Under normal circumstances even the possible one is rather unlikely, so practically meaningless.
I do carry 2-6 APCR for explicitly this kind of purpose where i get borderline pen to deal with perticular vehicles. Like the Tiger 2 H, Jagtiger or the Maus.
It might be unlikely if you dont give it a try, but its worthwhile enough that i have APCR in what i usually bring, which is between 24 and 28 rounds.
Like i do in the T-32E1.
It’s interesting how the argument for why the Tiger II H can be at 6.7 is not every vehicle needs to be easily killed from the front, but the argument for why the T32E1 has to be 7.7 is it isn’t easily killed from the front by 5.7-6.3 vehicles.
3 Likes
The Tiger II H turret face is 185mm at 10 degrees. 76mm M93 can penetrate around 194mm at 0 degrees. It may be able to penetrate at point blank with a high RNG roll but that’s it.
1 Like
It’s 190 mm at 0°. The Tiger II (H) turret front (besides the gunner sight) is ~192 mm effective against APCR rounds. In other words M93 has a below 50% chance to penetrate the main turret armor even at point blank range.
Safe to say it isn’t something that should be attempted.
4 Likes
No, I just checked in game and its 185mm at 11 degrees. Either way, out past 100m its a 50/50 chance assuming you hit flat on, and about zero if there’s even a hint of an angle. And that’s assuming RNG doesn’t throw your round either to the side or into the mantlet.
Even M82 can’t pen the turret front. M304 will go through it like a knife through butter, and the long 90mm can pen it with APHE out to about a klick. That said its a small target you’re going to need to carefully aim for even in CQC, and you’re a lot larger, and unless you’re the T32 a lot less armored.
Naturally, the UFP is all but impenetrable save for the MG port, and even then that’s iffy thanks to that rounded covering.
190 mm at 0° value I gave was the M93 penetration, not the Tiger’s turret. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.
Good enough reliability for me to consider valid. Tbh done it frequently enough with same penning rounds that idk why other people dont seemingly do it.
Gotcha. It wasn’t 100% clear since the values are so similar. But yeah, unless you use APCR or the long 90mm you’re not getting through it frontally, and the long 90mm has the issue of a reload that takes twice as long on platforms that are significantly less armored until you get to the T32.
And that has the issue of being at 7.3, where there’s far, far more things that render its armor less than reliable than the King Tiger has to face at 6.7.
50% chance happens when penetration is equal to effective protection.
This only happens on specific spots of the gunner sight when using M93. Against the main plate of armor, M93 has a below 50% chance to penetrate at all distances, about 25% when at point blank.
At point blank you already have a high chance to just not go through the main turret armor. At any longer range, this only becomes larger.
It is effectively suicide to attempt it because more often than not this will not penetrate, you will just alert the Tiger II to your position while you’re reloading. And the Tiger II does not have to carefully aim at your now exposed tank in order to kill.
2 Likes
Oh, whoops. I edited my post a few times before I finally hit the “Reply” button to post it and accidentally deleted the part where I meant to say that was APCR out of the short 90mm. The 76mm won’t pen it at all and neither will M82.
Short 90 mm APCR should have no trouble against the Tiger II’s turret front. It can even penetrate a Panther’s upper glacis if the requirements are met.
And the short 90 mm itself is a very accurate cannon now so dispersion is not a big issue.
1 Like
You made a single comparison putting the 6.3 Jumbo against the Tiger II H and I said:
Almost like not every vehicle needs to be able to deal with a specific vehicle to be effective.
Meaning that a Jumbo doesn’t need to be able to take out a Tiger II H from the front to be an effective 6.3 vehicle.
You say:
Even though I didn’t say that.
A 6.3 Jumbo with 150mm pen or a M-51 with 400mm pen has nothing to do with the Tiger II H being 6.7.
There’s obviously a difference betweeen a large number of vehicles that can easily penetrate the Tiger II Hs turret armor with APHE or other rounds compared to a T32E1 that can not be penetrated even by 128mm APCBC, one of the strongest APHE rounds in that BR range, that is also used by the 7.7 Maus.
If the Tiger II H couldn’t be penetrated by any APHE rounds at 6.7 and lower from the front, it would be obviously much stronger than it currently is and not suitable for 6.7.
However the Tiger II H is vulnerable to a wide range of vehicles from the front and particular when the turret is angled, something that can’t be said about the T32E1.
So the T32E1 is nothing other than a much better armored Tiger II H that has less firepower (RoF) but also better mobility (10hp/t vs 14hp/t).
So it’s like a Jumbo Tiger II H, except with better mobilty instead of getting worse.
1 Like
I made the comparison between the Jumbo and the Tiger II H because someone else said medium tanks don’t count.
Yes, that’s what I was saying. APCR can pen it and quite easily, but the M82 has no chance at all. Honestly, M304 is mandatory for the M26 since its the only APCR round that doesn’t suck total balls aside from the post-pen. Here’s hoping the APHE rework actually does something useful.
IKEA magic moment.
Basically this is the one and only true conclusion to this argument in my eyes.
1 Like
I noticed that 90mm APCR seems to have a much better chance of heavily damaging the ammo in a Tiger II H from the front compared to 20pdr APDS, blowing them up in one shot.
I shot several Tiger IIs in the turret with 20pdr APDS and it never resulted in ammo blowing up.
1 Like
The T32E1 APCR is great but comparing it to one of the worst rounds at that BR makes it seem better than it is.
Ngl 20pdr apds just feels so ass to use, it aint even funny.
Like it will either shatter or turn something yellow, its just depressing lol