Talk:75 mm gun M2–M6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Split[edit]

AFAIK, the line of 75 mm howitzers and the line of 75 mm tank guns have nothing in common except the caliber. Perhaps we should split the article ? Bukvoed 15:40, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

M4[edit]

going to add the M4 if thats ok. Brian in denver (talk) 23:38, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 75 mm Gun M2/M3/M6. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:20, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect and unnecessary information[edit]

The paragraph "By July 1944, complaints started to pour in... the 76 mm guns never completely replaced the older models." contains information that is most of all wrong, but also beyond the scope of this article (a similar piece of text is already present on the M4 Sherman article). I will therefore completely remove the paragraph. My main source in this is "Armored Champion: Top Tanks Of World War II" by Steven Zaloga (chapter 6, page 160 onwards) which states that combat experience in Italy with the 75mm M3 (as mounted in the Sherman) did not call for better anti-tank performance, as there was little tank-vs-tank combat. This continued into the first two months of fighting in Normandy, there were not many German AFV's fielded in the American sector in June, and no Panther or Tiger tanks at all.

--Huzaar NL (talk) 16:41, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So because you dispute July, you are removing the entire paragraph?
What date would you regard as acceptable for seeing, "the beginning of tank on US tank combat in Normandy"? In such combat, are you claiming that the 75mm was adequate? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Again taking from Armored Champion: "The first large-scale tank-versus-tank fighting by the U.S. Army in France occurred in September 1944 in Lorraine."
New panzer brigades were diverted from the Ostfront to Normandy to aid in counterattacking U.S. forces at Lorraine. Peak strength for the Germans was 616 AFV's, including tanks (194 Pz.IV's, 201 Panthers) and some 170 tank destroyers.
After Allied victory on October 1st there were 341 complete losses and only 127 left operational (of which there were 26 Panthers).
Mind that most encounters up to this point were infantry vs. infantry with armoured support on the Allied side.
Furthermore, how could there be complaints about anti-tank performance in June if major tank-on-tank combat didn't appear until October?
EDIT: Do I need to add that the paragraph in question is a piece without citation written up in April 2010?
Huzaar NL (talk) 17:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Mind that most encounters up to this point were infantry vs. infantry with armoured support on the Allied side." - not around Caen they weren't. In Montgomery's sector there were 7 Panzer Divisions. These divisions included numbers of Panthers, Tiger I's, and Tiger II's. Bradley's sector faced half a panzer division initially, rising to one and a half later, while Montgomery's forces around Caen never faced fewer than five panzer divisions. By 1944 every British Troop of tanks had one Sherman Firefly to provide added firepower to the other vehicles of the Troop.

Garbage article[edit]

Who even wrote this??

"Barrel length: 31 caliber" (wtf?)

This whole article needs to be reviewed, it's full of incorrect information and absolute garbage; possibly the worst article on all of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.103.141.163 (talk) 04:14, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOFIXIT. I think 31 calibres means the length is 31 times the diameter. Here is a book with another 75 mm gun of that length. If you think the numbers are wrong, find an alternative, or place a citation needed tag. Dicklyon (talk) 02:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 January 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to 75mm gun M2–M6. No opposition, and the alt sounds better.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:39, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


75 mm Gun M2/M3/M6 → 75 mm gun M2/M3/M6 – Simple case fix. No proper name here, per sources. Alternatively, a better name than this would be good. Dicklyon (talk) 04:26, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alt name could be 75 mm gun M2–M6 since the M4 and M5 are also mentioned and slashes are generally not preferred in titles. Dicklyon (talk) 02:05, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:75_mm_gun_M2–M6&oldid=1197091404"