I wonder how it compares to the Czech 152mm gun “Dana,” also on an 8x8 Tatra truck chassis for Southack’s points?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/152mm_SpGH_DANA
The Stryker looks sort of like the Czech gun. Looks like another maintenance nightmare.
You can use tracks instead of wheels to minimize axle-bearing failures related to giant cannons pounding out shells.
You can use manual transmissions instead of automatic trannies to eliminate transmission-cooling hoses to reduce tranny-fluid-related fires.
You can use rockets (e.g. Katyushas) instead of cannons to minimize damage from blast-firing vibrations.
...but even doing all of that, self-propelled artillery has fatal weaknesses compared to towed artillery.
Towed artillery was and remains cheaper to build and maintain.
Towed artillery is also lighter and can be taken to places that self-propelled guns cannot reach. Since the Vietnam war, heavy transport helicopters have also been used for rapid artillery deployment.
You can do that with cannons. A helicopter can carry a howitzer.
Not really the case for 55 ton SPA’s, though.
What’s faster for “rapid deployment,” a helicopter carrying a howitzer landing on a hill in Afghanistan, or a self-propelled cannon driving there?
So in speed, cost, and durability, the towed artillery always beats self-propelled artillery. Helicopters are simply faster than trucks.