Grant Gun TK#

geezer

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
142
Reaction score
4
Location
Canada
Country
llCanada
In the TK table one of the 75 caliber values is coloured green and is supposed to be used for the Grant gun.

What is this grant gun? I quickly browsed the chapter H notes for Americans and British but i cant find a reference to it. I feel like its probably in there but i just cant find it.
 

Michael R

Minor Hero
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
4,621
Reaction score
4,162
Location
La Belle Province
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
American vehicle note 7: the Lee tank has a bow mounted 75mm cannon.
British vehicle note 11: the Grant tank is similarly equipped.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
But beware that the lower TK applies to the Grant, not the similar Lee.

The early batches of Lee and all Grant chassis used the M2 75mm L/31 gun. However by the time the US began to deploy the Lee in action, the M2 gun was less common, having been replaced by the later M3 L/40 which also was fitted to all except a handful of 75mm Shermans. Even if a US Lee started with a M2, if it had to be replaced it would likely have been by a M3. The two guns were interchangeable. As the M3 was designed to conform to the M3's Gyro stabiliser and the Gyro to the M3, if a M2 was fitted it had a counterweight clamped to the muzzle end to restore balance and take the strain off the stabiliser.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
But beware that the lower TK applies to the Grant, not the similar Lee.

The early batches of Lee and all Grant chassis used the M2 75mm L/31 gun. However by the time the US began to deploy the Lee in action, the M2 gun was less common, having been replaced by the later M3 L/40 which also was fitted to all except a handful of 75mm Shermans. Even if a US Lee started with a M2, if it had to be replaced it would likely have been by a M3. The two guns were interchangeable. As the M3 was designed to conform to the M3's Gyro stabiliser and the Gyro to the M3, if a M2 was fitted it had a counterweight clamped to the muzzle end to restore balance and take the strain off the stabiliser.
Outstanding reply as for quite a while I hadn't made that differentiation.
 

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,532
Reaction score
1,437
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
The "Grant gun" TK has been on the TK chart since the original publication of ASL. There was no description anywhere of what that value was actually supposed to represent or when it should be used.

Of course, that wasn't a problem then as there was no counter equipped with that weapon. When Yanks was published, of course the US never used the "Grant" version of the M3 so again there seemed to be no reason to describe the value (even though, as Paul notes above, it should be applicable to early models of the "Lee").

The time to finally describe the mysterious TK value was, of course, when FKaC was published. Unfortunately, it appears that nobody remembered that it existed and so no description was provided. It's entirely possible that many ASL players have never even noticed that the entry exists on the TK chart -- and even if they have noticed it, they may not really understand when to apply it.

I would assume that the "correct" way to describe the entry is to add a new British MAVN, applicable to the Grant, Lee and (maybe) Sherman I (subject to various date restrictions). It might also be necessary to add it to the US Vehicle Note for the M3 Lee (I don't think it would be needed for any other US vehicles so need not be a MAVN). I can't recall exactly how the vehicle notes for the Russian Lend-Lease vehicles are organised so not sure if you'd need to add another MAVN for those, or if they would be covered by the British MAVN.

Whether MMP will ever actually issue such errata is of course an unresolved question.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
I would assume that the "correct" way to describe the entry is to add a new British MAVN, applicable to the Grant, Lee and (maybe) Sherman I (subject to various date restrictions).
I think the correct way to apply it is if the vehicle is marked "Grant", use it. Otherwise, don't.

JR
 

robh91

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
98
Reaction score
67
Location
Melbourne
Country
llAustralia
To further complicate the issue of Grant AP ammo there is this post (third one down) about the use of captured German ammo:
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
I did mention that a handful of M4 Shermans got the M2 gun. Definitely the T-6 prototype and a Sherman M4A1 named "Michael" that was the first shipped to Britain under LL. Michael had also a pair of fixed .30 MG in the lower centre hull, like those fitted to the M3 Lee/Grant series. So when I said handful I really meant that. Think of them more as pre-production trial vehicles, I very much doubt that any saw service. So no need for any modification of British/US/Soviet vehicle notes.

A clip of Michael, refitted with the later M3 gun:

As for US Lees, I have seen clips of them training in Northern Ireland and those clips had both the M2 and M3 armed Lees in the same unit. As only one regiment (2 x 3 company battalions) from US 1st Armoured used Lees in NA, photos of US Lees are scarce. Incidently the 1st Armoured had some of its M4 Shermans shipped to the British just prior to El Alamein and had to do with M3 Lees.

One of the few photos of Soviet Lees that I can quickly find appears to show 1 M2 armed and 1 M3 armed Lee, taken around the time of Kursk. From memory, others that I have seen show the M3 more often, though I could not swear on that.

So in the end due to the mixing of M2 and M3 guns, which used the exact same rounds, in the same units, it would not be possible to make an accurate but generalised rule. Like jrv, I would be inclined to treat all except "Grants" as having the higher TK.

As an aside the original SL and later ASL conversion U2 "Sweep For Bordj Toum Bridge" used reduced US TK. Partly for older ammo and I suspect some M2 armed Lees. The US 37mm M6 gun (37LL) as used in Stuarts and as AT M3 guns had particularly bad early ammo. The early M74 AP round got 36mm penetration whilst the later M51 APCBC round got 61mm! So with the early round a TK of 9 would be justified while the latter round well earned a TK of 11.
 
Last edited:

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
To further complicate the issue of Grant AP ammo there is this post (third one down) about the use of captured German ammo:
It was sort-of German ammo. A German projectile was fitted into an American cartridge case. As the post says, it was composite.

JR
 

Honosbinda

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
954
Reaction score
295
Location
Eastbourne Sussex UK
Country
ll
It's a shame that the rules don't call out the Grant Gun but it's logical enough that Grant tanks need to use this table for the 75 bow mount based on SL genealogy.

Given that these usually only show up in the Desert, that's where this got overlooked in development when chapter F was originally put out.

If and when MPP launches a retread of the Desert Module instead of new/reprinted starter kits for a change, maybe we'll get an official answer written in the updated chapter F rules, long overdue.
 

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,652
Reaction score
5,537
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
The early batches of Lee and all Grant chassis used the M2 75mm L/31 gun. However by the time the US began to deploy the Lee in action, the M2 gun was less common, having been replaced by the later M3 L/40 which also was fitted to all except a handful of 75mm Shermans. Even if a US Lee started with a M2, if it had to be replaced it would likely have been by a M3. The two guns were interchangeable. As the M3 was designed to conform to the M3's Gyro stabiliser and the Gyro to the M3, if a M2 was fitted it had a counterweight clamped to the muzzle end to restore balance and take the strain off the stabiliser.
Paul - you wouldn't have spent any time as an auto mechanic by any chance, would you? Cuz that's some prime explainin' right there. You had me reaching for my credit card by the end, there.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
Paul - you wouldn't have spent any time as an auto mechanic by any chance, would you? Cuz that's some prime explainin' right there. You had me reaching for my credit card by the end, there.
Thanks, but no, I was a programmer/analyst/system manager. Similar attention to detail and chains of causality help in both types of work. People person, NOT! I was able to do most of my bicycle repairs and tweaking. Even managed a little maintenance on my Morris Minor, but my next car, too much I didn't understand enough to risk. Sometimes knowing your limits and sticking to them is the optimal choice.

I do admit that as a child I was always opening and/or disassembling things to see how they worked. In addition I was an often annoying Who, Why, How, Where type of child.
 

FourDeuceMF

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
392
Reaction score
290
Location
Geneva, IL (Chicago)
Country
llUnited States
The time to finally describe the mysterious TK value was, of course, when FKaC was published. Unfortunately, it appears that nobody remembered that it existed and so no description was provided. It's entirely possible that many ASL players have never even noticed that the entry exists on the TK chart -- and even if they have noticed it, they may not really understand when to apply it.
Gee, I would have thought that AH's production of "West of Alamein", along with the British Chapter H notes for the first time, would have been the ideal time to describe this...hell, FKaC wasn't even a gleam in Perry's eye at that time!!!

Then again, we've gone about 35 years without any fist fights at ASL tournaments over the plethora of scenarios in which a Grant Gun is present, so I'd say it's a bit of a tempest in a tea pot...not that folks won't stew over this speck in the eye, though there are plenty of planks still extant, and much more impactful on a game.
 

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
17,426
Reaction score
3,364
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
I'm failing to see the need for any exposition on the matter. If you have a Grant tank then use the "Grant Gun" penetration. If you have an M3 or a Lee then use the standard one. Am I missing something here?
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
I'm failing to see the need for any exposition on the matter. If you have a Grant tank then use the "Grant Gun" penetration. If you have an M3 or a Lee then use the standard one. Am I missing something here?
Technically some of the Lee pattern M3s had the M2 75mm gun, perhaps with the early ammunition (M72 projectile). There is also a British "Grant II", but that seems to be a Lee really and just named "Grant" by the British to confuse wargamers. It's not clear whether the TK difference in ASL is due to the gun or the early ammunition, or perhaps both.

There were hardly any Shermans with the M2 75mm gun, and I don't think they ever had the early ammunition.

JR
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
The original M72 AP-T did better than the later M61/M61A1 APCBC-HE-T against Rolled Homogenous Armour but worse against Face Hardened Armour, from either the M2 or M3 gun. The only thing consistent was that the M3 had about a 1cm better penetration than the M2 which corresponds to a TK difference of 1. I just looked at the 0° at 500m figures which is the standard for ASL.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/75_mm_Gun_M2/M3/M6#Penetration_comparison

So the ammo is a bust for consistent performance difference while the gun length reason is fairly consistent.
 

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,532
Reaction score
1,437
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
Am I missing something here?
Only the entire point of the thread, apparently.

If you have a Grant tank then use the "Grant Gun" penetration.
Wait, what? Are you saying that Grant guns aren't armed with a normal 75mm gun? Where in the rules does it say that??? The vehicle notes don't mention it, at all, so it obviously can't be true. When I'm firing my Grants at your Pz IIIs in the desert, I'll be sure to use the regular 75mm penetration values, because -- and let me emphasise this just one more time -- there's no rule that says to do anything different.

If and when MPP launches a retread of the Desert Module instead of new/reprinted starter kits for a change, maybe we'll get an official answer written in the updated chapter F rules, long overdue.
Why on earth would you put a note about a specific vehicle/weapon in the rules for North African terrain? Lots of British vehicles only saw service in North Africa, may as well put all of them in Chapter F too, right?

it would not be possible to make an accurate but generalised rule
You've read the ASL rules, right? "Accurate but generalised" covers 95% of, well, everything, and especially Chapter H.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Where in the rules does it say that???
This is probably going to come as a great shock to you, so make sure you are sitting down before you look at the rest of this post.







Are you sitting down? Really? I don't want you to faint and hit your head.







Ok, the thing is, the charts are part of the rules. Where in the rules does it say that the Soviet 76LL has a TK# of 16 instead of 23? Or do you play the latter? The Soviet 76L is given as a EX in C7.31, but most of the other differences are just shown on the C7.31 chart.

I'm sorry I had to be the one to let you know.

JR
 
Last edited:

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,532
Reaction score
1,437
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
None of my guns are called "Grant" (they just have ID letters), so the chart notation must be referring to something else.

"Russian 76L" or whatever, obviously, is very specific and impossible to misunderstand.

Thanks for everyone who is determined to wilfully misunderstand the entire point of my post, though. Good job! We should rewrite more of ASL to have less specific information and more vague areas. Clarity is so over-rated.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
None of my guns are called "Grant" (they just have ID letters), so the chart notation must be referring to something else.
You are missing counters then. My British vehicle note 11 shows a counter labeled "Grant (a)". I have six of them from West of Alamein and six from For King and Country (unpunched to date). If you didn't get yours it may be a bit late to get them replaced from MMP, but you could try. If you did get them but lost them you may want to grab a copy of For King and Country quick. Depending on whether you are looking at a QRDC or the chapter C chart, the words "Grant Gun" are either marked with a dagger or colored green, which corresponds to a entry with the number 75 on the C7.31 AP To Kill Table. You can then look at British vehicle note 11, see that the Grant has two guns, but only one of them is a 75. That must be the one.

Now that you understand how the C7.31 AP To Kill Table works, as a service to the Australian ASL community you should begin each game you play with an explanation of this. I am sure all your opponents will appreciate your help because I'm sure they have been just as confused as you have been. You enlightenment will benefit all those poor benighted souls who for years have struggled with the meaning of the "Grant Gun." Just the grateful look in their eyes after you are done will repay you one-hundred-fold I'm sure, but you will certainly be revered as the Australian patron saint of ASL desert warfare.

"Russian 76L" or whatever, obviously, is very specific and impossible to misunderstand.
It just says "Russian." We will ignore that it should say "Soviet" and move on to saying that "Grant Gun" is a good deal more specific than "Russian."

JR
 
Top