(07-08-2012, 11:23 AM)campsawyer Wrote: I would agree 8 is too high, I am thinking 7-7 is better. As the 17pdr was slightly better than the 76mm but not as good as the 88mm of the Germans. I also believe the Panthers 75mm is slightly overrated making it 8-8 it is the same as the 88mm 7-8 would be better. It still gives the range that the everyone is talking about.
Source:
Panzertruppen: The Complete Guide to the Creation & Combat Employment of Germany's Tank Force: 1943-1945, Thomas L. Jentz ed., Schiffer Military History, Arglen PA
Data in Appendix D on penetration of tank guns shows that the 7.5 cm Kw.K. 42 L/70 performed slightly better than the 8.8 cm Kw.K. 36 L/56 for both the Pzgr 39 and Pzgr. 40 ammunition out to ranges of 1500m (at 2000m the performance was probably within the margin of error being only 4mm different). Granted there are other issues involved such as trajectory (probably favoring the Panther as its gun produced a higher muzzle velocity (1120 for Pzgr 40) than the Tiger I's (930 for Pzgr 40) and optical suite; stability of the chassis and so forth, but based on these data for gun/ammunition penetration there is no basis for the Panther's gun to be rated lower than that of the Tiger (Ausf E.). Interestingly, the 8.8cm Kw.K. 43 L/71 of the Tiger II achieved an 1130 muzzle velocity with the corresponding ammunition, but due to the larger/heavier shot achieved much higher penetration values as reflected in the 11 AT factor in PG.
Regarding the Firefly, the work by Jarymowycz I cited in a previous post above (Stackpole Military History Series) states that "A 17-pounder firing armor-piercing self-discarding sabot could defeat a Tiger in a frontal engagement at ranges of 1700 to 1900 yards" (p. 262). This was not true of the HEAT round variant. The Osprey Duel series "Sherman Firefly vs. Tiger" has some further discussion, particularly a good picture on p. 23 of the differing ammunition types employed.
