Thursday 28 January 2016

SU-76I in Combat

Interestingly enough, the SU-76I, designed as a stopgap measure during the most difficult time for Soviet tank production, continued fighting until at least 1944. The 7th Mechanized Corps lists 13 "SU-76 on T-3 chassis" (compared to only 11 SU-76 on T-70 chassis) among its vehicles (CAMD RF 3436-1-57). However, the comments on its performance weren't exactly great:

"By the start of the operation, all vehicles were ready for battle and moved out to initial positions, except SU-76 SPGs on the T-3 chassis, which did not reach the battlefield and got stuck on insignificant inclines.
The battle completely confirmed the low battlefield value of the SU-76 on the T-3 chassis: bad maneuverability, low off-road performance."

A rare photo of a SU-76I in the wild.

Via altyn73.


  1. That's weird. Never heard reports about Pz III or StuG III having bad offroad capabilities. Was the weight of the superstructure so big that it crippled the vehicle, or just the driver's skill so low?

    1. More interesting is statement "bad maneuverability" when stug III and this thing had same weight. Off road performance was almost certainly compared to T34 and its SPGs. It lags in power to weight ratio, T34 crosses higher vertical level, better wading deph. While stug, Pz III or all german tanks have better tracks. But then you can also compare ISU and Stug. IS have better ground clearence, better tracks, better transmision than T34 and can cross higher verical level 0,9-10 in compare 0,7-0,8 m.

    2. Eh. StuGs were largely the same thing as Pz III & IV when it came to tracks right? You know - the ones the T-34s with their wider tracks almost literally ran rings around in the winter snow?