Semovente M41/M42/M43 reload speed

What is the deal with them? They all have a 75mm cannon in there, shooting mostly the same projectiles yet all different reload speeds.

At 2.0 the 71/18 M41 with a 75mm has a reload speed of 7.8 seconds.
At 2.3 the 75/32 M41 with a 75mm has a reload speed of 9.7 seconds.
At 2.3 the 75/34 M42 with a 75mm has a reload speed of 8.5 seconds.
At 3.3 the 75/34 M43 with a 75mm has a reload speed of 7.8 seconds.

They all have 3 crew members in the same vehicle, the same projectiles but for some reason a reload speed a second or 2 seconds slower for no obvious reason.


They are all slightly different in terms of cannon but the reload speed are way too different between each other, we need them slightly reduced reload speed.

1 Like

The only issue is the 75/32 M41.

The 75/18 has a shorter gun with smaller ammo, so 6s reload.
The 75/34 M42 has the longer gun (bigger shells) so it’s slightly slower with 6.5s.
The 75/34 M43 has a wider chassis, so more space, bringing the reload down to 6s again.

The outlier is the 75/32 (7.5s) which should be similiar to the 75/34 M42, unless the cannon is so different that it’s actually takes more time to reload.

After a short dig-around, I found that the 75/32 is basically identical to the 75/34. Infact the 75/32 was basically created by replacing the front of the L34 gun with a muzzle break.
Tanks don’t need the muzzle break so they have the longer L34 barrel instead of L32, except for the early Semovente which used a L32 gun with muzzle break instead of the L34 without.

1 Like

Is it possible that the reload time of the 75/32 M41 is so long because the barrel does not have a cartridge ejection system?Since it does not have the same barrel as the The 75/34 M42.

I don’t think so. It uses a semi-automatic breech, afaik.
The barrels are basically the same apart from the muzzle break.

Well, then I don’t understand why they have put this reload time on it, I remember that a long time ago I asked why it took so long to reload the semovente 75/34 it took 8.5 seconds when the P26 took 6.5 seconds when they carry the same barrel, and someone He replied saying that it was because the semovente had less space, but if you look at it, the casemate of the semovente and the P26 tower must have practically the same space.

They fire the same shell so I don’t see why they’d have a longer reload time, and I know how space can affect reload time in game but that seems to be forgotten about half the time and I don’t feel the size difference is noteworthy at all, I haven’t even noticed it.

75/18 and 75/32 seem entirely identical, a shorter gun sure, but I don’t see why that would result in smaller ammo when you use the EPS M42 in both for example… a 2 second different is massive.

1 Like

75/18 is a howitzer which fires rounds with 400-450m/s velocity while the 75/32 and 75/34 are cannons which use bigger rounds to fire the same shells at 580-630m/s velocity.

The RoF would be slightly slower but not as much as with the 75/32 currently.
The 75/32 M41 is pretty much redunant due to the 75/34 M42 at the same BR, however in-game it’s just straight up worse due to the unreasonable longer reoad time as well as a much worse HP/T ratio.

I don’t see why the type of cannon would increase the reload though, it’s taking a shell from point A to point B, if the interior space remains the same and the size of the shell.

Maybe it was some sort of balance decision, which no longer makes sense since both vehicles are 2.3.

Could be, Gaijin has a knack for weird balancing decisions and then never reverting them even when you’re 5 years later.

1 Like

It seems to me that they do things and then they forget, and they only change it when half the entire community of players complains.

1 Like

Yeah seems like it, the Kugel still has ruined HVAP belts and think the Ho 229 was useless for years after being nerfed in like 2017/18.

1 Like

I think the Italians’ BR is because of the damage that APHE does, it’s the typical stupid balance that is coupled with the horrible damage model that only serves to destroy the game experience and cause gaijin to base balances on that mistake making the ball of disaster getting bigger and bigger and things are getting worse, and I don’t think it will ever be solved, gaijin is afraid of success.

1 Like

I don’t even use the APHE, I just use the HEAT which is identical on all of them, but some just load them several seconds slower.

The real problem with the semovente is not the reloading, it is that the HEAT has ridiculous and unrealistic damage and the AP ammunition of the 75/32 and 75/34 is not good, it should penetrate a little more.

The HEAT damage on the 75 is good but on the 105 it’s somehow a lot worse.

APHE is actually super good since it overpressures.
You only need HEAT for a few targets, maybe for sniping but overall the APHE is the go to round.

I don’t think you can expect any more penetration from a round with such a massive explosive cavity.

1 Like

Ahh, I had understood that the Italian 75 cannon had a penetration almost equal to that of the American 75 cannon, as it weighs and has a speed similar to the M61, plus I didn’t know that having explosive filling would affect the penetration so much.

In the 105 howitzer the problem is the low damage plus the reload time, you cannot kill with a single shot many times, and on many occasions you cannot even disable the shooter.