17th, I don't think I said she said
the 152 was BETTER than the 88..., just that for the first couple of phases of the war, until about late 43, it was really the ONLY reliable killer of heavy German armor they had, and the Russians were happy with them for that...and that at close ranges, I think 1000 yds or less, closer than the range at which the 88 could kill THEM, but then the Russians ALWAYS prefered their artillery up close and personal, direct fire....leave the indirect to the katyushas...
The MAIN Russian tank and AT gun for MOST of the war was the 76mm gun/howitzer, which was ACTUALLY about as powerful as the shorter barreled, lower velocity M2 75mm that our early M4 Shermans had. So even their arguably better T-34s (until the first T-34/85s showed up) and KV series heavy tanks were undergunned like our early (North Africa and some Sicily) M4s were against Tigers and Panthers, so they needed SOMETHING.
What I said was "superior" to the 88 was the LATER Russian AT guns, first available towed in about mid to ate 44, the 100mm HV long barreled cannon and later the 122mm cannon...and then which showed up in the JS series tanks and SU and JSU series TDs...that is why the Germans were trying to get the 12.8 cm cannon to work in the Sturmtiger, and later MONSTER tanks, just to catch up with the Russians that by late 44 early 45 had PASSED German tank and At guns in size, velocity, range, and penetration....
Heck, the Russian WWII 100mm towed AT gun was probably and probably still is, and probably will forever be, "state of the Art" for Towed AT guns and is STILL front line issue to many Armies to this day, and is "technically" capable of taking out even an Abrams...(the Iraquis had some at least in 91....) IF they could get a shot off, and being towed, it would be ONE shot. But the Pakistanis and Indians, and the Chinese, and many more, still use it...(Even if the CONCEPT of towed AT guns is obsolete and was by late WWII....)