Supertest: AMX M4 mle. 54

Tier: HT-10, France
HP:: 2 200
Engine: 1 200 hp
Mass: 80 t
Maximum load: 85 t
Power-to-weight: 15 hp / t
Max speed / Min speed: 40 / -15 km / h
Hull turning speed: 32 °/s
Turret turning speed: 33,4 °/s
Terrain resistance values: 1,247 / 1,342 / 2,205
View range: 390 m
Radio range: 782,1 m

Hull armor: 220 / 60 / 40 mm
Turret armor: 300 / 80 / 40 mm

Gun: 130 mm/45 Model 1935

Alpha Damage: 560 / 560 / 640
Penetration: 250 / 280 / 65 mm
Rounds per minute: 4,228
Damage per minute: 2 367,6
Reload time: 14,192 s
Accuracy at 100 m: 0,316
Aiming time: 2,11 s
Depression/Elevation: -8 / +15

Gun: 120 mm D. 1203 B

Alpha Damage: 400 / 400 / 515
Penetration: 264 / 325 / 65 mm
Rate of fire: 6,075 rounds/minute
Damage per minute: 2 430
Reload time: 9,877 s
Accuracy at 100 m: 0,288
Aiming time: 1,73 s
Depression/Elevation: -8 / +15

Crew: 5 people

Armor Schematics:

Guns & Ammo (130 mm):

Ammo (120 mm):

More pictures:

Advertisements

31 thoughts on “Supertest: AMX M4 mle. 54

      1. Spot on, it’s a 130mm/45 DP gun as seen on the Dunkerque battlecruiser and as main battery to a pair pf destroyers.

        Not particularily noteworthy guns, but it did have a (semi) armor piercing shell with the oddity (for the French) of having a small bursting charge, so it’s actually decent at piercing armor.

        An odd choice for a gun, seeing as the guns are twenty years older than this tank, and the last ships planned with the guns weren’t even finished by the time WWII started.

        It’s akin to seeing a British 114mm naval gun on a Conqueror.
        Sure it could have been made….but why would you do that?

        Liked by 2 people

        1. The whole tank seems suspicious. The AMX M4 project was dead around 1950, the AMX 50 succeeded it.

          What seems to me what this tank is, is one of the many late 40’s uparmored AMX M4 proposals with the mid-50’s TCB turret, and a random 1930’s battleship 130mm naval cannon

          Liked by 4 people

          1. I really don’t know why they decided to go for a naval gun, it’s baffling.

            But why they chose that specific gun makes sense, as it’s the only gun below 152mm caliber to feature AP shells.
            I don’t think anyone would have appreciated ticklking enemy tanks to death with 100mm HE.

            Overall, it’s a mix and match of random things.
            It looks good, but it makes you stand back and go “huh…”
            Kind of like the T-54 and it’s frankenstein-ish part assembly, with a 1947 hull and a mid 60’s engine.

            Like

    1. Uhh, the pen is way better. The rest is only marginally so, and it loses a ton of alpha for it. Both look viable, though I would say that the 130 looks way more fun, and honestly, probably more useful (560 alpha trades a hell of a lot better than 400), but we’ll have to see how it works in practice.

      Like

  1. I can’t wait for goldpen to be buffed …. this is borderline unplayable without 340 pen vs t8 and t9.

    I wish Wargaming would do their job right like they did with the new Matchmaker

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I’m definitely getting my hands on this. Not a big autoloader fan. It’s OK, but meh.
    For some reason it looks very naked in the front. Make it a little more attractive if possible.

    Like

  3. Pen seems anemic on then 130mm. It has same base pen as IS-7 but higher damage? Doesn’t make sense, if it had same pen as pz vii I would understand. I can see this gun changing before release, with either a alpha Nerf or pen buff.

    Like

  4. Damn, that boomstick it has… would definitely be going down this line, even though I have the AMX 50 B already. Been waiting for other French heavies to appear for way too long.

    Like

    1. WZ is much faster than this so no, also it has massive DPM advantage, has 50% lower profile and much better premium ammo. Also the side armor is better.

      Like

  5. Is it just me or playing this tank with the 130mm will make it an E100 kinda like tank except for the low gold pen? And the 120mm is the ultra snipy gun? Are we seeing versatility in playstyles? Or am I just dreaming

    Like

  6. FFS how am I the only one noticing that the armor profile will make this thing almost unplayable? Cant go hull down as the whole top of the turret is a weak pint. Those shoulder ~150 mm plates will be autopen for almost every tank that it meets even without angling. Big obvious weak points and a huge silhouette is not gong to make for a durable vehicle at all.

    Like

    1. Those “weak” hull shoulder with 150mm feature around 300mm effective armor on level ground if you don’t angle the tank, with 8° of gun depression they can go up to 340mm against AP so pretty much immune to 340mm pen HEAT. The turret “forehead” is 60mm so no overmatch here up to 180mm guns except on the very top flat part of the turret but considering the tank height I dont think any round can hit there on normal fighting conditions. The true weak spot however are the obvious cupolas on flat ground but you can probably hide most of it when you use your gun depression.
      Overall I don’t see it as durable as superheavies but pretty durable if engaged only straight from the front.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s