SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Stug IV vs. M-36?

595 views
6 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 12, 2004 11:55 AM
Thanks for you help everyone, hopefully I can get some more work done this weekend. Thanks again. Big Smile [:D]
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Rowland Heights, California
Posted by Duke Maddog on Tuesday, November 9, 2004 5:59 AM
Looking forward to seeing that Dio Dean.

Also: Happy B-Day [bday]

I hope my wife someday decides to treat me the same as your girlfriend does. Hope it was a good day; with two new models, it should've been! Big Smile [:D]Thumbs Up [tup]Thumbs Up [tup]
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, November 9, 2004 1:11 AM
And not because the size of the 90mm the reason is because ussually they atack german tanks on the sides because they where afraid of the technology and experience of the german tankers to afront them, so they atack on the sides and the internal explosion of the german ammo makes the total destruction of the tank.

Gabriel salazar
  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Rain USA, Vancouver WA
Posted by tigerman on Monday, November 8, 2004 10:44 PM
The Stug's 80mm of armor would have been little help if hit by the Jackson's 90mm.

   http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/wing_nut_5o/PANZERJAGERGB.jpg

 Eric 

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Philippines
Posted by Dwight Ta-ala on Monday, November 8, 2004 10:24 PM
The 776th Tank Destroyer Battalion Comabt History has this:

StuG III


Caption:
A Sturmgeschütz III Assault Gun after a catastrophic kill by a 776th TD Battalion Slugger, January 1945.

Jadgtiger:


Caption:
Captain Jack Rothschild, 776th TD Battalion, examines the wreckage of the first Hunting Tiger ever destroyed on the Western Front, killed by the crew led by Lieutenant John C. Britz. Near Rimling, January 1945.

You can also read some specs on the M-36 here:
http://www.100thww2.org/support/776m36.html

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, November 8, 2004 10:16 PM
AFAIK, the 90mm on the Jackson would most likely have little trouble on the frontal tarmor of a Stug IV, except at the most oblique of angles. I've read some accounts (granted they are anecdotal) that the "Slugger" as some units seemed to have nicked' the Jackson could even take on a Panther from the front at range.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Stug IV vs. M-36?
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, November 8, 2004 9:46 PM
Hello everyone, it's been a while. I haven't had much time to work on models since school started, 4 honors classes and Latin II really take any free time away. But I've gotten lucky and there seems to be a break in the weather, so, as Eisenhower said, "Let's go" Wink [;)]. My 16th B-Day was October 25th, (I got 2 models, compliments of my very wonderful girlfriend). Also, I have two 4 day weekends coming up, so I decided to drag out my old M-36 and put it in a dio with my new Stug IV.

Now for the question. Would a shell from the 90mm cannon of the M36 be able to penitrate the frontal armor of a Stug IV? If no, what would a unsuccessful shot look like on the armor? What effect would it have? I know that an American tank crew would have initially gone with an AP round, and if that didn't work, they would have gone with an HE round. The point of the HE round (or so I read in Another River, Another Town) was to basically hit the enemy tank so hard that it would make everything fall apart, like hitting a tin can with a sludge hammer. What would the effects of both of these shells look like (successful and unsuccessful)? Any pics would be greatly appriciated.

Thanks for all the help
Dean
JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.