Granata Perforante 75/32 APCBC 637 m/s 79mm - Leonacello- M43
M61 shot APCBC 588 m/s 102mm - M3 Lee
M61 shot APCBC 618 m/s 104mm - M4
Type 1 APHE APHE 668 m/s 103mm - Chi-nu
As per the title, I’m going back to talk and request that Gaijin modify the drilling factors of the
Lencello 75 cannon and M43.
because as can be deduced from the small diagram above where different 75 mm ammunition is taken into consideration, it can be seen that the American tank ammunition, despite being slower, has significantly higher perforation, we are talking about 102/104 mm of perforation compared to the 79 mm than the Italian one (plate 0° 100 meters as a reference point) despite the speed of the Italian ammunition we are clearly superior!!! and if we look at the Japanese 75 at 30 m/s more than the Italian ammunition and with a value of 103 mm, then if we go by exclusions the Italian ammunition must necessarily have a value that stands at the minimum 90 mm of stopping and not 79mm!!! At most that’s what Americans should be!!!. The fact is that it is clear that they do not want to change it because the data is reported in the specifications of the wagons. and don’t make the excuse that it depends on the fact that one ammunition was better than the others, the mechanics of WT is + speed + perforation - speed - perforation. Try to resolve this gup that you have created and do not want to fix. otherwise the leoncello and m43 tanks should be moved to 3.0/2.7 because they have values of that level!!!
2 Likes
The Italian round has a much larger filler charge than the American around. The formula Gaijin uses for penetration has a relatively significant penalty for large filler charges.
The Italian 75mm has more HE filler than a 50mm HE round.
The reduced penetration is absolute realistic and off-set by the fact that the round overpressures, making any penetration nearly 100% lethal.
In-game the round is 10 times more effective than it was in RL, because in-game rounds penetrate in perfect condition and will always detonate.
In RL the round would just break appart when shooting the front of a T-60 or T-70 light tank because it’s really more an anti-bunker round than a real AP shell designed to penetrate tank armor.
1 Like
OK understood. However, this also makes the destruction of enemies quite unrealistic because it has more of an HE effect, given that from the Kill cam you can see that the bullet impact does not penetrate but creates shock waves and splinters. then even the HEs should have a “greater” perforation than the usual 10 mm that are used!!! the kv1 with its BR-350A (MD-5 fuze) APHEBC 615 m/s- tnt 150 projectile makes 78 mm of perforation which as a rule should be something lower given that BR-350A still has little mass and speed and has 78 mm of drilling at 0° seems a little high to me.
even if the Italian one scores 79 with 250/260 kg of TnT and 635 m/s. but it still has + mass and + speed so it can fit.
In my opinion it must at least have an 82/80 for correct perforation. To be able to use it at BR 3.3. otherwise, as it is already at 3.0, you won’t pierce the frontal armor of a 4 F2 panzer at 0 meters, while it passes through you
Well, 270g vs 150g might not sound a lot but it’s almost twice the amount.
79mm or 82mm also makes basically no difference. What makes the shell so good is the overpressure effect. The BR-350A with 150g it pretty lethal but the Italian 75mm is even better.
Even for 3.3 the shell is perfectly capable due to high one shot potential.