75mm Kwk 40 and Kwk 42

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Zhaun
Member
Posts: 5
Joined: 16 Apr 2020 07:16
Location: Manila

75mm Kwk 40 and Kwk 42

Post by Zhaun » 16 Apr 2020 07:26

Wikipedia shows that Kwk 42 L/70 is cheaper than KwK 40 L/48

L/70: 12000 reichsmarks
L/48: 13500 reichsmarks

Why is that?

Was KwK L70 overpowered for its time?

I was thinking about the implications if the Panther was really intended to replace the Panzer IV (because i heard it wasn't, correct me if i'm wrong) and equipped with L/48 gun just like the Panzer IV. I've read that L/48 is already enough for most of the Allied tanks. I thought that this would practically save weight for the Panther but saw that L/48 is more expensive than L/70.

It made me scratch my head in disbelief. What are your thoughts?

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 2495
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 17:14
Location: London

Re: 75mm Kwk 40 and Kwk 42

Post by Sheldrake » 16 Apr 2020 08:10

Zhaun wrote:
16 Apr 2020 07:26
Wikipedia shows that Kwk 42 L/70 is cheaper than KwK 40 L/48

L/70: 12000 reichsmarks
L/48: 13500 reichsmarks

Why is that?

Was KwK L70 overpowered for its time?

I was thinking about the implications if the Panther was really intended to replace the Panzer IV (because i heard it wasn't, correct me if i'm wrong) and equipped with L/48 gun just like the Panzer IV. I've read that L/48 is already enough for most of the Allied tanks. I thought that this would practically save weight for the Panther but saw that L/48 is more expensive than L/70.

It made me scratch my head in disbelief. What are your thoughts?
1. Tank and anti tank gun development involves some crystal ball gazing about the enemy's intentions and development programme. It was reasonable to plan for what the enemy might build. The Germans would not want to repeat the problems of 1941 when Red Armour could not be penetrated by tank and anti-tank guns. The L70 was comparable to the 17 pounder and US 76mm guns. The Germans might well have needed the L70 against the JS3 allies might have also introduced some of the heavy tanks they ptototyped.

2. Costs can be illusory as they reflect some arbitrary decisions by government and its suppliers. Even more so in a corrupt one party state. Numbers like RM12,000 and RM13,500 look arbitary. The unit cost for the Pak 40 was RM12,000, so the cost of the L/48 may have been derived by taking the cost of a pak 40 and adding the cost of fitting it to a tank. or it may not. However, as the war progressed the Germans were under pressure to improve production efficiency and it may reflect some improvements. E.g. reduced labour costs through extensive use of slaves.

User avatar
Contender
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: 11 Jan 2008 14:57
Location: Pa

Re: 75mm Kwk 40 and Kwk 42

Post by Contender » 16 Apr 2020 10:28

Sheldrake wrote:
16 Apr 2020 08:10
The L70 was comparable to the 17 pounder and US 76mm guns.
The US 76/3 inch weapons were equivalent to the KwK 40/Stuk 40 weapons not the Kwk 42. :D

critical mass
Member
Posts: 602
Joined: 13 Jun 2017 14:53
Location: central Europe

Re: 75mm Kwk 40 and Kwk 42

Post by critical mass » 16 Apr 2020 12:08

only in perforation. In accuracy, both the l/70 and U.S. 76mm were in a class of their own.
The 3“ and 76mm also had the better subcalibre round (HVAP im us parlance).

Zhaun
Member
Posts: 5
Joined: 16 Apr 2020 07:16
Location: Manila

Re: 75mm Kwk 40 and Kwk 42

Post by Zhaun » 18 Apr 2020 00:00

What if they went for the Daimler-Benz design with a more forward turret? Do you think the L/70 would have hindered it for being nose heavy and extremely long?

Would it be enough if only the tiger tank are used to deal with Allied heavy tank?

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”