The same Tankograd booklet also describes the M47 and that was certainly described as obsolete from the very beginning, albeit with a 90% technical reliability. I have also read - somewhere - that early Bundeswehr crews (ie with WW2 service) were on occasion scornful of the M47 comparing it unfavourably with the Panther especially regarding the armament, but then the Panther could not achieve a comparable reliability.

As a former gunner and TC of Bundeswehr M41s in an armored recce battalion, I fondly remember these tanks. True, the air-cooled engine was rather loud for reconnaissance, but the ridiculous little Spz 11 "Hotchkiss" were a lot louder. And man, was the M41 fast! Whenever we could afford the gasoline to return from gunnery ranges on the road instead of by railroad, we used to have races against trucks on the Autobahn - downhill, they could pass us, but the next grade would bring us back, at 80 kph/50 mph. Irresponsible, as I see it now, but fun.
One point that may have made these tanks unpopular with the brass were the rubber track pads: these were bolted on, and the bolts had a fatal tendency to rattle loose. Can you imagine the energy of a 15-pound track pad that has been accelerated from zero to 70 or more mph and then flies off? In one instance, the passenger in a VW bus had been killled that way by an M42 track pad.
Peter

Quoted Text

---

The same Tankograd booklet also describes the M47 and that was certainly described as obsolete from the very beginning, albeit with a 90% technical reliability. I have also read - somewhere - that early Bundeswehr crews (ie with WW2 service) were on occasion scornful of the M47 comparing it unfavourably with the Panther especially regarding the armament, but then the Panther could not achieve a comparable reliability.

---

I'm curious about how they would see the 90mm as being inferior to the Panther's armament? I looked at a few figures & in terms of AP performance the 75mm L/70 was superior at under 500m firing APCBC rounds, but the 90mm used in WWII at least (one can assume post-war the performance might be even better) was superior in performance at over 500m firing APCBC as well as APCR rounds. The WWII 90mm at least was said to be very accurate as well.

Damon.

Hi Peter
"One point that may have made these tanks unpopular with the brass were the rubber track pads: these were bolted on, and the bolts had a fatal tendency to rattle loose. Can you imagine the energy of a 15-pound track pad that has been accelerated from zero to 70 or more mph and then flies off? In one instance, the passenger in a VW bus had been killled that way by an M42 track pad."

Is that 15 pounds accurate or a typo - seems excessive for just a track pad, though probably right for a track link?

Mal

M41s did not have a 90mm. They used a 76mm, M32A1, basically a modernized version of the one in the 76 Shermans.

Quoted Text

---

M41s did not have a 90mm. They used a 76mm, M32A1, basically a modernized version of the one in the 76 Shermans.

---

My post was in response to Brian Stoddard's post, which specifically mentioned the M47. But even if we confine ourselves to the M41, while its hard to find really good data on AP performance, nonetheless some of the data I was able to find suggests that post-war ammo outperformed the Panther's gun in penetration performance...

Damon.