Was the British m10 the most potent tank destroyer of the war?

>>35101941
>M10
>British
Did you mean the Achilles?

>>35101966
Same thing desu

Just a different gun

>>35101941
M36 is the same thing but better.

With HVAP, the penetration goes even higher than the inaccurate APDS on the Achilles.

>>35101989

>same thing, just different

kys yourself

File: 1438771833187.jpg (78KB, 1400x823px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1400x823px

>>35102000
but the 90mm couldn't penetrate the panther or the tiger 2
>>35102012
>2016
>having autism

>>35102030
17 pdr apds couldn't hit the panther or the tiger 2

File: M36B1.jpg (67KB, 700x309px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 700x309px

>>35102030
>but the 90mm couldn't penetrate the panther or the tiger 2

Using comparable ammunition both guns had nearly equivalent penetration at somewhat typical combat ranges of 500m, being 163mm for the QF 17pdr's APCBC round, and 164mm for the 90mm M3's M82 APC. Using their high velocity rounds (the British APDS and American HVAP) the guns could penetrate 256mm and 278mm respectively of RHA at 500m.

That being said, I will acknowledge that the Achilles carried and fired APDS ammunition in much greater quantities than the M36 carried and used HVAP rounds. Even then, the upper front plate of a Panther is effectively ~100mm of armor, well within the penetrating capability of both guns. Similarly, the upper front plate of a Tiger II is effectively ~233mm of armor. While this puts it out of the penetrating capability of the M82 round, with the frequency (or lack thereof) that Tiger IIs were encountered by American TD forces, and their psychological effect on troops fighting them, it's more than likely that HVAP ammunition would have been used without question on such a target. An assumption, yes, but a well founded one I would say.

File: colorized jagpanther killed by m36 90mm to the frontal glacis.jpg (352KB, 1280x896px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1280x896px

>>35102030
>but the 90mm couldn't penetrate the panther or the tiger 2
The M36 was well-liked by its crews, being one of the few armored fighting vehicles available to US forces that could destroy heavy German tanks from a distance. Corporal Anthony Pinto of the 1st Platoon, Company A, 814th Tank Destroyer Battalion knocked out a Panther at 4,200 yards. Another 814th gunner, Lt. Alfred Rose, scored a kill against a Panther at 4,600 yards, the maximum range of the telescopic sight.

>>35102905
Fair enough wasn't expecting a well informed post on this shithole

>>35102948
You should head over here if you wanna know about TDs, or at least see a lot of people throwing big numbers at each other. \
>>35068291

Me and at least a dozen other people who know what they're talking about (but probably not more) are on pretty much all the time looking for tank threads, so you'll probably get to learn a thing or two if you lurk a little more.

File: this chart.png (642KB, 614x466px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 614x466px

>>35102905
>the upper front plate of a Panther is effectively ~100mm of armor

how did you come up with this?
Using the charts from WWIIABG the Panther's front glacis (80mm @55° from vertical) should have protection equivalent to ~200mm of vertical RHA vs 90mm apcbc.

>>35103209
So I was using an online effective thickness calculator, which upon further inspection is sorta wonky, so my numbers may very well be off.

That being said, the point I made before still stands; if an M36 couldn't kill it, an Achilles wasn't likely to either.

>>35102936
but the panther's front armor was the concern. its side armor could be penetrated by the 76 fron any battle distance and was vulnerable to even the 75. the 90mm gun wasn't getting through the panther's glacis at those ranges, so those instances are pretty irrelevant

File: 1472341541055.png (19KB, 599x594px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 599x594px

>>35102936
>Dat Alberto last name.