i wish they would give it back to the cr3td ingame but this does make me wonder if the 59kmh top speed has been upgraded at all
1 Like
trust there gonna modernize it
1 Like
turtle tanks are in fashion currently to be fair
1 Like
The Challenger 3’s top speed is listed at 60kph, so a tiny bit faster than the Challenger 2. The transmission is an upgraded version of the Challenger 2’s, so a huge speed increase dosen’t really make much sense.
While 60kph doesn’t sound amazing, it’s pretty comparable to other modern tanks. The Leopard 2A7V/2A8 have a top speed of 61kph and the T90M is also 60kph I believe.
The 3TD ingame is built on a Challenger 2 hull, not a Challenger 3 hull, it incorrectly has a Challenger 3 engine ingame for some reason. It should be (and currently is) identical automotively to a Challenger 2 as it’s just a tech demonstrator.
true but it was so beautiful with 1500hp
59kph vs 60kph doesn’t really mean anything
probably just a convenient rounding, unless they’ve changed the drive sprocket again
(they did this with CR1 to CR2, TN37 and TN54 transmissions actually have the same top ratio of 1.003, all speed changes come from the change to the drive sprocket to go from 35 to 37mph)
it would only require an extra 1/4 to whole inch in diameter to achieve that extra speed
at the end of the day top speed doesn’t matter that much only cross-country top speed and acceleration, which is why the Leopard 2A7 had its top speed changed (i think it was due to a higher ratio in the Final drive?), iirc it was to bring it back up to Leopard 2A4 mobility despite an extra 16% weight,
AFAIK it is the same as Challenger 2, TN54E, or atleast a TN54 variant, just uprated to withstand 1500hp
I think you’re right, it was final drive changes to improve acceleration at the cost of top speed
To my knowledge the TN54E has always been able to withstand 1500hp
The manufacturer lists 1200-1500bhp for the TN54E on the Challenger 2 already.
The CR3s transmission is essentially a TN54E remade to be more durable as well as having an improved torque convertor, as well as some other changes most likely.
If they’ve really gone through all this effort to improve the transmission, engine cooling etc… just to not uprate the engine power at all I’d be amazed
This was years ago now, but I do hope the QRH twitter admin was right lol
3 Likes
“an option to increase the power to 1500bhp”
yeah, especially as the cooling is what held CV12 to 1200bhp in CR2
3 Likes
Also no need to yeet HESH at a tank at long range given than missiles and drones will work just as well
It really does suprise me we never made a HE-Frag shell for the L11/L30
Yeah, I guess those were just saved for the 155mm
The vicious cycle continues…
2 Likes
That’s a pleasant surprise, but once again, we have no idea how much. I think it’s logical it will be 1500 but we will have to see.
I’ll just add the full screenshot for future reference
2 Likes
Correct.
2A7V should have the same acceleration that 2A4 has.
The whole transmission ratios changes was to bring on par with 2A4 in terms of acceleration.
Ah’ ha! moment. It was heat management. I thought it was in order to under utilize the engine to preserve it’s life time.
You (British) make the best NATO 155mm shells with higher grade steel and the most explosive mass. Found out yesterday.
Look how low it’s sitting on it’s suspension. The lowest part of the skirt is below the road wheel rubber.
This is a misconception i think, the refreshed PP’s have more power than the older tanks because they have been refreshed, they are much more efficient than they used to be. The new torque converter and refreshed transmission may provide better delivered power. But CV12 is still running at 1200BHP.
Cold day and the vehicle is stationary/hasnt moved in a while, the gas cools and the tank squats.