Shermans

Moth · Post by **Moth** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:44 pm

I have a BBI Sherman,
I think 21st also made a Sherman

Which one is better?

Thanks

exether_mega · Post by **exether_mega** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:49 pm

both are different. BBI one is armed with a 105 howitzer and 21st with a 75mm one. Also, both model are different as 21st is a M4A3 and BBi a M4A4. They are great addition in a collection.

Take care.

phil

Moth · Post by **Moth** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:54 pm

Do you know if the 21st Sherman's engine cover opens?

Thanks

exether_mega · Post by **exether_mega** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:56 pm

unfortunately no

Moth · Post by **Moth** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:06 pm

Thanks
I dont plan on buying another Sherman, I was just curious

By the way, BBI made a mistake, that is a 75mm barrel, the 105 had a much longer one, and a big flare at the end

I think the 75 looks better, the 105 howler is too big for the sherman, it looks weird

But in war, the bigger the better, 105mm works a lot better on a panzer than a 75!

exether_mega · Post by **exether_mega** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:13 pm

as far as I know, the barrel seems to be correct.
http://www.battletanks.com/images/m4_105_Sherman-1.jpg

They were used as fire support and were not used on front line. Anyway, when a 105 ammo hit a Panzer IV, it give it a new american design

Moth · Post by **Moth** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:24 pm

That's a photo of the 75mm barrel

I will see if I can find the 105 barrel

Moth · Post by **Moth** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:30 pm

http://www.strijdbewijs.nl/tanks/sherman/firefly.jpg

That is the 105

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 5:02 pm

I could be wrong but I believe your pic shows the 76mm gun. I have pics of one I found in NJ:

http://community.webshots.com/myphotos? ... ity=EZbDcK

But to the point, which is a better model, I like them both but I favor the BBI because of the ton of equipment that comes with it for the look of different tanks in a dio.

TTT

lightning2000 · Post by **lightning2000** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 5:09 pm

Hi,
The "flare" you refer to is, if I'm not mistaken, a muzzle brake. Muzzle brakes were designed to reduce the gun's recoil (important with a longer gun like the 105mm) and lessens the amount of flash when firing by diffusing some of the hot exhaust to the sides of the gun barrel's aperture. Obviously, with less flash it makes it harder for the opponent to see who is doing the firing. During WWII, sighting was still done by eyeball and rudimentary optical devices. Needless to say, target acquisition is far different on the modern battlefield...

Lightning2000
www.themotorpool.bigstep.com

dfoos · Post by **dfoos** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 5:11 pm

I have several different paint patterns of the 21st sherman and they are all the same, they are nice and definately worth the $20.00 (or $22.88 at Wally World) but the BBi Tank has ALOT more detail. I love the engine and opening covers. It is also $40.00 at most TRU's so you are paying twice as much for those details. In all honesty, Everything I have from BBi seems better quality / More detail than 21st (I'm refering to 1:18 specifically). I like 21st too because they seem to have a bigger variety of stuff available and you have to love the prices, but BBi's stuff just seems better made.
I also have a BBi P51 and I love the detail. From a distance it looks just right sitting between my 21st F109 and Me 109, but when you get close, you really notice all the little details that 21st planes dont have. I paid the same for a BBi Plane as I would for a 21st - $39.99. I love their soldiers too. Much more realistic and better paint and weathering than 21st.

GooglyDoogly · Post by **GooglyDoogly** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 5:22 pm

BBI Sherman is correct. That is a 105mm.

Moth, the pic you showed, like the picture title said, is a Firefly, A British Sherman that has a 17-pounder gun, which is roughly 76mm (or is it 77mm?). Great penetration. That is not a 105mm

The only U.S. tank guns that had muzzle breaks are either the 90mm or the 76mm.

The 75mm never had a muzzle break. At least I have never seen any wartime photo of one....or even postwar...

105mm isn't designed for tank vs tank combat, it has such low velocity that if it hit a tiger, it would probably give the tiger crews a headache, but won't penetrate. and bigger isn't always better. The German 88mm L71 KwK 43 gun has a far better penetration values than the JS II's 122mm gun.

Moth · Post by **Moth** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 5:30 pm

Well, I screwed up with the shermans, please excuse that...
I knew about the Muzzel Brake, just forgot the name

that's why I called it a flare

About the bigger is better thing, there are exceptions (Flak88) but mostly it is true

The Flak 88 is one amazing cannon, but the SU-152 Russian Heavy Tank will leave that Tiger a smoldering mess of metal

Thanks for your help guys

GooglyDoogly · Post by **GooglyDoogly** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 5:48 pm

No need for the excuses Moth, any talk of armor is welcome here.

We're kinda starving for it.

As for the 152mm, the 88mm L56 (Tiger I gun) could still defeat a su-152 at longer range.

They were many instances that a 152mm hit on the front, or sometimes even on the sides of a Tiger would fail to penetrate. But the scary thing is that the 152mm has such a great HE capacity that the German armor would crack and fall of in some cases.

I've seen numerous photos of Tigers, Panthers, or King Tigers that have been hit by large-caliber Soviet guns, and they didn't penetrate, but left gaping holes because of the tremendous explosion of the shells literally cracked the armor like egg shells.

Moth · Post by **Moth** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:04 pm

To some extent, if the shell is too big, it will not penetrate the armor, but rather just smash the thing, like if the shell was a giant hammer

Even if the shell will not penetrate the crew will still be dead right?
BUT ONE THING the tank is definatly immobilized

lightning2000 · Post by **lightning2000** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:37 pm

Hi,
The key is getting the spawl within crew compartment. Once the molten mass and gases have penetrated the outer skin, then and only then is a tank truly dead. There were plenty of instances in WWII when even immobilized tanks withstood fearsome attacks. I can think of a couple examples at Prohkorovka during the Battle of Kursk when wounded Tiger tanks held off waves of Russian armor.

Lightning2000
www.themotorpool.bigstep.com

HardenSteel · Post by **HardenSteel** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:27 am

Yes, that picture was a Firefly - it was fitted with the long barrel 17 pounder (76.5 mm) QQF , which was able to take on Panther and Tiger tanks. With a muzzle velocity of 3950 feet per second, firing Sabot ammunition, could penetrate 135mm of armour at 1,800 metres. The rounded muzzle break is a unique feature of the gun. The shorter caliber 77 ( still a 17 pounder ) was only fitted to British tanks.

The American 3" gun was a shorter caliber weapon and was used with, and without a muzzle break. The muzzle brake is more retangular with rounded ends - look a lot like the German ones. Patterned after the 3" navel gun I believe. This was produced to be an antitank gun and for fire support having greater muzzle velocity and range than the 75mm. Unfortunately, it could not penitratr the frontal armour of a Panther or Tiger.

The America 75 gun was a much lower velocity weapon design primarily for infantry fire support and bunker busting - patterned after the French quick firing gun. It was quite comparible to other weapons for it's time. Just not upgraded continually through the war to keep up with the rapidly improving armour that was being fielded. Instead, late in the war, the 105 howitzer was fitted.

Sadly, no T23 turrets are produced in 1/35 scale, nor the 76 mm gun. Can't figure out why not. It would be a very logical variant that would allow the use of the rest of the machine.

Who knows, mayby they will get smart and produce the "Esay Eight" and we will all be happy.

Happily, the BBI 105 Sherman version has the late style, small sherman turret which would make a great conversion to a 75mm gun.

HD

Small Scale Military Headquarters

Shermans

Shermans

Flare?

....

...

Tank Attack