I think that’s the main thing I noticed on the dev server, I was able to turn more without losing all my speed. It’s a nice change. The slightly better reverse is an added bonus as well haha
1 Like
Right, forward inertia during turning should be high for the Challengers weight. It’s ground clearance could come down a pinch. They sit low when the suspension is cold and then rise slightly when it warms up but they’re still too high. Imagine if ramming damage was calculated off weight.
Forward inertia is calulated off of mass
The “Inertia” stats are more so to do with weight distribution than actual raw mass
Lower = mass concentrated more in centre = higher ease of rotation in that axis
1 Like
I’ve been thinking about this for a while, but the hull height of the Challenger 2 in War Thunder is way too high compared to its real-life counterpart. The hull looks significantly ‘taller’ or more ‘lofted’ than it should be.
1 Like
most images of CR2 are likely of it cold with the hydrogas making it lower
in game its modelled as “Hot” meaning it rides higher
I had looked into it myself sadly and came to that conclusion
is there any bug reports on it?
no, as it is correct in game to my knowledge
while doing research for a bug report i came to this conclusion
well damn it looks cooler on the lower ride height
1 Like
agreed, but sadly we cant get it
though technically, as the track tension needs to be changed frequently, due to changing temperatures we VERY HYPOTHETICALLY could get variably height suspension for Challenger, but only in the vertical axis
Not reported it because of 1) lack of info 2) it shouldn’t 3) seems very disingenuous to put it through
It used to be lower years ago but it got high centered going over rocks and it gave it too good of a hulldown profile so they nerf buffed it. It is slightly too high and it ruins it’s looks.
1 Like
i just want the spall liners and/or the ready rack fix but its not looking good
5 Likes
That and the NERA elements buffed to correct behaviour.
Wish we had more dozer blades and mineplows in general. We have all that mine protection and nothing to benefit from it.
3 Likes
i would also love the dozer blades and the slight l27a1 buff
1 Like
In the old days Challenger 2 side armour was super trolly, now not so much. But it shouldn’t detonate when it’s not ERA it’s NERA.
Definitely have a soft spot for the Challey’s, sounds like they’re trying to do them some justice in the next patch. Even that 30mm of missing pen they admit to but let ride. I’ll be excited for the day they bring the Rheinmetall Challenger2, 130-140mm technology demonstrator. Very good looking machine.
1 Like
i do hope they give the challys the love they deserve and implement some of the 2 year old bug reports that are collecting dust
1 Like
The ride high is likely a bit too high
If you look at irl photos with the Challenger (when non-stationary) the top of the road wheels roughly match the weight of the lowest point of the side skirt.
Ingame theres a noticeable gap, it should probably be a bit lower
As Teaz said though, it is pretty dependant on the temperature of the hydrogas suspension
4 Likes
yeah, driving on roads is likely to excite it less than going offroad, meaning it will get even hotter, raising it further
any benefit from the two heights in game will be almost moot though, doesn’t even look like there’s even a foot in it
I guess its not too dissimilar to those images
1 Like
idk if this has already been noticed but the Challenger 2 OES TES and 2F have the jiggle physics on the back
3 Likes