Best tanks, Allies or Axis?

[godofthunder9010]

It was there tactical and operational superiority where they really outshone all opposition. Consider the invasion of the Soviet Union. The fact that Germany had 3500 or so tanks to Russia's 20,000+ is, on the surface, a hopeless struggle. Many of those Russian tanks were outdated, but so too were many of the German tanks. Germany, according to the numbers, should have been decimated, yet it was them that wrought havock on the Russian tanks and destroying 15,000 minimum in the first 6 months.

The German armor was coordinated and constantly in direct wireless radio contact with all other tanks in the unit. Orders could be carried out quickly and efficiently. Superior tank designs were consistently outkilled by them throughout WW2.

 

[Patriot_1989tobeyond]

The Panzer was good, but so was the American Sherman, and The Matilda.

 

[godofthunder9010]

The USA's best - the Sherman, was a decent design considering that the USA had (for the most part) trashcanned the whole idea of tanks in their army prior to '39. But the fact of the matter is, a Sherman had to score a lucky shot on a Tiger I to kill it. Most direct hits simplly bounced off. The Tiger I, on the other hand, came equipped with the highly effective 88mm. Most hits from that were lethal to a Sherman.

In repairability and multitasking, the Sherman was a suberb tank. Some say that that the T-34/80 was vastly superior, but IMHO this advantage was only slight. Stuka pilots preferred going after the T-34/80 as it machine guns were not nearly as problematic as those on the Sherman.

 

[Uncle_Sam]

USA/Germany

My money is on Sherman Firefly against panther,
Pershing against Tiger I
Tiger king..... Air Force...LOL
T-95 against Mouse...

 

[Doppleganger]

USA/Germany

My money is on Sherman Firefly against panther,
Pershing against Tiger I
Tiger king..... Air Force...LOL
T-95 against Mouse...

I'd take your bet re the Sherman Firefly v Panther. In fact I'd bet my house and the shirt off my back on it too. And my first born.

Pershing was a better tank than the Tiger 1, but then it should have been given the fact that it was developed later.

King Tiger had so much potential.

The Maus was a joke.

 

[godofthunder9010]

There were lots of designs that were latecomers ... most of which DID NOT affect the outcome of the war. Of those that were very relevant to the War's outcome - so we're only counting tank designs that saw at least 3 years of WW2 service - the Tiger I was unbeatable 1v1. If anyone can think of an exception, please do share.

 

[The Other Guy]

I can't think of one. the Tiger was a great tank.

 

[redcoat]

My money is on Sherman Firefly against panther,

I'd take your bet re the Sherman Firefly v Panther. In fact I'd bet my house and the shirt off my back on it too. And my first born.

.

The Panther was a better tank than the Sherman Firefly, but I wouldn't go so far as betting my first born on it.
Because thanks to its 17 pdr gun, the Firefly could KO a Panther at up to a 1,000 yards.
In a battle between a Firefly and a Panther the winner would tend to be the one who scored a hit first.
In a single tank battle near Caen in Normandy a Firefly KO'd 3 Panthers.

 

[SHERMAN]

Hmmm, Id go with the Panther agains the firefly, if we are alking about the later modles of the Panther(which is only fair seing the FF is a late model of the Sherman...)

Would take Pershing over Tiger I...Probably equal to KunigTiger.

Id like to mention that if you count the Pershing in, than we really must discuss the Centurion and the T44. This makes it very diffecult for me....On the whole, Id say that, apart fromthe very last stages of the war, the Germans were superior, with their Tigers and Panthers. The Russians came a close second with the T34/88 and Stalin III...Americans were a very far 3rd, with the Sherman...

 

[godofthunder9010]

How many Pershings were actually deployed in World War II? I know that it was during WW2 that the USA realized they needed something better, but I'm not certain how much use the Pershing saw in that war.

As I said, there were a good number of latecomers and the outcome was already obvious by the time they were deployed. I believe that the Tiger II and T44 probably fall into that category, as does the Pershing.

 

[Doppleganger]

I don't think any Pershings were involved in action in WW2, correct me if I'm wrong.

As far as the comment re my first born on a Panther re Sherman FF yes I was a little over the top. I'd still take the Panther Ausf G over the FF. Aside from that gun the FF was a much inferior tank.

 

[SHERMAN]

No, a few Pershings showed up for the last stages:

Just 310 Pershings reached the US Army's armoured divisions in northwest Europe before the war's end. The new tank found itself against Panthers, Tigers and King Tigers and quickly proved itself to be just as resistant to punishment as the best of them.

The World's Great Tanks, Roger Ford

 

[Animal Mother]

I don't think any Pershings were involved in action in WW2, correct me if I'm wrong.

As far as the comment re my first born on a Panther re Sherman FF yes I was a little over the top. I'd still take the Panther Ausf G over the FF. Aside from that gun the FF was a much inferior tank.

The Sherman was also better regarding reliability and maintenance friendly.

 

[Doppleganger]

I don't think any Pershings were involved in action in WW2, correct me if I'm wrong.

As far as the comment re my first born on a Panther re Sherman FF yes I was a little over the top. I'd still take the Panther Ausf G over the FF. Aside from that gun the FF was a much inferior tank.

The Sherman was also better regarding reliability and maintenance friendly.

Once the Panther had it's teething problems ironed out it was actually quite a reliable tank. It was clearly not ready when it was introduced at the Battle of Kursk. You're right about the Sherman being more maintenance friendly, one of the few things the 'tommy cooker' had going for it.

 

[USAFAUX2004]

I would say AXIS and the russian T-34

 

[The thin Red Line]

You all seem to right off the Uk tanks .

So would you all please look up the comet tank.

short 17pdr (sherman firefly) firing sabot rounds could out range all german guns , could kill all tanks including the royal tiger on frontal arc.

armour not well shaped but 4 inch on turret.

and very very fast had a 600 bhp engine from the spitfire (p51d mustang)

UK kept them well into the 1950's before replacing. As same gun and engine as the centurion

 

[SHERMAN]

Yes, but that is the only decent tank the came up with, and it came late in 1944, when it was already too late.

 

[Kinection]

Shermans are sneered at by alot of people but I personally think they were very good tanks, I heard an account of some russian troops recieving some sherman tanks and saying that they thought them to be alot more reliable and easy to drive than their own Russian T-34 tanks.

The Sherman was also better regarding reliability and maintenance friendly.

The Russians did not regard the Shermans as good tanks, and definitly not reliable or armored for that matter.

Russians thought the tank was poorly constructed, things would break off in the cold and the armor was so thin that some times, shells would go straight through the tank without going off.

 

[godofthunder9010]

Well, we've had quite a lot of chance to discuss it. So I wonder how many disagree with my ranking for overall tank quality in World War II as follows?
#1 - Germany
#2 - USSR
#3 - tie between USA and UK
#4 - Italy
#5 - Japan

 

[SHERMAN]

Hmm, id agree with that.