Alanmccoubrey wrote:Clive, part of it was the wish to use their own Pak 40 ammunition I guess and also the poor anti-tank profile of the original carriage being so high.
The 7.5.cm Pak 97/38 did not fire the Pak 40 ammunition. It fired French HE shells, Polish AP shells and Greman designed HEAT shells with reissued French cartiridges. (Hogg 1975)
Captured Soviet F22 and F22 USV 76.2mm guns had their chambers modified so they could fire Pak40 ammunition. (Hogg 1975)
Manuferey wrote:We can add the need to tow the guns with trucks at higher speed that could have been done with the original wooden-spoked wheels of the 75 mm Mle 1897.
Didn't both the French and the Poles modify the Mle 97 for motor towing?
The main reason for the conversion was to give the PanzerJager units a more powerful anti tank gun than the 3.7cm Pak and the combination of the Pak38 carriage and the Mle 97 barrel was a quick solution. I was being light hearted when I suggested they need not modify the Mle 97 if they were going to used the Pak 97/38 as field artillery. All those photos show is that anti tank guns from all armies could be used in a secondary role as field guns if not required for their primary role.