First let's dive into the basic knowledge of long rod penetrators. In general, different rounds are against different types of composite armor, so they have varying statistics, and RHA measurement is only used for plain steel armor so results may vary.
Also the fact that these stats doesn't mean much on reality because in real life tanks fight infantry most of the times which the larger Russian guns excel at, packed with more explosive
The longer the rod is, the better it penetrates (in general).
Russian guns have always been larger than their western counterpart for the time being. For example, we can dig into a simple history of tank guns mounted on medium tanks/MBT briefly. The D-10T mounted on the T-54, against the 90mm mounted on the Pattons, the 115mm U-5TS mounted on the T-62 against the generally used 105mm L7, the 125mm 2A46 mounted on the T-80 against the 120mm L/44 mounted in NATO tanks, and finally, the 152mm testbeds on Armata and other 80s projects against 130/140mm guns on NATO tanks.
While impressive on paper and definitely powerful, Russian tank guns have a short upcoming. Obsolescence of APFSDS rounds and development limitations. For example, the 3BM36 round was the last round developed for the 115mm gun, which is still considerably inferior to latest NATO types for 105mm guns like the M900.
Now, onto modern comparisons and speculations.
The modern M256 tank gun from the US, fires at a 790MPa
The Korean CN08 120mm L/55 fires at 690MPa
The french CN120-26 L/52 fires at 670MPa
The German L/44 is said to have 710MPa pressure
The 2A46M5 has about 608 MPa of chamber pressure
I have no data on the Chinese 125mm gun
But what truly matters is the rounds that they fire.
As seen from above, western style (including japanese/korean) rounds are considerably longer, and thus can penetrate more armor. The best rounds for Chinese/Russian guns are pretty much capped at 680-750mm of penetration while it is not far fetched to believe longer rounds can exceed this figure.
The main reason for this is because Russian/Chinese tanks uses an autoloader system that limits the development of longer rounds. It just won't fit into the carousel.
Also the fact that these stats doesn't mean much on reality because in real life tanks fight infantry most of the times which the larger Russian guns excel at, packed with more explosive
The longer the rod is, the better it penetrates (in general).
Russian guns have always been larger than their western counterpart for the time being. For example, we can dig into a simple history of tank guns mounted on medium tanks/MBT briefly. The D-10T mounted on the T-54, against the 90mm mounted on the Pattons, the 115mm U-5TS mounted on the T-62 against the generally used 105mm L7, the 125mm 2A46 mounted on the T-80 against the 120mm L/44 mounted in NATO tanks, and finally, the 152mm testbeds on Armata and other 80s projects against 130/140mm guns on NATO tanks.
While impressive on paper and definitely powerful, Russian tank guns have a short upcoming. Obsolescence of APFSDS rounds and development limitations. For example, the 3BM36 round was the last round developed for the 115mm gun, which is still considerably inferior to latest NATO types for 105mm guns like the M900.
Now, onto modern comparisons and speculations.
The modern M256 tank gun from the US, fires at a 790MPa
The Korean CN08 120mm L/55 fires at 690MPa
The french CN120-26 L/52 fires at 670MPa
The German L/44 is said to have 710MPa pressure
The 2A46M5 has about 608 MPa of chamber pressure
I have no data on the Chinese 125mm gun
But what truly matters is the rounds that they fire.
As seen from above, western style (including japanese/korean) rounds are considerably longer, and thus can penetrate more armor. The best rounds for Chinese/Russian guns are pretty much capped at 680-750mm of penetration while it is not far fetched to believe longer rounds can exceed this figure.
The main reason for this is because Russian/Chinese tanks uses an autoloader system that limits the development of longer rounds. It just won't fit into the carousel.
Last edited:
