Garand vs Sherman

[Michael Emrys]

In another forum recently a person claimed that in training he fired AP rounds that penetrated the side armor of a Sherman tank at ranges out to 100 yards. I would not have regarded that as especially remarkable, but his claim was that he was doing it with an M1 Garand. Now I have no particular reason to doubt this person's word, but if there are any M1 grogs who would like to share a word or two on this subject, I would be interested in hearing them.

Michael

[Sergei]

Well, shure makes you glad 'em Germans didn't have no Garand's!!!!

[Breakthrough]

Impossible..... You sure he wasnt talking about the AT rifle grenade for the Garand? When I was growing up my neighbor was a veteran of WW II CBI theatre. He was one of Merrils Marauders. He claimed that they were able to knock out Jap 'two man' tanks as he called them with M-1 rifle fire. But those Jap tankettes were much more thinly armored then the sides of a Sherman.

[Michael Dorosh]

If your correspondent was firing at a training target, it is possible said target - a wrecked Sherman - had already suffered considerable damage, perhaps even catastrophic fire weakening the hull armour.

Obsolete tanks are usually stripped of their engines, any flammables, certainly any ammunition, and the derelicts used to practice with.

Generally, one sees the usefullness in practicing firing anti-tank weaponry at tank-sized targets. Even up into the 1970s and 1980s, Sherman tanks were seen on Canadian ranges so anti-tank weapons like the M72 (LAW) and 84mm Carl Gustav could be practice live.

Why would anyone want to take an M-1 Garand out to an anti-tank range, though? You don't need a target that big unless, as mentioned, it was to train with the rifle grenade.

[Snarker]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Why would anyone want to take an M-1 Garand out to an anti-tank range, though? You don't need a target that big unless, as mentioned, it was to train with the rifle grenade.

Or you're feckin' blind! I shot my uncle's Garand back in the early '80s and I remember blowing through both legs of 1/4" angle iron the range used to support the target. We were sighting it in for the first time with regular ball ammo, and the range official wasn't amused. But that's a far cry from a Sherman...

[Auggy]

My life isn't complete until I own a Garand.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Breakthrough:

You sure he wasnt talking about the AT rifle grenade for the Garand?

Positive. He was talking about a standard 30-06 AP round.

But those Jap tankettes were much more thinly armored then the sides of a Sherman.

Agreed. When he first posted, I thought he might have been confusing something like a halftrack for the Sherman. I'm still puzzled. I don't believe he's blowing smoke, and it would be hard to think he's misidentified some component of the equation, but it really strains my credulity too.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Why would anyone want to take an M-1 Garand out to an anti-tank range, though? You don't need a target that big unless, as mentioned, it was to train with the rifle grenade.

His explanation was that his training sergeant wanted the recruits to have confidence on their ability to fight back against tanks with their rifles. Of course, that was mainly false confidence, IMO.

BTW, my own brother went through basic in 1954 and related to me that they fired bazookas at derelict tanks. He never said anything about trying it with rifles, and he was in the paratroops at the time.

Michael

[JonS]

How thick is the armour on a Sherman along the lower hull (behind the tracks/wheels)?

Also, what is the armour-penetrating performance of a standard 30-06 round (or something similar) fired from a semi-auto rifle?

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by JonS:

How thick is the armour on a Sherman along the lower hull (behind the tracks/wheels)?

I thought of that, but he said he was aiming—and got a penetration—at the armor where the ammo bin is located in the upper hull. I kind of took it that the tank he was shooting at didn't have the appliqué armor at that point.

Also, what is the armour-penetrating performance of a standard 30-06 round (or something similar) fired from a semi-auto rifle?

A crucial question. I don't know.

Michael

[Hans]

Perhaps he was firing at one of the Shermans made of mild steel for training and later turned into a target?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

BTW, my own brother went through basic in 1954 and related to me that they fired bazookas at derelict tanks. He never said anything about trying it with rifles, and he was in the paratroops at the time.

That's exactly what derelict tanks are for, we still use them, and there may even be Shermans left on the ranges. Canada used Shermans in armoured regiments up into the 1970s, at least in the reserves. The last variant used - M4A2E8 - same kind we used in Korea - are seen as gate guardians in many towns, in front of armouries or on military bases. Many more went to be used as targets. There are three here in Calgary; one indoors at the Museum of the Regiments, a second outdoors at the Museum (that used to be a gate guardian at CFB Harvey) and a third in front of our Armouries. I believe a fourth may be a runner in private hands.

[gibsonm]

The newer SLAP rounds for small arms (7.62mm) can penetrate M113 armour.

Perhaps the individual acquired some of these for his M1, but in any case Sherman steel armour should provide a lot more resistance than the alloy armour on a M113.

[SpitfireXI]

Perhaps he is talking about the M10-that technically is a Sherman but with much reduced armour and perhaps a Garand could penetrate the turret from the sides.

[btm]

Auggy-

I own an M1 Garand and shoot it regularly in competition. I will probably buy a couple more in the future, it is a superb rifle.

If you are a U.S. citizen, and meet certain other requirements, you are eleigible to purchase an M1 Garand through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. The CMP program offers M1's at a price that is $300-$400 less than you will find on the regular market.

The CMP site is here: Civilian Marksmanship Program

-------------

As to the penetration question:

I am assuming that the cartridge used was WW2-vintage .30-'06 M2AP.

This exchange (http://yarchive.net/gun/ammo/armor_plate.html)describes a very informal test wherein M2AP penetrated 1/2" of armor (unknown type) angled at 30 degrees (at unknown range).

1995 British MOD standards for Class 2 and Class 3A armor use M2AP as the standard for testing armor plate from 5mm to <15mm, which seems to indicate that M2AP will normally penetrate up to 15mm of this class of armor plate.

I will try to find better documentation of the performance of M2AP against armor plate and post it here.

[btm]

Oops -double post

[SgtDuke6216]

Originally posted by btm:

Auggy-

If you are a U.S. citizen, and meet certain other requirements, you are eleigible to purchase an M1 Garand through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. The CMP program offers M1's at a price that is $300-$400 less than you will find on the regular market.

The CMP site is here: Civilian Marksmanship Program

-------------

I own a Springfield M-1 made in 1943 and issued for use in the ETO and it shows. I was looking to get a CMP match M-1 but I went to the site and coulnd't find all the criteria. I have to join a CMP affiliate and shot in competitions right? Which is not a problem, I have been looking to shot in comps ever since I left the military.

[MikeyD]

There's a chance drillling a hole almost 3/4 inch deep into a Sherman's hull side with a rifle round is sufficiently impressive that under the right light conditions it could appear to him that the hole had gone all the way through.

Maybe it was a cast hull Sherman. Not only is cast armor softer than rolled, internal flaws are more likely to form. No telling how deep a round would go under the right (wrong) conditions.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by SpitfireXI:

Perhaps he is talking about the M10-that technically is a Sherman but with much reduced armour...

That has crossed my mind and I will ask him, but from the way he identified the vehicle, he was positive it was a Sherman proper and it didn't sound like he would have made a mistake on that. Who knows?

...and perhaps a Garand could penetrate the turret from the sides.

You haven't been reading my posts carefully. The penetration was in the forward upper hull.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

There's a chance drillling a hole almost 3/4 inch deep into a Sherman's hull side with a rifle round is sufficiently impressive that under the right light conditions it could appear to him that the hole had gone all the way through.

Maybe it was a cast hull Sherman. Not only is cast armor softer than rolled, internal flaws are more likely to form. No telling how deep a round would go under the right (wrong) conditions.

The relevant section of his posts is this:

Had to be a right angles to the Sherman, but the side armor was only an inch or so thick in places and only medium density on the early models, and the Garand round packed a hefty muzzle velocity. Ideally, we were supposed to be maybe fifty yars away, but the Drill Sergeant one fine day broadened my horizons. He had me aim from one hundred yards just under the turret on the hull and slightly forward, right about where the early WWII Shermans used to weld on that applique' armor to cover up one of the soft spots. Zip! Nice, neat hole with a spall outside, richochetted around inside like driving a golf ball three hundred yards in a tile bathroom.

Michael

[Spears]

Also is it true AK47 can puncture the thin armour of the M113 and the Warrior IFV???

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Spears:

Also is it true AK47 can puncture the thin armour of the M113 and the Warrior IFV???

Define thin armour.

Armour of the M113 is 1.125" at the thinnest, so I would seriously doubt that 7.62x39mm would penetrate this, even if it was fired from underneath (thinnest point is the floor).

When equipped with uparmour kits, the Warrior can resist RPG 7 rockets from the side. Hull armour is proof against 14.5mm AP, so the Warrior is not vulnerable to AK47s

[Tero]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Originally posted by Spears:

Also is it true AK47 can puncture the thin armour of the M113 and the Warrior IFV???

Define thin armour.

Armour of the M113 is 1.125" at the thinnest, so I would seriously doubt that 7.62x39mm would penetrate this, even if it was fired from underneath (thinnest point is the floor).

When equipped with uparmour kits, the Warrior can resist RPG 7 rockets from the side. Hull armour is proof against 14.5mm AP, so the Warrior is not vulnerable to AK47s

AFAIK there is a special AP shot for the 7.62x39 caliber in existence.

[flamingknives]

Apparently the 5.45mm AP round (AK74, RPK74)will go through 16mm of RHAe at 100m. This might get through the side armour of the M113 (min 1.25" = 32mm) of aluminium.

It's still not going to get the Warrior. The 14.5mm round is vastly more powerful and is defeated.

[Siege]

.30-06 penetrate a sherman? Maybe a stowage bin, but not the armor.

Dad was in the National Guard in the 1950's, and in the insanity of it all they actually trained with .30cal MG's and live ammo by having somebody drive a sherman back and forth to act as a moving target. He mentioned something about occasionally a round got to the radiator by richocet, causing the tank to break down, but the driver was never in any danger.

Even if the guy got ahold of a SLAP round, he would have to take it out of the .308 casing, and handload it into the .30-06 since modern 7.62mm is a different shell casing. So doubtful that is the situation.

-Hans

[ May 21, 2004, 09:54 PM: Message edited by: Siege ]