Type 60 SPRG (B)

[_N4MELESS]

Do you want to see the Type 60 SPRG (B) being implemented ?

• Yes!
• No.

Type 60 SPRG (B), Tank Destroyer, Japan, Rank 4

The Type 60 is a self-propelled recoilless gun developed and utilized by the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF). It was the first armored fighting vehicle (AFV) to be standardized in Japan after World War II. Developed in the 1960s, it was designed to provide mobile fire support for infantry units. The vehicle is armed with a 106mm recoilless rifle, offering effective anti-tank capabilities. Its mobility is ensured by a horizontally opposed 6-cylinder air-cooled diesel engine, providing a balance between power and reliability. The Type 60 saw various iterations, including models equipped with liquid-cooled engines and reinforced components. Throughout its service, it played a crucial role in Japan’s defense strategy, particularly during the Cold War era. However, with the changing military landscape and advancements in portable anti-tank weaponry, the Type 60 was eventually phased out of service by 2007.

---

This suggestion pertains to the early version of the Type 60 Self-Propelled Recoilless Gun, commonly referred to as the B-type. In comparison to the already existing C-type within the game, the B-type features a less powerful engine and a lower top speed. Consequently, it could be appropriately placed at a lower Battle Rating than the C-type, potentially suggesting a BR of 6.3.

Early Type 60 SPRG equipped with a pair of snow tracks.

Since the only difference between the A-type and B-type variants lies in the strengthened structure of the B-type, distinguishing between the two externally is impossible.

---

B Type

• Production Start: 1967
• Description: Referred to as the “Sanji Yobogata” (Third Defense Model), the B type featured reinforced sections throughout the vehicle’s body to enhance durability and survivability on the battlefield.
• Production Number: 143 units were produced, making it the variant with the highest production numbers among the Type 60 series.
• Engine Upgrade: Starting from 1975, the B type vehicles began to be upgraded to the same liquid-cooled diesel engines as found in the C type, though these modifications were done gradually.

C Type

• Production Start: Post-1975
• Description: The most notable change for the C type was the switch from an air-cooled to a liquid-cooled diesel engine, which required modifications to the vehicle structure, including a higher engine compartment to accommodate the new engine type.
• Production Number: 82 units were produced. When considering the vehicles upgraded from B to C type, this variant had the highest number of units deployed.
• Design Changes: The adoption of a liquid-cooled engine necessitated the installation of a radiator in the rear part of the vehicle and the relocation of the muffler to the upper surface of the vehicle’s left side.

---

How to differentiate between the B-type and C-type externally:

C-type on the left and B-type on the right

Change to the drive sprocket.

Engine muffler relocated to the upper surface of the vehicle’s left side

The redesigned engine compartment now accommodates the new engine type, with notable changes such as raising it. Additionally, it appears that a radiator has been added onto the rear left side of the C-type variant.

---

Type 60 (B) Specifications:

Weapons:

• Main Gun: Type 60 on-vehicle recoilless gun
  • Traverse Angle: ±30° (High posture) / ±5° (Low posture)
  • Vertical Guidance: +15°, -20° (some parts -12°) (high posture) / ±5° (low posture)
  • Ammunition: 10 shells (12 shells with 2 pre-loaded rounds)
• Secondary Gun: Type 60 cal.50 spotting rifle
  • Ammunition: 10 × 4 magazines

Weight:

• Full Load (Normal Track): 8.0 tons
• Full Load (Snow Track): 8.5 tons

Mobility:

• Maximum Speed: 45 km/h
• Maximum Inclination: 60%
• Ability to Ride Across Trench: 1.8 m
• Ability to Ride Across Embankment: 0.6 m
• Ability to Wade Across Depth: 0.7 m
• Minimum Turning Radius: about 6.5 m

Engine:

• Komatsu 6T120, 120HP (2400 rpm)

---

Walk around

---

Vehicle diagram

---

Type 60 26 caliber 106mm recoilless gun

This is the same gun as Type 60 SPRG (C) in the game and has two types of ammunition shown below:

---

Sources

https://combat1.sakura.ne.jp/60SHIKI.htm
60式自走106mm無反動砲 - Wikipedia
『60式自走106mm無反動砲C型　発売迫る！』
‚U‚OŽ®Ž©‘–‚P‚O‚Umm–³”½“®–C
Type 60 SPRG Early Production - Japan - War Thunder - Official Forum
https://aobamil.sakura.ne.jp/Photo/60SPRR/60SPRR.html

[karnitin75]

Looks AMAZING PLEASE GIVE ME THIS BOI

[Noveos_Republic]

Consequently, it could be appropriately placed at a lower Battle Rating than the C-type, potentially suggesting a BR of 6.3.

As a Japan main, I know this thing is gonna get uptiered lmao.

[_Mr_Fahrenheit]

@Noveos_Republic

As a Japan main, I know this thing is gonna get uptiered lmao.

Knowing these chumps, it’ll probably be the exact same tier. You know for “balance”.

[Exocetta]

Considering how not popular this vehicle is in the game…

[bbbdddaaa]

+1
new meme tank lol

[l2ulan]

+1 for being a recoilless carrier and a Japanese unique vehicle. Both variants foldered would be ideal.

[PercussionCap]

+1, ability to raise and lower turret for extra concealment would be great too.

[_N4MELESS]

Add elevation mechanism of Type 60 SPRG (C)

[Culusion]

Honestly I wouldn’t be opposed to it just being the same BR as the normal Type 60 SPRR since the difference is only in how fast you can get into a good spot and not killing power. I would welcome having backups on each so I can bring out 4 cheeky Type 60s!

[Sensei3643]

This doesn’t seem to have much of an advantage.
It would be nice to see a prototype with a quadruple turret.

Type 60(P)

[_N4MELESS]

The SS-1 Kai had already been passed to the developers since 2018.

Type 60 "Kai" Recoilless TD

The Type 60 SPRG (B) is not, that is why i made a remake of its old suggestion so it doesn’t get lost on the old forum.

And since the Type 60 SPRG is the model that was accepted by the self-defense force, imo it deserves to be added for historical reason (especally i never liked the unaccepted prototypes over the production models).

[TheS1up]

Tbh tho he’s right the (B) type wouldn’t bring anything new to the game, while the 4 barreled one could be interesting

[_N4MELESS]

Ok, and I didn’t disagree with them, I just explained why I made this suggestion. The prototype had been suggested for the longest time; it just never made it into the game.

Additionally the 4 barrels one IF added it would be placed at 6.7 like the (C) variant, but this vehicle is suggested at 6.3.

[TheS1up]

Why would it end up at 6.3 if it gets the same armament? Lower HP isn’t a justification to be 0.4 lower to me

[_N4MELESS]

If you actually read what i wrote in the suggestion it has 30 HP less and 10 km/h slower, that is pretty much justified for lower BR to me because for a light tank/ tank destroyer that is very slow and if you ever have experienced the Type 60 back when it had wrong engine power and top speed from the B type you would know how sluggish the Type 60 was back in the day before it got fixed.

Just because it has the same gun doesn’t mean it needs to be at the same BR if its performance is worse in other areas. For instance, the M36 is not at 6.3 like the ST-A1 despite having the exact same gun and ammunition.

[_N4MELESS]

Actually the Type 60 (C) should have been at 6.3 to begin with seeing how it a basically worse version of the Ontos with four less guns and 8 less total rounds

[TheS1up]

@_N4MELESS_

Just because it has the same gun doesn’t mean it needs to be at the same BR if its performance is worse in other areas. For instance, the M36 is not at 6.3 like the ST-A1 despite having the exact same gun and ammunition.

@_N4MELESS_

Actually the Type 60 (C) should have been at 6.3 to begin with seeing how it a basically worse version of the Ontos with four less guns and 8 less total rounds

M8 i’m not a fan of derailing topics, but let me get this straight:

1. The M36 is lower despite having the same gun and ammunition, not because it’s slower but because it’s an open top thus much easier to overpressure and get strafed. The type 60s would be both open top, thus same BR.
2. The Ontos is much worse than the Type 60, since the guns fire in a cyclic way so you can’t select wich guns to fire like in the Type 60 and you can’t even reload guns 1 by 1. This also implies that even if you get only 1 barrel damaged you can’t use the other 5. Also the Ontos has less crew and worse elevation and depression (one of the key features of the type60)

The Type 60 (B) while one could argue would/could be a nice backup, would just end up like the ST-2: aka worse than the ST-1 (one example is the lack of a .50cal) but at the same BR (another example could be Type 61 vs ST-3 which has a 6s autoloader but has the same BR as the type61 which has a longer reload). Why would I spawn in a worse type 60 if i can use a backup? The only thing you could argue is that both of them should be 6.3, but even then looking at other similar vehicles the BR is often 6.7 and the difference between 6.3 and 6.7 isn’t abissal

I’m not saying you shouldn’t have made the suggestion don’t get me wrong, just don’t expect it to be added anytime soon imho (watch gaijin adding it next patch)

[_N4MELESS]

I was referring to the M36 in the Japanese tree, specifically the M36B2 which has a roof protecting the crews. From my experience playing it, it felt no different from the ST-A 1 or 2. The only aspect that makes the ST-A a better vehicle for me is the higher reverse speed.

As for the Ontos, it provides a more comfortable gameplay experience, especially without having to worry about limited ammunition. Additionally, its ability to rapidly fire 8 shots is quite powerful. I’ve observed players single-handedly taking out multiple vehicles by rushing with the Ontos, something that wouldn’t be achievable with the Type 60.

@TheS1up

The Type 60 (B) while one could argue would/could be a nice backup, would just end up like the ST-2: aka worse than the ST-1 (one example is the lack of a .50cal) but at the same BR (another example could be Type 61 vs ST-3 which has a 6s autoloader but has the same BR as the type61 which has a longer reload). Why would I spawn in a worse type 60 if i can use a backup? The only thing you could argue is that both of them should be 6.3, but even then looking at other similar vehicles the BR is often 6.7 and the difference between 6.3 and 6.7 isn’t abissal

This is precisely why I’m suggesting it be placed at 6.3. As you mentioned, why would anyone choose a worse vehicle if there’s a better version at the same BR? Placing the slower Type 60 at 6.3 would strengthen the lineup at that BR and provide players with the option to use the Type 60 at a lower BR, albeit without the same mobility as the C variant. This would only benefit the players, there is no reason why it should be dissagreed. Even at 6.3 i don’t think the firepower of Type 60 is any different to 90mm guns that firing HEAT-FS so it would not be completely overpowered, the only reason those similar vehicles with the same gun are at higher BR because of their incredible speed for example the R3 T106 FA that can reach 100+ km/h. Speed can be an important factor in determining a vehicle’s battle rating.

Unlike the ST-A 3 or Type 61, where both vehicles have their pros and cons, the ST-A 3 boasts an auto-loader, whereas the Type 61 features smoke dischargers and larger ready racks capable of holding up to 20 rounds. This means that the best reload speed of the Type 61 lasts far longer compared to the ST-A 3, which only has 11 rounds in the magazine, so the ST-A 3 is not completely better or Type 61 is completely worse both tanks have something that the other don’t.

The Type 60 B is however straight up inferior to the C variant, which would make it less appealing if they were at the same BR. At 6.7, there are already plenty of vehicles with different playstyles available. However, at 6.3, where there’s currently no light tank option, it could fill a gap in the lineup. Introducing it at 6.3 might make it more appealing for players to grind or include in their lineups.
Yes, just because there are some vehicles that are basically the same but slightly better or worse than other at the same BR doesn’t mean we have to stick to that tradition. It’s more important to itroduce the tank in a meaningful way.

@TheS1up

I’m not saying you shouldn’t have made the suggestion don’t get me wrong, just don’t expect it to be added anytime soon imho (watch gaijin adding it next patch)

This suggestion is originally based on the old suggestion made for the early Type 60 variant. Like many of my other suggestions, they are either remakes or resuggestions. I’m not expecting everything to be added; the reason for resuggesting is to preserve this vehicle suggestion so it doesn’t get lost on the old forum especially it was never approved for consideration, as I mentioned in the previous reply to someone else.
Whatever they want to do with this suggestion is up to them or maybe it will be here for many years to come i honestly don’t care, like all suggestions, it is just here to exist and well, it is also a vehicle that Japan actually used.

[PercussionCap]

@_N4MELESS_

From my experience playing it, it felt no different from the ST-A 1 or 2. The only aspect that makes the ST-A a better vehicle for me is the higher reverse speed.

STAs are faster, much lower profile (ST-A1), have better optics for long range, and are better protected.

Look at the difference in height between it and an M4A3.