The German IFV Puma

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Thu Jun 02, 2016 7:16 pm

Trying hard to avoid a pi**ing contest on a couple threads here, just provide info...

I have spent some time this morning trying to find a pic somewhere of the Puma side by side with a Marder or a LEOII using a number of different search parameters without success. I have seen a LOT of pics of current German armored vehicles, but not ONE of the Puma with ANY OTHER vehicle to give an idea of relative size. One of my posts includes the dimensions of the basic vehicle.

Below is a URL for a video of the three vehicles, including head on of the vehicles in column making a left turn, each in turn, Marder, Puma, then Boxer. As nearly as I can tell, at least the TRACK WIDTH of the Marder and Boxer are similar. That would make sense for rail transport - neither would exceed a certain width. What I mean is the distance between the left track and the right track, either from inside to inside or outside to outside of the left and right track. While that is not definitive, it does provide SOME basis for comparison.

Take a look at the video and see what you think. Then, if you own the GHQ Marder, Leo II, and Puma, PLEASE compare track widths and see if they are similar. let us know what you found. If you can, provide a pic. That will at least give us something to go on.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=bu ... ORM=VRDGAR

Thanks to anyone who can provide more info.

chrisswim · Post by **chrisswim** » Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:41 pm

I received a pic with a Leopard 2 and Puma in the same pic, but on on the same plane as the camera and vehicles, so accurate comparison is deficient. I too am still on this quest.
The Puma, according to recollection, appear to be large when compared to the Leopard.

Extra Crispy · Post by **Extra Crispy** » Fri Jun 03, 2016 1:51 am

Are the measurements of the vehicles not available? Why not just use those? (I have no dog in this fight, I don't even game moderns).

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Fri Jun 03, 2016 2:19 am

Extra Crispy,

I posted the following in a different thread. My assumption is that these are for the basic vehicle without add-on armor kits, which both have available.

Length: Puma - 7.4m LEO II - 7.7m

Width: Puma - 3.7m LEO II - 3.7m

Height: Puma - 3m LEO II - 3m

The GHQ model obviously has an add-on armor package, so that will distort size comparison. If someone has the Marder, Leo, and Puma, I recommend putting them track to track (bottom to bottom) to see if the track witdth is similar for both (not the individual track, but distance between tracks or from the outside to the outside of the track). Please tell us what you found.

I'm not ready to expand my German contingent yet, so I only have Marder and Leo and won't be buying Puma until we have some better resolution. I'll stick with Boxers or Marder III if necessary.

In any case, I would prefer to get the basic Puma, with an add-on kit for the extra armor.

chrisswim · Post by **chrisswim** » Fri Jun 03, 2016 4:54 am

I see and understand your reasoning. We concluded it seems large. This old dog has gone home.... or we can beat a dead horse, or get two horses and beat both, send them to me seminar to be for effective. We hashed this our a few years ago so we can move forward and not dwell on this as a courtesy to ghq and many of us.

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:25 am

Chrisswim,

You will be relieved to know that I've nothing further to offer on the subject.

Ben · Post by **Ben** » Tue Jun 14, 2016 6:21 pm

Hello Gentlemen,

I just want to let you know that following the most recent publication on the SPz Puma it has the following dimensions:

Length: 7.6m
Width: 3.9m
Height: 3.6m

On the recent Tag der Bundeswehr in Munster I had the opportunity to see the SPz Puma side by side with the BPz 3 BÃ¼ffel and Leopard 2A6M. Thanks to my son who lent me his camera, I have been able to make three rather poor photos. The angle was far from perfect but it gives an idea what a big beast the Puma is.

What I found a bit strange is that when you see the Puma on its own it looks quite compact...

Kind regards,
Benjamin

RedLeif · Post by **RedLeif** » Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:16 pm

Thanks for posting those photos. Clearly the Puma is a big IFV (both wide and tall).

SKeeM · Post by **SKeeM** » Tue Jun 14, 2016 10:26 pm

Holy Crap! It is HUGE! I have to be honest I thought GHQ made a mistake. Clearly I am wrong and own them a huge apology. I'm very sorry for doubting your accuracy I should have known better.

kfeltenberger · Post by **kfeltenberger** » Wed Jun 15, 2016 4:36 am

Looks about the size of the Namer, but higher due to the turret.

chatto · Post by **chatto** » Wed Jun 15, 2016 7:14 am

I'm glad a photo like this has arrived, it'll definitely put to bed the old concerns and worries. Not surprisingly, GHQ got it right

Nevertheless every time I see those bad boys I always think "Damn! That's one huuuuge b****!"

BattlerBritain · Post by **BattlerBritain** » Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:29 pm

The front armour does look very 'Israeli' doesn't it?

Almost Merkava like.

And yes, it's quite big.

Ben · Post by **Ben** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:18 pm

Hi again,

as this AFV is discussed in another topic as well

http://www.ghqmodels.com/forum/viewtopi ... 2397f5b813

and the question about rail transportation occured there, I want to take the opportunity to drop in some more information.

Following more recent readings like this:

http://www.mittler-report-shop.de/produ ... 8ltedknca6

I can tell you that the configurations of the Puma are A (air-transportable) and C (Combat) now, while B (Bahnverladbar = rail-transportable) was dropped as it could be met with the C-configuration.
Nevertheless I asked Ralph Zwilling, who did write quite a lot about the SPz Puma (e.g. reports for the German magazine MilitÃ¤rfahrzeug), yesterday and asked him if a C-configured Puma could be tranported by rail. He did some checks and came back with a clear answer - it is NOT the case. The SPz Puma must be prepared for rail-transportation which means some disassembling is required.
Furthermore there will be a configuration called G (Grundbetrieb = configuration for e.g. training and exercise). This configuration includes lighter dummy tiles instead of the real add-on armour which could be removed a lot easier prior to rail-transport.

May this information be of use to some of you.

Kind regards,
Benjamin

paul · Post by **paul** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:30 pm

Looking at the pics it looks like the track system on the PUMA is narrower than the Leo 2A6 however, if memory serves me correct the GHQ figure has a wider track for the PUMA. I will have to pull them out and compare them.

Just checked and it is wider than the a Leo 2A6 at the tracks and overall. The pic does not show it being wider but it is hard to tell.

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:34 am

There is no question the Puma is a large BEAST!

However, be careful of the comparison in the photos. If you look closely, the front two road wheels on the right side of t he Puma are on slightly elevated terrain and the Leo pulling up beside it is a bit in back of it and a LITTLE depressed, throwing the EXACT perspective off. It's a good comparison if you take that into account and look at the statistics that I and another member put up about dimension.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the track footprint is mighty damn close, but the Puma tracks not quite as wide as the Leo. If you've ever loaded a tank on a rail car, you know that half of the track is off the edge on both sides. I don't think the tracking of the Puma would be much wider.The dimensions say they are the same height.

Anyway, I'm gonna fade away about this, with apologies to those who think I'm nitpickin' and just not letting go.

Believe me, I am NOT criticizing GHQ. They have provided me with many pleasant hours.