Swedish Emil I Full Stats



full stats of the Emil I are now out:


Tier: VIII
Hitpoints: 1500
Engine: 550
Weight: 28 800
Power-to-weight: 19,1 hp/t
Maximum speed: 45/16 km/h
Hull traverse: 32 deg/s
Turret traverse: 20.9 deg/s
Terrain resistance: 1.151/1.247/2.014
Viewrange: 380
Radio range: 850
Hull armor: 100/20/?
Turret armor: 180/35/?

Gun: 10.5 cm TK 105-9 (Autoloader)

Damage: 320/320/420
Penetration: 277/258/53
DPM: 1 839
ROF: 5.747
Reload: 37,203s

Reload between shells: 3.75
Accuracy: 0.364
Aimspeed: 2.88

Gun: 10.5 cm lvkan m/42

Damage: 320/320/420

Penetration: 179/224/53


Model and Armor:

66 comments on “Swedish Emil I Full Stats

  1. Deano says:

    if that 105s pen is right then the opposite of what the game needs right now we done need tier 8 hts with 270 pen

  2. Thomas A. says:

    Love the Swedish….become the Swedish…..

  3. Enigmaticmuffin says:

    inb4 IS-3 is now obsolete

  4. blockhaj says:

    I hope they reconsider its armament. It needs the 120mm autoloader as a top gun. Otherwise it will be to similar to the amx 50 100.

  5. Xenomass says:

    what the hell is this thing

  6. blockhaj says:

    Well what i would do is to give it the 120 as a top gun but artificially nerf the penetration. I mean dpm is generally what matters when it comes to auto loaders anyway. I would also nerf the hitpoints if necessary since it was a really small tank. At least the Emil II seems to be getting the 155 mm.

    • I think the EMIL II will get the 120 at tier 9, and the Kravagn will get the 155 at tier 10. Still don’t think it needs a 120, as right now, it looks pretty balanced. Looks like a peek-a-boom style medium (due to the delay between shots + the turret armor & gun depression), which makes sense coming from an entire line of Light/Medium tanks. I’d imagine there’d be a lot of player whine and/or nerfs to it if it received the 120.

      • RikJoh says:

        Peek-a-boom is exactly what the Swedish doctrin was. Defensive. From hidden “tank fox holes”.
        Or “shoot and scoot” as some call it. We never intended them to be offensive “brawlers”, but easy to hide, effective in mixed terrain. And with that magnificent barrel dump.. Jummy from behind inclines. Just pop the barrel over the top and….

    • BP OMowe says:

      DPM matters shit if the shells can’t cause any damage through lack of penetration.

  7. sp15 says:

    That is a lot more armor than it should have…

  8. blockhaj says:

    Yo SP15 u dont happen to have any contact info since i would like to ask u for some help regarding swedish vehicles since i want them in War Thunder.

  9. sp15 says:

    “I did research on this vehicle and what i found was that the original plan was to have 100 lower 120 upper frontal hull armor and 150 on the turret. Later this was raised to 145 on the upper hull and 175 to 200 on the turret if shooting tests would have shown a weakness to the Russian 122 mm and 100 mm guns.”

    Well that contridicts just about everything in the archives so i would like to see your source because as it stands the EMIL 1951 only had armor up to 150mm (though with 200mm on the mantlet) as you can see here http://i.imgur.com/7TzaKC8.jpg Note the 1951 date in the upper corner. There were NO other armor options for this version.

    Later in 1952 there vere several versions concidered with different armor options. The base one being 120/30/30mm hull (75mm upper glacis) with 140/60/30mm turret. And the uparmored one with 145/40/40mm hull (95mm upper glacis) and 170/80/40mm turret. You can see the two frontal armor options listed here http://i.imgur.com/QfWiI5B.jpg

    Note that the armor on the ingame Emil 1951 is better than even the best armor concidered of the later versions

  10. deadarashi says:

    Don’t know how i feel about such a long overal reload time and reload between shells

  11. sp15 says:

    “I did research on this vehicle”
    it certainly does not seem that way because everything you posted is wrong but if you have a source better than the archies then i would like to see it. This is the one and only armor scheme for the 1951 emil.

    • blockhaj says:

      I found a single report on the emil program hiding at the back of krigsarkivet. I guess the armor upgrades where for the KRV since it didnt have any date on it if i remember.

    • blockhaj says:

      I think i searched for “Tung strv” and one of the results was a report of swedens defence against the is3.

  12. blockhaj says:

    Anyway i would rather have it with the 120 mm historical gun with bad armor than with unhistorical armor with the budget gun.

  13. sp15 says:

    well anyway blockhaj you can find me on the american Wot forums in this thread. Frankly though i think WT is a lost cause, but well i may be somewhat wrong. Still seeing how they messed up the Strv 81 (the atgm test vehicle actually had 6 atgm’s not 3 and it shouldnt be called strv 81) i dont expect anything from them.


    • blockhaj says:

      I have made a bug report of the strv 81 since it features the wrong mg and several other details like the name. Although i didnt know about the 6x rb.52’s? Any reference? But even if war thunder gf is generally bad atm its generally because gaijin is generally working on too many projects atm. Like japanese tanks and the italian tech tree. Not to mention that they are trying to figure out how to do naval warfare without making it boring ore unrealistic. But wt has its ups and downs. For ex patch 1.57 was probably the best patch ever. Beating previous good patches. So think wt will get a new life as soon as gaijin finishes its current projects.

  14. sp15 says:

    “I found a single report on the emil program hiding at the back of krigsarkivet. I guess the armor upgrades where for the KRV since it didnt have any date on it if i remember.”

    which authority’s archive, bureau/division, series and year, that is arkivbildare, avdelning (motsv), serie, år eller hellre volymnummer?

  15. GU-7 says:

    From what I see here, this tank, and it being auto-loaded, is a over all bad-ass… In tier 8 alone, with that 270mm of pen, there would be no point in sloping your armor, or even trying to, as the pen is far too great for most Tier 8 tanks… If not all tier 8 tanks…

  16. Yeah… another tier 9 and 10 French autoloader. It even looks nearly identical. I am more disapointed with these Swedish heavies than any other tank introduced into the game ever. They r direct clones of the AMX 50s.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Wg releases another stupidly unfair tank. They have really lost thier minds now.
    -Wt E100
    -Nerf already UP tanks, Foch155, ect
    -Jap tanks with armor as thick as it is high
    -Replace the OP autoloader with a OP railgun/Best mt ingame(Grille)
    -Skorpion G, another grille(wheres our french TD to replace Fcm?)
    -Now a amx 50 line with ridiculous armor and higher calibre guns.

    Whats next, the Bandkannon with a 14 clip?

    • blockhaj says:

      Not to mention the nuklear rounds.

      • BP OMowe says:

        Bandkanon 1 *never* was intended to have nuclear ammunition, for several reasons:
        * High rate of fire, which indeed WAS intended from start, doesn’t work well with tactical nukes. 15 rounds sent into the same area means the last 13 or so will target a mushroom cloud, which hardly is effective, especially when considering
        * that nukes are expensive stuff, and smaller ones are even more so when weighing in the bang for the buck.
        * The range of the gun means you risk having your own gun caught in the outfall from the blast, which hardly is desirable.

      • blockhaj says:

        Um ho said anything about firing 15 nukes one after another? I dont know the tactics for the bandianon but firing the hole magazine at one location seems stupid. It was planned to develope nuclear rounds for it since it was more cost effective then developing nuclear missiles ore nuclear bombers. But the nuclear program was shut down before anything could be developed. Most information is still classified.

  18. Brighteyez says:

    Sorry but did’nt they say it was going to have a 120mm autoloader? Just feel like that was what this tank needed to stand out among the rest. We all know frontal (overall) armor does’nt matter anymore, So why drive this when you can drive a more mobile AMX 50 100?

  19. sp15 says:

    Blockhaj why pretend that you have been to the archives to somebody who can tell you have not?

  20. I dont even see why they keep adding more tanks to the game when they’re also trying to rebalance everything with sandbox.

    The newer tank still strong and will keep making oldest tanks worse (like if we needed another autoloader. T50/51 wasnt gamebreaking enough we need more !). And while they keep adding less balanced tanks to the game they also add newer things they will need to rebalance aswell maybe 2 month later. What’s the point. Focus on rebalance and add new tanks when the game is fixed enough, and give these new tanks stats compatible with the new balance.

  21. SCARed says:

    my biggest concern is the combination of the autoloader (even with the high clip-internal reload), the small size and the ridicoulus gun depression.

    -15° – what the ***** are those devs thinking? plus if you find a ridgeline to work with that, the angle of your turret armor also gets quite obscene.

    I have absolutley no clue, what they do al day long in the balancing department. only thing is: looking at their tanks is NOT one of teir task, it seems.

  22. Ares says:

    Tiger 2, Vk auf A, Caernarvon looks so bad in compere to this…next broken HT on tier 8, shiting on old ones…this is WG.

    28 tons my ass. When Porsche Ferdinand design Maus, he wish to made tank under 150 tons, with 250 mm upper front plate. Get to 190 tons beast, with only 200 mm plate, cuz for 250 mm tank whould go over 200 tons. So when I see this tank, and its lighter then AMX 100 I call this horse crap. WG just made weight of most paper tank. Weight is only true one tank is build, you can assume. So HORE CRAP, 28 tons…HA. Better frontal armor then AMX 100, same shit armor on side and back…Next OP nation comming into wot, they gonna broke balance. Fuck old tanks…

    • BP OMowe says:

      Weight of armour is directly related to the volume encased.
      If you look at Maus, it’s quite a lot larger than the Emil, which also is smaller than the AMX 100.
      Also note that apart from the frontal (30° left and right of the centre-line) protection dimensioned to handle Josef Stalin-3, the rest is little more than protection against artillery shrapnel.

  23. Žilvinas says:

    Frontal armor and the penetration are really impressive.

  24. Brighteyes says:

    All this flaming, keep it too yourself or do it in a more professionel way, plz guyz

  25. Jake silverblood says:

    I will be spending my free exp on this tank line thats for sure, but this tank isnt flawless some things about the tank can and will bother me for example: 1. the DPM is quite low 2. The aim time leaves much to be desired 3. That godawful 3.75 reload between shells makes for some doubts in this tanks capabilities as a burst tank, but then again it has 15 degrees of gun depression and good armor which becomes really good when hull down and the speed of a medium so yeah i think this tank will be OP but not flawless

Leave a Reply