Object 167, a nimble T-62

Would you like to see object 167 in game?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
How would you like to see it be introduced?
  • Tech tree
  • Premium
  • Event
  • Squadron
  • Battlepass
  • Other
  • I don’t want it
0 voters

Object 167, the nimble T-62.

Object 167 was designed as an improved T-62. Although it was planned to use a 125mm D-81, no prototype ever received this armament. The 115mm U-5TS was retained. Instead the most notable change compared to the T-62 would be much better mobility (19.1 vs 15.7 hp/t). This would come at a slight reduction in armour. I don’t think this is essential to the tree, and would better be presented in the game in another form. It does however have more historical significance, its suspension (inherited from object 140) was later used when creating the T-72 Ural.

Developmental history

See history

Object 167 being an improved T-62 means its history goes as far back as it. In 1953, the GABTU began a project for a new medium tank to replace the T-54, the project was approved in 1954 with the preliminary name T-64. There were three major design bureau’s that participated and submitted designs for the project. Object 430 by KB-60M of Plant No.75, object 140 by KB-520 of Plant No.183, and object 907 by VNII-100 of Experimental Plant No.100. Out of the three, only object 140 and 430 would be built.

Plant No.75’s object 430.

Object 140
Plant No.183’s object 140.

Object 907
Experimental plant No.100’s object 907. The project focused heavily on the effectiveness of cast hull armour in medium tanks. Extensive test results showed it was better in raw performance (though minimal), but not in cost effectiveness, hence why object 140 and 430 were preferred.

Prototypes of object 140 and 430 participated in trials in 1957 with the conclusion that the 430 was more promising, this lead to the termination of the 140 project, in June, 1958. Plant No.75’s object 430 would eventually evolve into the object 432, which was then accepted into the soviet army as the T-64, in January 1967. The story of object 140 didn’t stop there however. Even though object 430 was preferred for being superior, it had several major issues and it wasn’t going to be ready for production anytime soon (as is even more clear in hindsight). Already in 1957 a proposal had been made to create a T-54 improvement based on object 140. The turret, gun and hull was taken from object 140, the rest was T-54B. This project received the index 142. It was inferior to the 140, but since many parts were shared with the T-54, it could still be lucrative to the army as it provided a quick and cheaper vehicle.

Object 142
Object 142, if the 140 didn’t make it obvious, perhaps you can now see where this development is going.

Object 142 Rear
A view of object 142’s engine bay makes it easier to see how different it was from a T-54.

Object 142 wasn’t long lived due to the acceptence of the T-55 in 1958, and the cancellation of T-54 production. But this only proved a short interruption in development. After T-55 production had begun, Plant No.183 was back on the saddle with a new project, object 165. This was in essence just object 142 but based on the T-55 instead of the T-54B. The hull design of the 140 was finally dropped, and instead an elongated T-55 chassis was created. The new project was truly promising. It’s downfall however would be its sister project.

Object 165
Object 165. The little tank that almost could.

In the '50’s the soviets had been working on solutions for improving the armour penetration of their tank guns. As the tried and true methods of WW2, which was increasing the size of the shell, the length of the barrel and the maximum pressure of the system, had come to their end of efficiency. Further developments using these methods lead to unruly, heavy and slow to load weapons. One such new area of research was done into smoothbore guns. The first successful smoothbore gun was the 100mm T-12 Rapira field gun. Attempts were made to fit it into a tank, but its ammunition was simply to big to fit in a tank. Thus a project to create a smoothbore version of the D-54T (the gun used in both object 140 and 430) came about, this became the 115mm U-5TS gun. This was the gun intended for object 165’s sister project, object 166, started in 1959.

T-62. The first production tank with a smoothbore gun.

Although object 165 was perfectly fine, object 166 was even more impressive. Though due to caution with the newly developed smoothbore technology, object 165 was still strung along. Object 166 was accepted for Service in August, 1961 as the T-62. Object 165 too was adopted shortly after, in january, 1962, as the T-62A. However the decision was reverted in October, before production had begun. The few T-62A pilots were left for reserves and the vehicles history faded behind the T-62.

As you might’ve forgotten by now, the story isn’t of the T-62. Though it is integral. Even before its acceptence, Plant No.183 had already started the design of a successor, this is where object 167 comes in! Object 167 was intended to be an improvement on the T-62 in all areas except armour. The new vehicle was to feature a better engine, better suspension, a more powerful gun, better radiation protection and more. Even the parts shared with the T-62 and T-55 were to be improved.

Object 167
Object 167. The easiest tell from a T-62 are the six roadwheels instead of five.

Sneakily, the new V-26 engine and suspension used in object 167 was further developments from object 140. It’s clear the design team, or perhaps more accurately their chief designer, Leonid Nikolayevich Kartsev, was still wanting to pitch a reincarnated object 140. The new tank was intended to further increase the power of its armament with a smoothbore 125mm D-81 with some form of loading device. But due to the lack of 125mm guns during the prototypes construction, they were all instead armed with the same 115mm U-5TS of the serial T-62. Since the weight of the vehicle increased. Weight savings were done by reducing the armour, to keep its weight relatively similar. Its lower front plate got reduced from 100 to 80mm. The side armour from 80 to 70mm, and the rear from 45 to 30mm. The turret stayed identical however, apart from the loader’s hatch cover which was reduced from 25 to 20mm due to the installation of anti-radiation lining. Its gear ratios were also changed to accomodate the increased power.

Object 167 rear
The rear of object 167.

The first prototype was completed in October 1961, two more would be built in December, '61 and August '62. There were of course small differences between them. But the major differences were that the second prototypes engine was retuned to put out 700hp at a lower 2000 rpm, compared to the first prototypes 2100 rpm. The third prototype became part of a general project of the time to arm various tanks with ATGM’s. As such it had a 9K11 Malyutka system installed on the rear of the turret.

Third object 167 prototype with Malyutka ATGM.

Trials during 1961-1962 were successful, and Plant No.183 were convinced object 167 would be adopted. But it was rejected. For one, even though it surpassed the T-62 in several areas. It was not liked that it compromised its armour layout. Secondly it shared less parts with the T-55 and T-62, and retooling the factories would cost both time and money. Both resources which were now planned to be used to prepare for production of the T-64 (object 432). It was simply deemed unnecessary.

Object 432 T-64
Object 432, or T-64. Another world first, this time in use of composite armour.

In 1963 Kartsev sent a letter trying to push the 167 again since the T-64 (object 432) was still running into issues. It was again rejected. This is the end of object 167. That is not to say nothing more came of it. Not only did the developments of object 167 get reused in the production of the T-62. Several more vehicles would sprout from it. Including a project with a turbine engine, which had begun in 1962. This was object 167T. I think object 167T is a more interesting vehicle as far as War Thunder is concerned. But I felt the original deserved the spotlight for now.

Object 167T
Object 167T. With a GTD-3T turbine engine producing 800hp.

One thing I haven’t really mentioned, which was integral to the T-64’s development, was its composite armour. Which had been explored by Plant No.75 and integrated into object 432 in 1961. This further increased the gap between Plant No.75 and No.183’s designs. But Plant No.183 wasn’t far behind. In 1962 they started a project seemingly meant to rival Plant No.75’s object 432. At the plant this was known as T-62B, and it received the index 167M. Like the 432 it too had composite armour in both hull and turret with an equivalent protection of 400mm RHA. And it was to finally carry the 125mm D-81 smoothbore gun initially intended for the original 167, with an accompanying autoloader.

Object 167M wooden scale model.

Diagram of object 167M.

Plant No.183 experimentally fitted several of object 167M’s components in T-62’s. The most notable example being object 166TM produced in 1966. A T-62 with the suspension of object 167, the turbine of 167T, and both 125mm and autoloader of 167M. This too would be an interesting addition to War Thunder.

Object 166TM
Object 166TM. Sadly the known frontal picture of this prototype is poor quality.

Object 166TM rear
Rear of 166TM. Initially it looks just like object 167T. But it seems the commander switched sides to the right of the turret in this prototype. Other differences include a slight relocation of the shell ejection port, and new stowage bins.

Object 167M was perhaps superior to object 432, but Plant No.75 had not stood around twiddling their thumbs. A successor to object 432 had already been designed during the same period, object 434. Which would later enter service in 1968 as the T-64A. And of the two projects, object 434 clearly came out on top. Yet again Plant No.183 were out of luck.

Object 434 T-64A
Object 434, or T-64A.

The T-64A did still suffer issues, mainly with its engine and autoloader. Kartsev managed to get his hands on several early vehicles with the promise to fix these issues. His improvements on the T-64A, indexed 172, was largely inspired by object 167M. Both the engine and autoloader was all taken from it. However it still wasn’t perfect. The vehicle suffered issues relating to the suspension, partially because it was more than a tonne heavier.Thus an improved model, 172M, was created with improved suspesion, again it was taken from object 167M. The suspension that originated on object 140. This vehicle was adopted as the T-72 Ural in 1973. The object 140 didn’t just leave its mark on the T-62, but T-72 too.

Object 172.

Object 172M, or T-72 Ural. Object 167M packaged in a T-64A.


Crew: (4)

115mm U-5TS (Ammo: 40)

  • Elevation: -4°/+15°
  • Stabilizer: 2-Plane Meteor
  • Rate of fire: 4-5 rpm

7.62mm SGMT coaxial (Ammo: 2500)


  • Day
    TSh2B-41 3.5x/18° - 7x/9° (Gunner telescope)
    TKN-2 5x/10° (Gunner periscope)
    TKN-2 5x/10° (Commander periscope)

Turret rotation speed: 23.6°-27.7°/s (depending on if the stabilizer was active or not)
Gun elevation speed: 7°/s

  • Night:
    TPN-1-41-11 5.5x/6° (Gunner telescope) Passive night sight
    TKN-2 5x/9° (Gunner periscope) Active night sight
    TVN-2 1x/30° (Driver periscope) Active night sight


  • Weight (total): 36 600kg
  • Length (total): 9500mm
  • Length (hull): 6365mm
  • Width (total): 3300mm
  • Height (total): 2390mm


  • Engine: V-26 (700hp at 2100 or 2000rpm) (19.1hp/t)

  • Transmissison:
    forward gears: 5
    reverse gear: 1

  • Top speed: 64km/h


See armour

Armour layout
armour 2


  • Front:
    Upper front plate: 100mm at 60°
    Lower front plate: 80mm at 55°
  • Sides: 70mm at 0°
  • Rear: 30mm at 13°


  • Front: 241mm at 17°
  • Sides: 140mm
  • Rear: 65mm


See footnotes
  1. There are different specifications for the 167 listed by Pavlov and Pavlov at different pages in their book. One set of specifications seems to be the intended figures before any prototype was built as it lists the weight within a 1.5% range. My other sources also come with slightly different figures. However any criticism of the specifications I’ve picked (or the rest of the suggestion) is gladly accepted.

Other images

See images

Diagram of object 167.


  1. M.V. Pavlov, I.V. Pavlov (2021) Otechestvennye Bronirovannye Mashiny 1945-1965 gg.: Chast’ 1 – Legkiye, Sredniye I Tyazhelye Tanki (Eng. National Armored Vehicles 1945-1965 Part I – Light, Medium and Heavy Tanks). (Отечественные бронированные машины 1945-65 - 0001.htm)

  2. Tank Archives: T-64's Birthday

  3. Tankograd: T-62

  4. M. Pavlov, I. Pavlov (2006) Моделист-конструктор №8 (Eng. Modelist-Constructor No.8)


Speedy 115? I’ll take it!

1 Like

Why not shows his autoloader

Because object 167 didn’t have an autoloader.

1 Like

what I want is a DShK, I think

Object 167 did not have a DShK.