PzIV ausf G vs ausf H w/ schurzen

[Dressler]

I've got a quick question about the effects of schurzen in CMBO. Is there any appreciable benefit to having the H as opposed to the G? The reason I ask is purely for aesthetics. I'm playing a scenario that's inundated with PzKpfw IV/H's and I've thought about replacing some of them with G's just to break up the monotony from a visual standpoint. Most photo reference shows the schurzen missing in varying degrees anyway on vehicles with any significant amount of time in the field.

[Silvio Manuel]

Allegedly they might save your IVH/J by causing a "c" round to prematurely explode. I've never heard anyone explicitly talking about getting something like a, "side lower hull penetration, no serious damage" or something.

[Shosties]

Someone not too long ago posted hereabouts or on the CMBB forum that Guderian said/wrote that the skirts were to protect the suspension from ATR fire.

[Lee_DiSantis]

I think historically it was recorded that schurtzen drastically reduced the number of hits on tracks (which would immobilize the tank) and suspension (same thing). Don't know about you, but few things piss me off more than an immobile tank in Cmbo (especially when they're out of LOS of the battle, so they're just gooney, impotent fools).

[Andrew H.]

The Schuerzen were originally added to protect the tank (not just the suspension, but the hull and turret, too) from anti-tank rifles. As it turned out, the Schuerzen also had the effect of protecting the tank from hollow charge projectiles, like bazookas. This was modelled in CMBO, so I assume it's modelled in CMBB. I don't know whether the skirts were effective against hollow-charge projectiles shot by actual guns, though.

BTW, one common American name for Schuerzen was "Bazooka pants." As in "That tank's wearing bazooka pants."

[Priest]

The H also IIRC has slightly better armour up front.

[Chad Harrison]

IIRC the schutzen were originally designed to force heat rounds to detonate a distance away from the main armor. I think this shows because schutzen were mounted around the Mark IV's turret in addition to the sides.

Regarding the difference between the Mark IV G and H, the main difference was that the Model G had the additional 30mm of armor bolted on, the Model H had the additional 30mm armor cast in. Bolted armor is not as strong as casted armor in CMBB, so the Model H then has better armor, in a way.

Chad

[Dressler]

Thanks for the replies. I was familiar with the real world benefits of the Schurzen, but wasn't sure if any of that was modelled in CMBO. I hadn't thought about the difference in the glacis armor between the H/J and the G though. I suppose I could set up a firing range and test the frontal armor of both.

BTW- I'm not so sure the Schurzen were of much benefit after '43. I've seen photos of them pretty much Swiss-cheesed by .50 Cal fire.

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by Dressler:

Thanks for the replies. I was familiar with the real world benefits of the Schurzen, but wasn't sure if any of that was modelled in CMBO. I hadn't thought about the difference in the glacis armor between the H/J and the G though. I suppose I could set up a firing range and test the frontal armor of both.

Think of it this way: the 80mm instead of 73mm in the H/J models might save your when hit by 75mm+ cannon fire. There's nothing more frustrating than non-lethal hits in a Short-75 game, where the rules really foster a game where everything can kill everything else w/ 1 shot. These non-KO penetrations in CMBB will take some getting used to...

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

IIRC the schutzen were originally designed to force heat rounds to detonate a distance away from the main armor. I think this shows because schutzen were mounted around the Mark IV's turret in addition to the sides.

No, they were made against Soviet AT rifles and later found to be useful against HC shots.

In CMBO my testing could not show any noticable effect against HC. I didn't test in CMBB yet, neither for AT rifles nor HEAT.

[Dressler]

Did that hold true for the frontal aspect as well, or were you testing just the Schurzen?

[Redwolf]

I'm not sure I understand the question.

I shot Bazookas at the sides and could not notice that the Panzers with Schürzen had better survival chances.

[Dressler]

I was wondering if you also tested the quality of the PzIV G's frontal armor as compared to that of the H/J?

[kevsharr]

Evidentally the shurzen was found to have a stand-off effect given the fact that the J version sported wire mesh shurzen protecting the hull,not much good against atr fire{factory swiss cheesed}

[Bastables]

Originally posted by kevsharr:

Evidentally the shurzen was found to have a stand-off effect given the fact that the J version sported wire mesh shurzen protecting the hull,not much good against atr fire{factory swiss cheesed}

Mesh and solid Shurzen were tested and found to be successful in defeating Soviet ATR rounds. The Mesh Shurzen required more modifications to be made before it could be mounted and therefore the nod went to the solid Shurzen. Wire Shurzen was mounted near the end of the war due to savings in metal that it offered.

All the skirts need to do is deform and/or tumble the ATR rounds to makke them ineffective

[Chelt]

Originally posted by redwolf:

In CMBO my testing could not show any noticable effect against HC. I didn't test in CMBB yet, neither for AT rifles nor HEAT.[/QB]

The Jagdpanzer IV (with skirt) and the plain Jagdpanzer IV (presumably in slacks) cost the same, 124 points in June 44m - suggesting that the protective effects *aren't* modeled.

I always bought the variant with skirts, because you never do know, and besides, they look great, especially if you find a good wire-mesh-look mod for the vehicle.

Cheers,

David

[Chad Harrison]

Originally posted by redwolf:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

IIRC the schutzen were originally designed to force heat rounds to detonate a distance away from the main armor. I think this shows because schutzen were mounted around the Mark IV's turret in addition to the sides.

No, they were made against Soviet AT rifles and later found to be useful against HC shots.

In CMBO my testing could not show any noticable effect against HC. I didn't test in CMBB yet, neither for AT rifles nor HEAT.</font>

[A Panzer]

there is only one reason to have panzer h instead. That reason is that the skirts provide protection from HEAT rounds fired form bazookas and PIATs. this can be a major addvantege for the Germans in the map in qustion.

[ October 10, 2002, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: A Panzer ]

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Dressler:

I was wondering if you also tested the quality of the PzIV G's frontal armor as compared to that of the H/J?

I don't think there is anything to be tested. The armor quality rating is in the unit info and I don't think there are any hidden characteristic around it.

[Dressler]

I suppose it wouldn't hurt me to read the unit info once in awhile.

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by A Panzer:

there is only one reason to have panzer h instead. That reason is that the skirts provide protection from HEAT rounds fired form bazookas and PIATs. this can be a major addvantege for the Germans in the map in qustion.

The H/J models have 80mm front armor instead of 73mm on the G, which is pretty notable. The G is 1 mph faster, IIRC.

[Bastables]

Originally posted by redwolf:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dressler:

I was wondering if you also tested the quality of the PzIV G's frontal armor as compared to that of the H/J?

I don't think there is anything to be tested. The armor quality rating is in the unit info and I don't think there are any hidden characteristic around it.</font>

[Andrew H.]

I don't have CMBO up, but doesn't the G have a faster turret than the H - IIRC, the G is medium and the H is slow.

[offtaskagain]

Originally posted by Andrew Hedges:

I don't have CMBO up, but doesn't the G have a faster turret than the H - IIRC, the G is medium and the H is slow.

Turret speeds are the same in BB but the H is now labeled as a medium speed.

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by Andrew Hedges:

I don't have CMBO up, but doesn't the G have a faster turret than the H - IIRC, the G is medium and the H is slow.

In CMBO, only the IV-J is "slow" turret, the G/H are medium. Also, the CMBO PzIV's don't have any difference in armor quality despite the face-hardened vs. rolled armor types. IIRC they DO get the differences in CMBB.