Hello,
Today I would like to make a suggestion for the M26E1.
First some background context so we can all be on the same page before I make the suggestion:
The vehicle is a veteran workhorse that sadly is purchasable only a few times a year, and is not to be confused with the T26E1-1 or M26A1. This vehicle shares many of the same features, and deficiencies of the standard M26 Pershing. It differs in that it is a slightly heavier vehicle due to the longer 90mm T54 canon, and has access to a coaxially mounted .50 Cal heavy machine gun, instead of the 7.62. The M26E1 weighs 42.9 tons, while the standard M26 weighs 41.6 tons. Both vehicles have the same engine of 500HP at 2600RPM. In Realistic and Arcade battles both tanks sit at a Battlerating of 6.7, with the M26E1 being at 6.3 while the standard M26 remains at the stated Battlerating in Simulator matches.
Now onto the proposed change for the M26E1:
The M26E1 in my opinion needs a reload buff. As of the first week of 2026 the M26E1 offers a reload time of 11.1 seconds per shot on a single piece loaded 90mm gun. The gun has access to the following ammunition:
-
APCBC: T41
-
APCBC: AP Shot
-
APCR: HVAP
-
HE:
As can be seen the M26E1 offers the typical long 90mm American canon experience. The gun differs from the other variants however in the sense that it provides vast improvements in charge and chamber pressure efficiency. This means that the shell casings do not need to be as long and large as the shells found on the T26E1-1 as shown below:
T26E1-1:
M26E1:
As you can see the shells casings on the M26E1 look to be around half the length of the shell casings found on the T26E1-1. This would make for a considerably more comfortable reloading process. To drive home the fact that the M26E1 should get a faster reload time lets take a look at the shell size of the standard M26:
M26:
As can be seen the shells of the M26 and M26E1 are very similar in size and dimension. The M26 gets a reload time of 7.5 seconds on an aced loader, while the M26E1 is stuck at 11.1 seconds. That’s a 48% slower reload time for having what appears to be the same ammunition, especially when you factor in weight. For Example, lets look at both the M26’s and M26E1’s APCBC shells that contain HE filler:
M26:
M26E1:
The Masses are near Identical.
After awhile of thinking I thought the issue of reload time difference between the M26 and M26E1 was due to crew space. Maybe the breach of the M26E1 is significantly larger and thus
restrictive to the loader. Below are images of the crew compartments in the turrets for each tank.
M26:
M26E1:
The photos in game show the crew of the M26E1 actually having a little bit more room in the turret for, not just the loader, but the commander and gunner as well, which would make for a better fighting compartment experience.
I also think this tank deserves a reload buff due to the fact that German tanks like the Tiger II (Nr.1-50), Tiger II, Tiger II (Sla. 16), Panther II, Tiger II (10.5 cm KwK.) have all received a reload buff within the last 2 years. For the Long 88mm the reload time dropped from 8.5 seconds aced to 7.5 seconds aced. The 10.5 cm canon dropped from 15.4 seconds aced to 12.5 seconds aced while receiving a penetration buff to 284mm, granted the explosive TNT filler dropped to 140 grams, which is still extremely potent.
In conclusion, I think the M26E1 should get the same reload time as the M26. My evidence for this change are stated and shown above. Not only does the tank use similarly sized shells as the M26, that are around half the size of the of the T26E1-1, but the breach of the M26E1 also takes up less space inside the turret of the M26E1 allowing the loader more room to maneuver and reload.
