherman. and it had an adequate if not good he shell by then? it would of been pointless bordering on the insane. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqf77 Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 especialy as in normandy the british did face the majority of german tanks deployed so it would of been a point. Especialy as the point of the cromwell was to close the gap between allied and german tanks, which it did there is no doubt in my mind the cromwell was superior to the sherman virtualy all the cromwell tanks said so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 6pdr: Marginal HE 75mm: Good HE HE good for killing ATGs Germans have more ATGs than tanks. If the British had their heads screwed on, the Cromwell would have been a tank that mounted the 17pdr. It was intended to be an improvement on the Crusader, which it was. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Lucke Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 Originally posted by flamingknives: If the British had their heads screwed on, the Cromwell would have been a tank that mounted the 17pdr. It was intended to be an improvement on the Crusader, which it was. That would be the Challenger. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 The Challenger was a bastardised attempt to retro-fit a 17pr. into a Cromwell-based chassis, rather than being a tank in it's own right. As a result, it looked and was very bad. The first tank purpose built for the full-scale 17pr. was the Centurion. Even the Comet, with it's cut-down 17pr., the 77mm, was a better tank, as it had been designed, rather than adapted, with the gun in mind. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 I must admit to being slightly mystified that the 57mm could be rebored to a 75mm! The 6lber must have been massively over-engineered ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 I don't think that it was rebored, but the mount was the same. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 Rebored is what I heard. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 Originally posted by dieseltaylor: I must admit to being slightly mystified that the 57mm could be rebored to a 75mm! The 6lber must have been massively over-engineered ... High velocity -> low/medium velocity helps ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Lucke Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by flamingknives: The Challenger was a bastardised attempt to retro-fit a 17pr. into a Cromwell-based chassis, rather than being a tank in it's own right. As a result, it looked and was very bad. The first tank purpose built for the full-scale 17pr. was the Centurion. Even the Comet, with it's cut-down 17pr., the 77mm, was a better tank, as it had been designed, rather than adapted, with the gun in mind. True. Always liked the Comet, tho. Prolly the ultimate evolution of the cruiser series. 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.