SU-74, SU-76D and SU-57b (GAZ-74 Series)

Hello everyone,

you probably heard about the screwup with the SU-76I. It did put Wargaming into an uncomfortable situation – now that it’s out, they can’t nerf it (it’s a premium tank after all), all the while the vehicle in the game is clearly overpowered. And so, they will have to introduce another lowtier tank destroyer to replace it I guess. And what do you know – there are two perfect candidates for the role, the SU-74 and SU-57b (the third one would be OP I guess).


In the summer of 1943, the designers of the GAZ plant under the leadership of N.A.Astrov (famous Soviet vehicle designer, responsible for example for the T-60, T-70, T-80 or SU-76M) created two light tank destroyer projects and offered them to the national commissariat of tank industry under the designation of GAZ-74.

The first vehicle (GAZ-74a) project resembled the already existing SU-76, while the other (GAZ-74b) was more of a “Hetzer” design, with closed compartment and frontal gun. Where the first vehicle was relatively tall (albeit maneuverable), the second one was low and sleek, well armored (frontal armor was 35mm thick, but it was sloped) and it was armed with a 76mm S-1 gun, the same type used on the SU-76I. It was to be powered by a lend-lease diesel engine by General Motors, the 110hp GMC-71, that was to be license-produced in the USSR by the YaMZ plant in Yaroslavl.


Design-wise, the project turned out to be a mashup of T-70 parts and equipment (the vehicle was based on the T-70) and the American engine with some new development added into the mix. Generally, the vehicle resembled the famous German “Hetzer”, although when it comes to its gun and armor, it was inferior to it. The suspension was taken from the T-70 as well, with individual torsion bars for each of the 5 roadwheels and 4 return rollers.

The hull was made of rolled armor plates of varying thickness, from 10mm to 35mm – only the frontal armor had a significant slope in order to make it easier for the crew to operate the vehicle by giving them enough space. The vehicle had a crew of four – driver, commander, gunner and loader. The frontal plate had a massive hole cut in it in order to mount the powerful 76,2mm S-1 gun. The gun itself had a -5/+14 depression/elevation and could traverse 13,5 degrees to each side. The gun mount resembled the SU-76I gun mount for the same gun. The vehicle, as stated above, was powered by the GMC-71 engine, locally produced under the designation of YAZ-206.


The vehicle was built in one prototype, that was designated SU-74 or SU-76-I. It passed succesfully both factory and army trials. However, it was already second half of 1943 and the Soviets were meeting heavily armored German tanks, such as the Panther and the Tiger – the gun was considered too weak to knock out the German behemoths at that point and it was this that caused this vehicle not to be mass-produced. The entire IT (tank destroyer) series of light “Hetzer-like” series, that started much earlier, was in fact a Soviet (at first desperate) attempt to bring more AT guns to the field to compensate for the lack of AT measures and tanks, but in 1943, the danger of being overrun by German Blitzkrieg was no longer present.

Despite this setback, GAZ continued its work on the light tank destroyer series (despite the apparent obsolescence of the concept, that – ironically – started to appeal to Germans in turn, as they met more and more Soviet armored vehicles). In Summer 1943, the production of 57mm ZIS-2 guns was resumed in the Gorky Artillery Plant No.92. These guns had pretty good ballistic characteristics and GAZ decided it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to actually use a high-power 57mm gun in the GAZ-74 chassis to produce a better-performing tank destroyer. They introduced more variants of the project – one was to be equipped with the 57mm gun (S-1-57, ZIS-4) and the other with some sort of improved 76mm (S-54 presumably). The 57mm variant recieved the designation of SU-57b.


The vehicle was built on the SU-76D chassis, only the gun was replaced with 57mm ZIS-4. According to Soviet data, this gun could penetrate 90mm at 1000 meters and 100mm at 500 meters (90 degrees).

A prototype was built as well and it passed all the required tests, but, just like the project before, it was not accepted in service. The reasons for the cancellation of the project was – apart from what was stated above – that the vehicle was actually expensive to produce.

The development of the GAZ-74 chassis ended in 1944 with the introduction of the improved version, carrying a 76mm gun (S-1), but with improved armor (60mm in the front). This vehicle was designated SU-76D (or GAZ-76D). A prototype was built and was tested by the army under the designation of SU-80. However, at this point, the SU-76M was already produced in massive numbers and it was preferred by the army to keep the mass-produced vehicle instead of introducing a completely new one.

-76 vs Hetzer

The SU-76D emerged one more time in early 1945 – in Hungary, the vehicle was tested against a captured Hetzer along with the SU-57b with mixed success (one of the listed SU-57b drawbacks was the lack of powerful HE shells for example).



Crew: 4
Weight: 11,6 tons
Engine: GMC-71 diesel (110hp)
Power-to-weight: 9,5 hp/t
Maximum speed: 36 km/h
Hull armor: 35/15/15mm
Superstructure front: 35mm
Gun: 76mm S-1
Maximum rate of fire: 20 RPM
Combat rate of fire: 15 RPM
Ammo carried: 71


Crew: 4
Weight: 9,56 tons
Engine: ZIS-16 (100hp)
Power-to-weight: 10,5 hp/t
Maximum speed: 40 km/h
Hull armor: 25/15/15mm
Superstructure front: 25mm
Gun: 57mm ZIS-4
Maximum rate of fire: 20 RPM
Combat rate of fire: 15 RPM
Ammo carried: 72


Crew: 4
Weight: 11,6 tons
Engine: GMC-71 diesel (110hp)
Power-to-weight: 9,5 hp/t
Maximum speed: 36 km/h
Hull armor: 60/15/15mm
Superstructure front: 60mm
Gun: 76mm S-1
Maximum rate of fire: 20 RPM
Combat rate of fire: 15 RPM
Ammo carried: 71


38 thoughts on “SU-74, SU-76D and SU-57b (GAZ-74 Series)

  1. SU-74 should be the tier 3 one.

    They could mix both the SU-76D’s armor and SU-57b’s gun to make a regular tier 4 TD.

    Also,They look like a Kanonenjagdpanzer,Which is nice.

  2. – now that it’s out, they can’t nerf it (it’s a premium tank after all), all the while the vehicle in the game is clearly overpowered.

    And this is what I don’t get from WG. What is so difficult to reimburse the cost, for the people who want to and than just rework the thing accordingly?
    Can say the same about the E-25 and it keeping it’s camo after firing. Or the Type-59 getting normal mm for example and than being sold again.

    It’s all about money, I know, but it hurts the game IMO. As it could be so much more.

    • Moreover, very few people bought it. and mainly collectors.
      So I don’t think a lot of ppl wil ask for a refund.

      Just give it normal MM.
      (PS: do the SU76i will stay in the garage of its owners or be replaced?)

    • Of course they can nerf it. Just give everyone back their money in gold, nerf and then reintroduce. They did the exact same thing to the Super Perishing. That is what they should do, clearly there is precedence.

      • Was it not that the type moved up a tier and all the tanks on tier 8 got better over time?
        The Type 59 is basically the same thing it always was.

  3. Offer refund as with the SP, move up a tier, tweak HP pool and stats to fit. Sell again. Done. Next.
    Oh! I forgot, they’d probably screw up that too.

    • Yep, a tier up and it would be perfect with a tier IV hitpoint pool. Those who already have it, are not going to complain about getting a tier IV for the price of a tier III, I dare say.

      • Why would the collectors not complain if it was bumped up a tier? You will already find that they are pissed off with the B1 and the S35 getting the same treatment.

  4. They can sort it – offer full cash refund and sell a new tank. Didn’t they say the reason new tanks as sold through the shop was to allow refunds.

  5. They nerfed Type 59 multiple times,they nerfed Super Pershing but they cant nerf Russian prem tank,ppl get serious.And there is no Russian bias at all.

    • They offered to reimburse the cost of the Super Pershing after the nerf. This could be done here as well. Dunno why they don’t do it.

  6. They never changed a Premium Tank…
    Thinking of the Type 59 that is not entirely true. and the Löwe was also changed.

  7. Of course they can nerf it! When I bought my Type 62, it was a tier 6 TL. Now it is a tier 7, so I don’t know what would be wrong with mowing another premium vehicle up one tier. It’s not like it didn’t happen before …

    • yep they did it to leFH fench arty, it was T4 they took it from the shop and moved it up to T5, but i hope they just leave the SU-76l alone and introduce some other alternative as SS is suggesting – meaning i’ve got one and i don’t want them messing about with it, there are plenty of tanks out there that have no problem penetrating it, it’s mainly just the pewpew guns that can’t.

      • It hits extremely hard and the grand majority of guns that it sees are ‘pewpew’ guns. It’s not invincible, but it is not conductive to the health of lowtier to have more than a handful of SU-76I’s in existence.

  8. SU-74
    35mm at 40 degrees from the vertical gives us 45mm protection upfront, with what looks to be a useless mantlet. The low p:w would need to be compensated by insanely low track resistance, or high health. Neither situation is desirable. An alternative is to keep the mobility historical and downtier it to tier 2, where the gun may only fire AP at an unusually bad velocity for such a 76mm gun. The idea that the vehicle is unusually prone to penetrating shots from small arms fire to the side may hammer in the idea that keeping large reserves of HE ammunition around is not a good idea. As for bullet velocity, I can think of nothing else to nerf the gun into a howitzer state: it is not healthy to have a good 76mm at tier 2. Likewise, it will suffer in tier 3, so I don’t see any other option.

    An alternative for implementation is to make it extremely stealthy with normal 76mm characteristics at tier 3, however, many of the players at this tier are still struggling with the vision mechanics. Given that you can put a 3 skill crew into it as it is a premium, this is not a grand idea, and will perpetuate the ‘Soviet Bias’ myth.

    To my mind, this is the most likely to be implemented at tier 3. The mantlet protection seems to be much improved and the mantlet itself is rather large. The low caliber and high penetration means that both APCR and HE shells are unusually useless. Given the low damage per shot, it is a requirement to spam shells to destroy enemy vehicles. This is not well-suited to a ‘stealthy’ vehicle, and thusly, we may either balance it as a TD that must relocate every few shots like the E-25, or as a TD that will always be spotted, such as the WT E100. Once it is decided what kind of TD this vehicle is, balancing it via adjustment of RoF and HP will suffice, and create a fun vehicle. Again, the extremely low damage per shot is a very limiting factor, and it could be given a suitably low RoF.

    This looks to be a fun vehicle, though, as a tier 4 vehicle. 60mm at 40 degrees gives us 80mm of protection, which falls in line with the Valentine II and B2, perhaps a little bit stronger. Given the presence of side armor on those vehicles and the absence of it here, this is acceptable. The Jagdpanzer 38(t) itself has about 90, 95mm of frontal protection, and will see tier 5 and 6 vehicles. However, it has a much better gun suited for the case than the SU-76D. The case could be made to give it similar matchmaking to the Valentine II and B2, however, the gun is noticeably stronger on the SU-76D, even if the side armor is not. If it had a low enough track traverse speed and relatively weak gun handling, I could see it as getting the same MM.

    These were just my personal ideas for implementation, as they stand, the only vehicle which would not be wholly inappropriate for tier 3 is the SU-57b, where it will likely not be a high stealth vehicle, as the chassis itself is not fast.

    • Ran out of editing time. What I meant by that last paragraph is that most stealthy vehicles with low caliber guns tend to have other gimmicks, such as the StuG III. The SU-57B does not have the capability to deliver these gimmicks without being completely unhistorical, which breaks the premium status. Thusly it should have a good deal more health than the SU-76.

  9. As an SU76I owner, I’d be happy with increase to Tier IV, with necessary HP buff, and +1 tier limit – least that way you could earn credits or crew XP with the thing, rather than the current meta of just farming cheap, filthy, easy, WN8.

    It is broken, but that actually limits the enjoyment and playability of it (for me at least) – swatting complete beginners at Mines, Province, and Himmelsdorf with impunity does get very boring very quickly.

    • It seems more like WG is content to let the relatively small numbers of SU-76I to continue to exist, like the KV-220.

  10. Those new vehicles don’t solve the main problem: they are still better than the regular SU-76.

    • On the contrary, the SU-76 stock is a much more mobile vehicle than all 3 of these vehicles. The SU-76 is also high view range. I am not sure if you noticed, but the optics are terrible. The SU-76 is also tiny, low to the ground and stealthy. Like the Jagdpanther, it is not possible for these vehicles to engage without showcasing the entire frontal profile, and they are quite tall: it is likely they will have crap stealth. It will be trivial to hit the side armor of these vehicles at range.

  11. Nerf the shit out of it and offer people to sell it back for gold… clearly they didn’t want to sell it like that anyway.

  12. Pingback: WoT SU-76i destiny

  13. Btw, interesting fact – when I tried to upload a replay with SU-76i on, the page said, that it will not take it, because it’s some sort of rare high-tier(!!) premium or whatnot vehicle..
    Well, looks like WG even does not want people to be able to see, how good it can perform on the battlefield.

  14. I’d rather the 76i to be reworked and reintroduced.
    what will happen to the 76i if it is replaced? Removed+ gold compensation or it will stay a rare tank nobody can get like the PzIIJ? (I’d rather they avoid :/ )

  15. Pingback: Nové mapy, Charioteer, 183ka a doplňky - Rychlá Rota

  16. “SU-76I(…) they can’t nerf it (it’s a premium tank after all),”

    Yes, they can. Time to re-read the game’s R.o.E., license, terms, etc.

  17. Of course they can nerf it, and they should. Why would they throw away the development that went into the tank? Because that’s what they would be doing if they leave it like it is now and move on to start from scratch. Plus they’d be leaving an OP eyesore for experienced players to sealclub like crazy in on the lower tiers, wrecking the experience for a lot of new players.

    They can, they should, and I honestly both hope and think they will. Super Pershing and Type 59 have both seen the same happen to them. Why not?

  18. Implement them all. :P
    With the SU76i and the SU76D as Tier 4 (moving 76i one Tier up isn’t a nerf.. :p)

    Then I buy them all.