The Kwk36 88mm of the TIger penetrates (at 90°) 138mm with AP and 179mm with APCR. Shot Mk.3 has 239mm 90°, 233mm 60° and 97mm 30°īoth shells have an added damaging effect, meaning they do both spalling and fragmentation damage upon penetrating the target, causing critical damage and crew deaths in an estimated 95% of cases, which more often than no leads to 1 shot kills or critically incapacitated targets.Ĭomparatively, the Kwk42 75mm of the Panther penetrates (at 90°) 149mm with AP and 169mm with APCR. Comparatively, this is 0.2s slower than the Panthers and Tiger, 3.7s faster than the T25 and 1.5s faster than the T-44.įor the penetration values of the ammo, i am going to use parameters at 1000m. Like the Tiger II (H), IS2 1944, M26 and T32.īoth the Caernarvon and Centurion Mk.3 use the 84mm 20pdr OQM Mk1.īoth fire Shot Mk.1 (APCBC) and Shot Mk.3 (SABOT) ammunition. The conclusion and analysis indicates that the Centurion Mk.3 thus has disproportionately more armor across the board.Įven considering it's weak spots, which are all well protected, it's armor ratings are more akin to vehicles of BR 6.7. The T-44 has 120mm on the mantlet, 130mm on the face section and 443mm of effective armor on the cheeks, due to angling. The T25 has 90mm on the mantlet, 130 on the face plate and a rolling off of 120-145mm on the cheeks. But since the aim indicator always goes by the lowest value, we'll consider the weakpoints. The Tiger has a composition of plates on its mantlet. The G variant has an added 20mm on the chin of it's mantlet, bringing its armor to 120mm. The Panther has 100mm on both frontal turret plate and mantlet. The Centurion Mk.3 turret armor is (due to angling and layering) 150mm on the top, 190mm on the mantlet and 160mm on the cheeks. The latter is appropriately tiered at BR 6.7. That's 30mm more than the Panther, 50mm more than the Tiger, 45mm more than the T25 and 25mm less than the T44. While it's nose and hull armor can be comparatively similar to tanks like the Panther, Tiger, T25 and T-44, the fact that it is a lot more heavily angled (58°), bringing its effective armor to 153mm. But we'll discuss that in the mobility section. The side and rear armor is not important, since it's a given fact that everything can be killed by out-flanking. I am going to talk about the face-frontal armor values, since most confrontations in matches happen head on. I will be focusing on comparisons with those, but if you think you have a valid argument including other tanks, please do add. This means the Panther (D, A, G), Tiger (H, E), T25, T-44. Since those are the tanks these two are most likely to encounter. I can't speak for RB, so someone please supplement me on that.Īs a comparison, i will be using tanks of a BR from 6.0 to 6.7. I am basing my judgement on experience with these tanks in AB. Please, do join in with your own findings. I am going to try to reason as constructively and factually as possible, why these two tanks must be moved to BR 6.7 or 7.0.

Russian centurion armor