I just had a smal thought...

The difference between the Panther and the Tiger, both with around 100-110mm armour, but Tiger with 88mm gun and Panther with 75, and now to my thought, was there ever any Panther refitted with a 88mm gun?

Just a small idea I had to ask

 

The long 75mm gun (75L70) of the Panther actually had better armor penetration than the 88mm gun (88L56) on the Tiger I. At 500m the 75L70 was tested at 124mm penetration, the 88L56 at 110mm.
The long 88mm gun (88L71) on the Tiger II was tested at 185mm at 500m.
There were no production WWII tanks with enough armor to stand up to the 75L70, only the Soviet IS-2 came clsoe with 120mm of frontal armor.

So first of all the 75L70 was a better anti-tank gun than the 88L56, and secondly there was no real need for a better AT capability than the 75L70. It may not have been physically possible to put the 88L71 in the Panther turret, there has to be enough room for the gun to recoil and space to load the rounds, and it all has to be balanced so the turret can move. Finally, there is the crew fatigue factor, the 88mm shells are heavier (10.2kg vs 6.8kg). Men become tired very rapidly trying to keep up a high rate of fire when moving that much weight (and you can fit more 75mm rounds in the same volume).

 

Thanks for the reply.

If the 75mm was better then there was no need for that 88mm.

 

But the 88 carried a larger HE charge for use against soft targets, and having a larger mass would travel further while retaining a higher velocity... probably (possibly) made it a better penetrator at LONG range (especially as it was introduced before the 75 L/70 IIRC).

 

The 75L70 was a better AT weapon than the 88L56 even at longer ranges. German test results at 2000m put the 75L70 at 89mm and the 88L56 at 84mm. (88L71 was 132mm at 2000m)

HE effectiveness was almost certainly better for the 88, and barrel life of the 88L56 was probably superior as well.

 

The ammo for the 88mm L/56 was much the same size as that for the 75mm L/70. So in theory the Panther's gun could have been rebarrelled to fire the 88mm ammo, just as the British 6 pdr was rebarrelled to fire the 75mm. You would have lost a bit in AP performance (but it would still have been good enough: no-one complained that the Tiger 1 lacked hitting power) and gained usefully in HE effectiveness. Tanks tended to fire more HE than AP - it was much more useful against AT guns, buildings sheltering enemy troops etc.

I think that would have made for a more balanced tank. As it was, the Panther was really strongly biased towards being a tank destroyer.

The pic below (from the Ammunition Photo Gallery on my website) shows the 75mm L/70 (75x640R) next to the 88mm L/56 (88x571R) and the 88mm L/71 as used in the Tiger II (88x822R), so you can compare the sizes.



Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

 

Thank you Tony! It seems tanks are always evaluated on their AT performance. It's good to be reminded that they did have other functions than driving around shooting each other.

 

The Panther II was basically a redesigned Panther with a turret large enough to fit the 88mm L/71, which was vastly superior to both the Tiger and the Panther's gun in terms of armour penetration. However, the Panther II never went into production (and I'm sure someone will step up now to tell me the whole thing was a myth or a paper tank).

 

nope, it was not a paper tank,the project was given to MAN, 2 protos ordered but only one made, with a panther I turret delivered in 45 the only proto of the panther II was captured and send to the usa to test and evaluation, it is currently housed in fort knox, kt. ( perhaps to post sentry among the hoard of gold in it )

 

The Panther II was abandoned before suggestions to mount the 8,8 cm Kw K 43 L/71 on the Panther started. It would have been impossible to mount a 8,8 cm Kw K 43 L/71 on the Panther I and Panther II too, because the turret ring diameter was too small.

 

Yes... it was called the JagdPanther...

Kris

 

if i recall correctly the pather II used alot of the same parts as the King Tiger

 

BMG:
I believe you are correct. The Panther II was an attempt at [some level] of standardization of parts between Panther and TigerII-series.

Tim