Another day another thread to be locked because there are tons of others with the same subject ongoing;
Then you could just stop by this statement instead of posting this wall of text based purely on other’s experiences, “math” and Test Driving those vehicles.
Based on what I’ve seen in War Thunder Forums, you or anyone else yapping about a vehicle without any prior experience means nothing and adds nothing to the subject.
Nice you mentioned the vehicle mass which can be used as counterargument to you mentioning the vehicle’s top speed, which in both cases are comparable.
2S38 can be pierced by 12.7 mm rounds on the side. The case with the RDF/LT is that Gaijin added it as the base model instead of the latest modification vehicle that features the better ammunition, I believe the add-on armor on the sides, the missing thermal sight on the cannon base and probably few other features. Which is common, it’s not exclusive to this vehicle, the T-80UD/478BE which also is missing a lot of features, currently only difference from the Ukrainian variant T-80UD is the thermal imager.
With the size you pointed is no advantage but a issue, it’s a SPAAG after all, the most ammo it can carry the better, not to count the numerous modules inside it to make it capable as a anti-air vehicle:
And as you can see, barely no empty space, which, in my opinion is a good thing, I’m not against really, but as you can see, the advantage is non-existent, actually, the 2S38 is a moving ammunition box.
I believe it’s a third generation thermal sight; and as a coastal defence system, the 14 999 km laser rangefinder operational distance is reasonable, also, as I’ve mentioned earlier, it’s a SPAAG, and it’s accurate information, there’s no bias, you can easily search up for “Bajkal Fire Control System combat module” and you’ll find most information about the cannon and offensive modules in the 2S38.
The difference between the fire rate on the 2S38 and the RDF/LT is quite obvious why, the 2S38 is a dual fed auto loading system, where the ammunition comes from two sides instead of a single linear rail. Obviously how the system works is unknown at least for me but this is how I think it can reach 0,5s reload time between shots.
Again, 2S38 is a SPAAG, and I believe that 1/3 of the vehicle is pure ammo, and also, as I’ve mentioned, it’s combat module came from a ship for coastal defence, maybe it explains the overheating subject, it’s made to shoot consecutively for a long period compared to common autocannons.
The RDF/LT cannon is way superior, the problem is people that never tried 2S38 in live battle but test driving it, the difference of damage between the 57 mm autocannon and the 75 mm autocannon, the BR-281U AP HE ammunition is no advantage, you’ll need more shots to heavily armored vehicle to make it count, and same applies to the 3UBM22 APDS FS that, even in small caliber, doesn’t deal good damage to light or medium armored vehicles. And the HE VT is also no advantage, the argument of “It’s faster” is pointless when the RDF/LT shoots the second best or if not the best HE VT in terms of velocity, HE filler for a auto cannon.
Everything related to the economic subject of both vehicles in-game and outside it’s due to its BR placement and Rank, which I’ll not argue, it’s Gaijin.
Both vehicles are capable but I wouldn’t buy any of them despite owning 2S38, it’s a vehicle hard to adapt, specially for newer players and demand strategic changes, how you play it and everything else. Which same applies to the RDF/LT which I hope no new players are buying this, which, I wouldn’t, even considering the firepower superior compared to the HSTV-L with more ammunition to use, either I would buy the M1 Abrams KVT or the T-80U-E1, both vehicles mentioned in this thread are good to be played as secondary options, not primarily grinding vehicles.