Re: M26 Pershing
 

Junkers Jumo 207 is a lightweight 6 cylinder diesel engine that was rated at 1000hp for takeoff. The Junkers Jumo 208 was rated at 1500hp for takeoff.

The Junkers Jumo 207B was the engines used in the Ju-86p super high altitude photo recon plane. The Brits had to develop a special version of the Mosquito just to get up to altitude to catch it.

With the Junkers Jumo 207B this would have given the Germans a 700 hp range diesel engine.

With the Junkers Jumo 208 the Germans could have had a 900-1000hp range engine.

Can you imagine a Panther or Tiger II with a 900hp or 1000hp engine?

And as for aero engines in tanks?

Continental R975 in the Sherman was a radial aircraft engine
Rolls Royce Meteor in the Cromwell was a tank version of the Merlin.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

A tiger with 1000 hp would be a piece of shit if it were a petrol engine. Remeber a gas engine only get a 1:10 air combustion ratio while a diesel gets 1:20 and air combustion is needed for torque and torque is needed to pull something with heavy resistance. Petrol engines burn at very high heats and heat the pistons up like a microwavable pizza causing a horrible explosion in the engine. They also burn quickly so they run n out of fuel quicker. Diesels do the opposite burn slow and give long range. and aero engines need to be greatly moddified for use in a tank.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

spammer :PPPP

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Im not sure what your trying to say here.

Gasoline engines can run from a 7.5: CR to a max of about 14:1CR. For anything over 10:1CR you will need to run 92 octane fuel or better to prevent detonation. And you can back off the cam timing if it does start to detonate. For instance I have a Ford 5.0L V-8 rated at 225hp. If I increase compression ratio from 9.0:1 to 10:1 I only gain roughly 10hp and about 12 ft. lbs. of torque. If I install a more radical cam I can pick up on average of 15 hp and 15-20 ft. lbs. of torque. If I put on a better flowing cylinder head I can gain 35hp and 20-30ft. lbs. of torque.

The engine is a complete package. The balance of all the components is what makes good power. And yes it does produce more heat. To combat that I run a cooler thermostat and/or a bigger radiator. If thats not enough I can mount a fan on radiator to incrase the airflow through the radiator. If thats not enough I can mount a radiator for the oil and cool it as well.

A properly built engine will not overheat, will not snap crankshafts, will not blow head gaskets, and will not throw rods out of the side of the block. The early Maybach V12 in the Tigers and Panthers was a tempermental engine. When the HL-210 P45 came out it was considered to be tempermental and trouble prone and engine failures were not uncommon. But the design was tweaked and when the HL230P45 was released in the Tiger I and the HL230P30 in the Panther it was a good motor. Main problem was rushed design.

The Junkers Jumo 207 was a sound design and the only successful diesel aircraft engine. It had been around since about 1939 so there was plenty of time to work the bugs out. It was considered very fuel effecient and reliable and was installed in the Dornier flying boats flying the transatlantic routes before the war. The Junkers Jumo 208 was an enlarged version of the 207 that made almost 50% more power. With most aero engines into tank making between 60% and 75% of what they made in the aircraft you can figure that a 207 motor would have made 600-700hp and a 208 would have made about 900-1000hp. So you would have had the same or better power to weight ratio and the benefit of diesel fuelled vehicle not bursting into flames.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

To prevent an explosion just use a diesel. Who gives a shit about hp in a tank it is useless without torque. Petrol engines rpm goes through the roof so damn easy while a diesel can have half the rpm and be going faster. Hp is usefull in the air because there is no resistance and you need rpm to go fast, but on the ground in a tiger you have 58 tons of resistance. People who think hp is usefull in a tank are extremly misinformed. and btw a diesel doesnt have a timing system.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Couldn't aircraft be used as a counterpart? Wasn't that what mainly took out the German heavy tanks anywaY?

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Hp and torque go hand in hand. For example a Rolls Royce Griffon in a Spitfire made 2,250hp at take off and 4,700 ft.lbs of torque. Most petrol engines make as much torque as hp but it is more common fo the torque to be a good deal higher than the horsepower. The Meteor tank engine, which was based off of the Merlin was rated at 650hp for 1,650cid. Torque would be on the order of 2,000ft.lbs. The Maybach HL230P45 was rated at 700hp and 1400cid(23.10L). I would expect that motor to put out close to 2,000ft.lbs of torque.

And as you mentioned before a Diesel works better under load than a petrol engine so I would expect the Diesel to make even more torque at the same horsepower rating as the German Maybach or the British Meteor.

And it looks like the Panther F or Panther II would have gotten a Maybach HL 234 P45 that used a gear driven supercharger to achieve 1,000hp. Being supercharged I would expect that motor to make close to 2800ft.lbs. of torque.

And aircraft engines were usually operated at 3,000rpm or less. Higher than than and you overspeed the propellor and over 4,000rpm the props can fly off if not careful. Rpms on gasoline engines are limited by a govenor.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Point is Tiger nedds a damn diesel engine to properly operate.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Agreed :nodding:

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Actually it was artillery AND aircraft. But I wouldn't let that stop the dev team from creating a Jumbo, M4 (76), and an M26.

And speaking of armor that needs to be modeled:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m24chaffee.jpg

M24 light tank w/ 75mm main gun. In the ETO from late '44 on.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Ah sweetness, the Chaffee is one of my favorites. In many way for itsweight I almost consider it better than the Sherman.

It fires the same ammo as the Sherman, it has a torsion bar suspension, and the sloped armor gives it good protection for its weight.

The funny thing is the M24 only weighs about 2 tons less than the PzIVF-G

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Thats an arguable statement.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Yeah...such a sweet tank...would be lovely in FH. Move out quickly, hit hard (relatively), and have decent armor (for a "light" tank). Better than the M3/M5. Gawd. Nice counterpart to the Puma actually...

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Hey wait...... The Russians get that on Kursk don't they?
I could, and most likely will be wrong.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Nope No M-24's for Ivan.

The M-24 didnt enter service with the US Army til end of 1944. It was given in lend lease to other Armies but most were too late to see service in other armies.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

No, they have Matilda II or something. I forget by now.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

All I know is, it's big, green, has a ugly skin on it and it looks like the tank mentioned earlier

Re: M26 Pershing
 

The big slow green thing on Kursk that the Russians get is a Matilda II.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Wow, I never noticed how thin the tracks on the m-24 were! hate to use one of those in the famous russian mud!

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Actually...it's all relative to the ground pressure.

Ground pressure on the T-34/85 is 12.35 psi (very similar to the Pershing and Tiger btw). The T-34/76 is 10 psi. The Panzer IV was whopping 12.8 (the Panther too). The Panzer II was 11.3 psi. The M-24's is like 11.01 psi. Not bad at all actually. The T-34 is obviously designed with that in mind.

Pretty good for a "light" tank.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

That seems high for the Panther. It has wide battletracks like the Tiger I and weighs 10 tons less. The more surface area per ton should mean less ground pressure.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

While that's essentially true, the wider tracks allowed better turning in mud and snow, and a allowed the tank to float better on the wet ground. While the ground pressure might be the same or even less on thin tracked tanks, the wider tracked ones (that had a slightly higher ground pressure) usually had the edge over them.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

All the information I have seen for the Panther puts the ground pressure between 12.5 and 13 psi. I'm not saying that's the number, but that's what I keep seeing. And I am open to other stuff.

And ground pressure's tricky...but track thickness is inherent in the psi number, after all it's just a question of surface area/weight. Wider tracks = lower ground pressure. Now, this doesn't take into account track type or any benefits from a certain track arrangement, or suspension (usually "improved" suspensions allow wider tracks and lower ground pressure...Easy 8 Shermans were about 11.0 psi but M4A1/A3's were around 13 and the Jumbo was 14.3), but ideally track thickness is inversely proportional to ground pressure...and a number representative or relative mobility.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Any ideas what those track attachments are called that were designed to help in movement in snow and mud?

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I know exactly what you're talking about. . . but for some reason can't find the correct spelling. They were something along the lines of "shruchen" or I might not even be close.

They were small plates bolted onto the tracks of Panzer III's and IV's that stuck out over the edges and few inches to make the treads wider.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

No clue...I look forward to reading about it though.

The T-80 track for the M4A3E8 (HVSS) was wider than the ones used on previous Shermans and provided better mobility...but that's about as much as I know about specific track stuff.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

you taking about the right thing but using the wrong word i think.
schurzen is the word for the added armor plates used on late model panzer IIIs and the Panzer IV H.
"Panzer IVs serving in Russia, were equipped with wider "winter tracks" (Winterketten) and since the Spring of 1944, with even wider "eastern tracks" (Ostketten)."
I think this is what u are talking about or at least this is all i could seem to find but u are talking about track attachments and these are new tracks

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Germans IIRC called them Ostketten

Americans called them grousers, or depending on the stype duckbills.

The problem was for US and Germans was that they had a tendancy to snap off if you caught them on something, like ran over a rock or curb.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Yep, thats what I remember reading. They had to to take them off when going across bridges made for the tanks then put them back on once they were across, not the easiest task.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

yep, the problem with the germans Ostketten was, if they wre attached it made the berth of the tank to wide for standard german military bridges, thus meaning the wehrmacht had to unbolt and bolt on the tracks of 200+ tanks just to get across one bridge

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Boy you figure that, with all their ingenuity during the war, they'd have figured out to just make the damn bridges wider. :)

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Designing(not a big deal), constructing, and then reequipping every motorized division with these new bridges might be a while.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Something posted in another forum:
The "Super Pershing" a re-worked T26E1 with the T15E1 90mm gun installed and re-designated T26E4 , pilot number 1, registration number 30103292 never fired a shot in anger, the war ended before it saw action, the vehicle was later found rusting away in a vehicle "bone yard" outside Kassel Germany in June 1945. This tank was the victim of several screw-ups, one the was it was shipped with the wrong sight, that and the army mis-dierected its ammunition to the wrong unit, a Tank Destroyer unit that wanted to know why the new 90mm shells were 12 " to long for their new test T8 90mm guns!

Re: M26 Pershing
 

look at the last post date for this thread Avil. CHRIST!

at least you used the search, for what i have no idea

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Around 50% of the panthers were found to have severly flawed armor, especially the Glacis.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Actualy I didn't look at the dates, I found a link to this thread in another forum. LOL

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Heck, you dont really need a tank destroyer for the tiger, You just gotta be clever. I remember a time on valirisk that i took out a tiger with the bt7 :p, I just hid in some rubble and kept shooting the tigers behind, and he couldent find me, 12 shots later the tiger died :D.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

You probably had some help from a sniping T-34-85. Technically the BT-7 should not be able to even penetrate the back or sides or front of a Tiger.

The TOP is another story though.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Did anyone note the age of this thread?
B4 new posts, last was Jan 14!

Re: M26 Pershing
 

If you post a new subject you get flamed for not using the search. If you searcha nd post you get flamed for necroposting.

Lots of people keep telling people to use the search before they post and he did. Its a necropost but I cant really fault him for it.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

i dont mind when people resurrect an old thread for something useful but his post was nothing more then info about a finding a super pershing in a junkyard and some tank destroyer unit getting the wrong ammo 65 years ago at basically the war's end.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

But it was info I dont know and I was glad to hear it, I had wondered what happen to the Super Pershings.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

ok for digging it up after such a long time:

Here is my latest Render of the Pershing.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

looks good

Re: M26 Pershing
 

holy crap, is rad still the one thats planned to skin it? because your KT mdoel had even less detail then this and that turned out AMAZING.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Thats a sweet model AceS im quite impressed. Id like to know the polycount, and if you could PM me a wireframe of it. id like to see the poly flow work you did on the turret!

Re: M26 Pershing
 

omg, i want now! its sooooo sexy!

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Very nice indeed.

With the level of quality I am seeing lately with the Tiger II ausf B, Jagdtiger, and Sherman Firefly and Jumbo I cant wait to see what the Pershing will look like.

Too bad it didnt see much action.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

This is the Pershing model for FH:
http://fhnation.ngz-network.de/board...entid=150&sid=

Re: M26 Pershing
 

and?