SU-76M Assault Gun - Second MOST PRODUCED Soviet Armoured Vehicle of WWII

AusArmour Assistant Manager, Jason Belgrave, gives us a tour of the Second MOST PRODUCED Soviet Armoured Vehicle of WWII: The Soviet SU-76M Assault Gun.
Subscribe to our channel & hit the notification bell 🔔 so you never miss an upload! ➡️ bit.ly/ausarmouryt
Keep up to date with the Museum!⬇️⬇️
Facebook ➡️ / ausarmour
Instagram ➡️ / ausarmour
Twitter ➡️ / ausarmour
Website ➡️ ausarmour.com
Email ➡️ [e-mail]

[@andrewwoods456]

Can now understand why 'The Chieftain' is so keen on track tensioning!

[@ymishaus2266]

The Aus Armour lads should be expecting a strongly-worded knock at the door by the heavies from the offices of Nick Moran, right about now. Nobody infinges on The Chieftain's track tensioning brand and gets away with it, you hear?!

[@thomascampbell4730]

I spent 2 years restoring a Suka at the USMC Air Ground Museum as a volunteer. It became an obsession. It had been "donated" by the NKPA in 1950 and a white star had been painted over the red star. The vehicle had been left outside for many years and many of the sheet metal parts were either useless or completely gone. It had run over a small mine which punctured the floor and pierced the oil pan of the forward engine which probably seized it up. I pickled the engines since we had no intention of making her a runner but did tear down both engines and transmission to apply preservative. The most frustrating task turned out to be removing the muzzle break on the Zis-3, After an hour of using ever larger cheater bars to loosen it up one of the guys working on an Ontos suggested it might be a left hand thread, and sure enough it was off in a few minutes. There were lots of American parts on the engine but the carburetors were typical Russian big and clunky. What I did was child's play compared to what you guys do. Sand blasting and using a needle gun are fun but you guys are artists and take scrap metal and turn it into runners. Great job guys and Semper Fi.

[@ArminHamner]

American and Russian bits combined....definitely was garbage

[@maxmagnus777]

If Stalin knew that people would be spending years restaurating these things he would had donated one to each of your grandfathers.

[@ArminHamner]

@maxmagnus777 no he wouldn't have... Stalin was a genocidal thief he wasn't generous... he had his jewish government kill 69 million Christians .

[@Burboss]

This SPG had another nickname - "Butt-naked Ferdinand" (approx. translation from Russian) for its visual resemblance with the Panzerjäger Tiger (P) Elefant/Ferdinand and lack of armor protection. As Jason said, SU-76M was intended to be used as mobile infantry support art. unit, not as anti-tank vehicle. That role was given to SU-85 and SU-100. SU-76 had rate of fire around 20 rounds a min and if used en-masse could put out high-intensity support fire.

[@antontsau]

+1. Effectively it is self-propelled 3" field gun used in Russian army from late 1800s, gradually improving for more than 80 years. Short barrel, mostly high explosive or even ancient shrapnel shells (armor-piercing were very rare!), no way to shot in motion, no good sight, no good general view even for commander. Just go ahead with infantry and shot "somewhere to there", creating rain of metal forcing enemy infantry to hide. In 1900 it was done with horses and manual force, in 1940 with engine from 3t truck. The first real enemy tank nearby immediately kills it. AT guns (85, 100, 122 and even 152) were based on much heavier and armored bases of T34 and KV.

[@tpaul802]

I always thought that SU-76 was primarily an antitank vehicle. You learn something every day. Going back to bed

[@Salamandra40k]

Well...dont always trust games or looks, thats all I'll say.

[@Tonyx.yt.]

from mid 43 onwards the zis 76mm gun was not really special for anti tank capabilities, just few month later su85 came in service, with a much more capable anti tank gun and by early 1944 the 34-85 as well

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

Очень большое количество танков красной армии было причиной того, что Вермахт очень нуждался в противотанковых средствах. У Вермахта было гораздо меньше танков и поэтому красная армия не нуждалась в очень большом количестве самоходных противотанковых средств. Достаточно было буксируемой противотанковой артиллерии. Бои на Курской дуге и на Сандомирском плацдарме это показали

[@quan-uo5ws]

Considering that it had super thin armor and the gun couldnt penetrate anything past 1943 it makes sense that it isnt antitank.

[@MGB-learning]

Another Outstanding Tank walk around presentation. Thank you

[@Ian-mj4pt]

Love watching these where Jason explains the tanks and issues that they have. Always enjoy these alone with Workshop Wednesdays.

[@Trilobiteer]

Thanks for another great video guys, always loved the SU-76M and this was a fantastic presentation about a fairly unappreciated fighting vehicle, people tend to get hung up on tank vs tank combat when in reality most targets that would have been engaged would have been infantry fighting positions or grid square coordinates. This was a very pratical vehicle to get that job done while offering its crews a decent level of protection from small arms fire and nearby shrapnel, although I bet they were just happy to have a warm place to sleep and not have to push their field guns around anymore!

[@kenskinner6948]

Excellent presentation as usual. Thank you.

[@MercutioUK2006]

Another location added to my "wish list" to visit - fantastic overview and history, not to mention some great footage. Cheers!

[@quentinstacy35]

Good work Jason. Liked how you inserted some video of it driving Kurt.

[@Alan.livingston]

SU-76 is my fave Russian vehicle. It’s got STUG workhorse vibes.

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

Су-76 совершенно не похожа на штурмовое самоходное орудие

[@tedarcher9120]

@@user-jo4hq8ks8n это оно и есть по определению

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

@@tedarcher9120 это ошибка

[@tdb7992]

I always think to myself that there’s not much better than watching a master at work; whether that be restoring a tank, or even discussing how a bit of military equipment works. You guys all deserve a knighthood for keeping Australia’s military history alive and importing such historic tanks so we don’t have to fly overseas to see them.

[@Ghostmaxi1337]

0:35 either you have wrong info or the wrong picture, because that is 100% a 76,2mm F-34 and not a 45mm.

[@concertautist4474]

I must have knocked out thousands of these over the years playing Steel Panthers World a War. I had no idea they were primarily intended as an infantry support weapon. The fact that it has no decent gunsight for targeting tanks was eye opening. All too often it is easy to cringe at the armour thickness on these types of self propelled guns. It's best to just think of them as a field gun sitting on top of its transport instead of being towed by it. Apparently another reason the crew were keen for a roof was so they didn't freeze their tits off in winter. At just over ten tons it's an economical package with sufficient firepower.

[@rotwang2000]

They could be built by the smaller automotive plants that didn't have the means to produce full size tanks.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

"It's best to just think of them as a field gun sitting on top of its transport instead of being towed by it." Yeah, that's pretty much a good description. The armor was essentially a bonus, as the most important part was to get the gun on a mobile platform. "The fact that it has no decent gunsight for targeting tanks was eye opening." People nowadays often completely fail to realise just how difficult it is to make good gunsights suitable for all a guns intended purposes. A decent example is the classic FLAK 88, which had to choose between AA and ground target sights, and switching between was nowhere near instant, or some German artillery, which were fielded with both an indirect sight and direct sight, but could only fit one at any time and same thing there, switching took a fair while. And this was a common problem for all WWII militaries, with proponents for all kinds of solutions, few to none of them truly good. And since the Su-76 was specifically designed as infantry support vehicle built cheaply, they skimped extra on the sights. That might sound bad, but having a distinctly better gunsight would have meant 10-15% fewer of them, maybe even a bit more, because the sights, radio and the engines(and sometimes the gun) tended to be the parts that were really restricting. And after Germany captured USSRs brand new optics and electronics factories both in 1941, they didn't have the capacity to massproduce advanced or high quality sights and radios.

[@justforever96]

That's it exactly. As soon as you put tracks on something people act like it needs thick armor or it's just idiotic and suicidal. anti tank guns killed like 3/4 of the tanks in WW2, and they were totally unprotected, and had to be hooked up to a truck before they could relocate. They weren't suicide missions for their crews. So why would a self mobile anti tank gun on tracks be totally doomed without armor that lets it slug it out toe to toe with enemy armor? You just fire from ambush and concealment. You are a little more visible on an SP mount but you can also GTFO an lot more easily and will need a direct hit to easily take out the crew. For infantry support, they used regular field guns for that to the time. They only had a simple armor shield. This is more mobile and pretty well protects you from all four sides, it's far better. It's not meant to fight tanks or even hunt them, the SU-85 was meant for that.

[@UlyssesFiles]

Great video - thanks for taking us around your fantastic Suka!

[@shed66215]

Another outstanding 'walkaround' video. Always amazed at Jason's knowledge of the collection.

[@americanpatriot2422]

Always an outstanding video and presentation

[@Bill53AD]

Great job Jason, well versed in information.

[@russwoodward8251]

Excellent rare vehicle. Thanks Jason and Aus Armour.

[@PatGilliland]

A great look at one of my favourite Soviet vehicles - Thank you

[@jameslooker4791]

The SU-76M was closer to an IFV precursor than a traditional assault gun. Its versatility almost as valuable as its production volume.

[@bryanduncan1640]

Again it’s living proof that you don’t need the best/biggest tank, you need the MOST!

[@tedarcher9120]

You don't need the most, you need it where it matters. This one uses regular truck engines and regular truck gas and regular infantry gun ammo so you can put it into infantry divisions no problem

[@scottcrawford7310]

Good show, love the in depth of vehicles

[@discount8508]

a handy and reliable weapon to have around your infantry

[@thestoicsteve]

A thorough and comprehensive reveal about this widely produced vehicle!

[@entropyachieved750]

Look forward to seeing this each Friday

[@lukeskywalker7566]

Another excellent video cheers lads

[@orbitalair2103]

I would love a ride. I am making a 1/72 scale model of this vehicle right now. its TINY. This was a great walkaround, thanks.

[@bigmac60]

Another great video

[@andrewsteele7663]

Thank you, Jason, you are a walking fount of tank knowledge, Cheers.

[@bwilliams463]

Excellent vid. Informative and well-presented.

[@kukatahansa]

Nice! Thanks for the info. I like the measuring of the armor plates and discussion of different variants. In fact it would be great if you could always talk about what specific version of a vehicle you have and how it differs from other version. Also how to spot those differences. Even though I've been interested in armored vehicles for several decades already, there is always some new info in those kind of discussions. Or pointer for something I've already forgotten!

[@yattaran1484]

Always my pleasure to watch this channel. Even German utilized this powerful gun for some of their assault guns.

[@wazwulf2698]

very informative, ty

[@354sd]

Very thorough and informative

[@felwinter5528]

grate video. please do more like this one

[@NikolaosKorelis]

This looks like a actual modern tank And i think it can serve to

[@54mgtf22]

Always interesting 👍

[@juusolatva]

I think it used the same ammo as the earlier T-34s with the 76mm, so at least the shells were about as effective in an anti-armor role, but you have to account for the sight as well.

[@fakkeltje9871]

Really like these videos, i only think they are a bit short... Still all the love in the world for you guys and what you do ;) we want moooreeee! ❤

[@paulday-lh5mx]

This does not feel like a fix it Friday to me. However I will take and like it. Thanks for the video and info on that machine. See ya on maintenance Monday, and workshop Wednesday for sure. Have an awesome weekend.

[@SteveMichaels]

Well Done Sir

[@GM4ThePeople]

Maybe this side of perfection, but a winner right out of the gate, & the HEAT round didn't hurt either.

Very nice Video.

[@willmartin7293]

A traverse range of 37 degrees left and right is very impressive for an assault gun. I bet the gunners appreciated the versality in being able to acquire targets.

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

Эта САУ не была штурмовым орудием. Наставление по боевому применению прямо указывало что это не танк и что САУ не предназначена для штурмовых действий.

[@willmartin7293]

@@user-jo4hq8ks8n Then what is its official classification. Is it a tank destroyer? The video indicated it was used in the roles of anti-tank, self-propelled artillery, and infantry assault support.

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

@@willmartin7293 Это не противотанковое орудие. Это Самоходное Артиллерийское Орудие

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

@@willmartin7293 Противотанковое САУ это СУ-85 и СУ-100

[@willmartin7293]

@@user-jo4hq8ks8n Okay, my friend, you have convinced me that the SU-76M is self-propelled artillery. However, according to the video, its basic combat load included several armor-piercing rounds, so it must have had a secondary mission of anti-tank. Or else, those AP rounds were just for self-defense against enemy tanks. Anyway, thanks again for clarifying for me the more accurate classification of the SU-76M. 👍

[@alexandermarken7639]

For the role intended the Armour protection is actually almost lavish. I would say it is better than the Priest in concept as it could do multiple roles far better.

[@mzimmerman1988]

thanks

[@bloodrave9578]

A well thought out design, can see the argument for having a roof

[@BlastedBilly]

it's a beauty!

[@MrDgwphotos]

In the US, we call electronic "valves", tubes.

[@justforever96]

For some reason i love these things. And Stugs. Great practical machines. Does this have the original twin engines?

[@natopeacekeeper97]

When the North Korean People's Army invaded South Korea in 1950, they were equipped with around 150 T/34s with the 85MM gun and "plentiful 76mm self-propelled guns", so that's probably what this vehicle is an example of.

[@MrLotrecht]

It remember me on the Marder 1 -2 and 3 from the Wehrmacht!

[@CAP198462]

That’s a nice collection of what I presume are rare vehicles.

[@Drownedinblood]

Always wondered how the side mg ports work, they turn the whole vehicle to fire out of it? Were they just to protect flank? Do they just pop over the top with the DT and start blasting forward and hope they don't trip and fall>

[@brealistic3542]

How about the Su76 I ? The td using captured German Stug chassis ? The Su76 was having a lot of develemental troubles at the time. The Soviets in a very smart move put a good Soviet gun on Stug chassis. It actually worked out very well and was loved by its crews till the Soviet td version could be mass produced. It even fought in the battles of Kursk.

[@dominuslogik484]

Honestly i think such a simple platform as this could theoretically still be useful even today if there was still production of small caliber howitzer ammunition. Massive militaries like the u.s and Russia wouldn't need it but less wealthy or large militaries would do well with a lightweight and cheap system

[@depleteduraniumcowboy3516]

I am aware that Jason served on tracked vehicles. When I was in Fort Knox I was responsible for 3 tanks. I did a lot of track work, the only time it was "easy" was if we got all new track or you where one of the officers that only did 1 day of track work.

[@allaboutboats]

Awesome! Great vid! First!

[@DS-gt1ft]

Almost perfect. The machine gun he was referring to was the DP-27 or DP-28 (not DT). Could be an accent thing but I heard him refer to it as a DT.

[@Clowndoe]

The gun in the picture (8:16) is a DT.

[@Klovaneer]

Even 15 klicks is too optimistic - the towed version could reach out to 13km at +37 degrees so somewhere around 5 probably?

[@realgrilledsushi]

That variant 73 should be in WoT

[@horrido666]

I didn't realize the vehicle came so late in the war. Doesn't look quite so good now that I know its not a prewar vehicle.

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

Её появлению предшествовала СУ-76. Отличия состояли в параллельном, а не последовательном агрегатировании двигателей, в полностью закрытой боевой рубки. Параллельное соединение двигателей обусловило низкую надёжность силового агрегата.

[@kirankrishnars9089]

❤❤

[@Evans701]

Машина не живучая. Которую не особо любил экипаж за ее топливный бак прямо спереди рядом с водителем. Но они были очень массово применены

[@Bigbacon]

assume the diamond plate was added by you guys?

[@rossomachin]

This is postwar built SU-76M

[@brealistic3542]

You know if you ever acquire a beat up Stug chassis a Su76i could be made the same way the Soviets did ! 😎

[@Chauc3r]

Did this vehicle have smoke rounds?

[@antontsau]

bare-arse Ferdinand (Elephant). Cheapest and simpliest machine from truck parts designed for one time use.

[@h.c.2108]

Are people expected to know what souchka means from "hard to steer"?

[@MrChainsawAardvark]

Is there any particular reason the SU-76 had two small engines and a presumably complex transmission, as opposed to making one bigger unit with less replication? I can see the utility of using available small car/truck engines over lager ones needed for other vehicles, but given the early difficulties, and replication of effort to maintain everything, that still seems like a less than reasonable idea.

[@kimjanek646]

This and the IS-2 was probably the most efficient Red Army vehicle 😄

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

Все современные основные боевые танки являются концептуальной копией ИС-2. Моторно- трансмиссионное отделение сзади, дизельный двигатель, задний привод, орудие 122 мм, дифференцированное бронирование.

[@kimjanek646]

@@user-jo4hq8ks8n Truely ahead of its time ;)

[@ivan200804]

A bit of history. Soldiers gave it a nickname: suka. Which means bitch in Russian. Why? There is no particular reason, the SU designation made it easy. SUka.

[@billyponsonby]

According to Wiki, this vehicle’s designer Semyon Alexandrovich Ginzburg was blamed for the poorly functioning transmission and was removed from his role, sent to the front and was killed at the battle of Kursk in 1943.

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

Гинзбург проектировал СУ-76, а это СУ-76М. Это очень разные САУ

[@sg195286]

look at those welding seams 🤭

[@stephengunnell5048]

Did you just get those small Russian tanks recently?

[@freedomfrogs4847]

Why do people always slap Soviet Airforce roundels on tanks?

[@ArminHamner]

ZiS8 was a different gun.. i dont thing it was even 76.2mm

[@henrykfu]

I'm waiting to see an SU76 appear on the battlefield in Ukraine with a bunch of corrugated roof metal welded around it...the Blyatmobile

[@mahastyaadhyananda6658]

Tank destroyer right from Soviet union ?? The tank similar elefant nazi Jerman

[@PapasDino]

Almost looks like an engineering oversight to have such a significant exhaust system so vulnerable to small arms, shrapnel etc.

[@wazza33racer]

Imagine taking an open top vehicle into an urban battle ground of high buildings........yikes.

[@elbrover]

Su-76, called "Suka", russian for "bitch", because exploding of gasoline tanks after being hit by german cannons

[@UnderTheBanner]

isnt russian production

[@gregchijoff9959]

Zelensky will steal it!

[@NinjaKittyBonks]

Wonder how many times that LH lever was pulled with a guy's thumb atop the stick.... OUCH! Thanks, mates🦘

[@themanmike1]

Guy's, When a tank burns out or experiences a "cook off" like in Ukraine does the fire change the quality of the armor or can you re-use the burned out hull?

[@ihorkorotchenko9732]

+

[@hopper1415]

"H"

[@dickdegraaff5452]

Dear Guys, Thanks for the explanation of SU-76M. As far as I know the official name was Samokhodnaya Ustanovka 76. The figures were based on the 76 mm. canon what was installed on this lightweight tank destroyer. The gun was self-propelled. The tank was produced by the GAZ car, bus and truck factory with their headquarters iNizhny Novgorod, NIZ, Russia. I’ve seen this tank in a bit different look in the Tank Museum in Bovington, Dorset in England. That’s why I know some of the history of this lightweight tank but you did let me know some more. I look forward to your next vlog and send you love from the Netherlands

[@2adamast]

Tank destroyer?

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

СУ-76 и СУ-76М это очень разные САУ. Узнайте пожалуйста об этом больше.

[@user-jo4hq8ks8n]

СУ-76 не была противотанковой САУ. СУ-85 предназначена для борьбы с танками.

[@tonydoggett7627]

I think the Australian armour museum could design and outsource component manufacture a battle taxi or tank using their skilled trades & library of proven part designs. 🦘🇦🇺

[@tpaul802]

I always thought that SU-76 was primarily an antitank vehicle. You learn something every day. Going back to bed