Brand New Tiger Tanks

BritinBritain

BritinBritain

Per Ardua Ad Astra
Last edited:
Well I told the wife I had found her a new vehicle, it was new off the production line, had that classic shape and European styling and best off all no matter how badly she drove it would be hard to dent.

She was impressed until I showed her the video then I got told to F**k off.

:)
 
MontyB said:
Well I told the wife I had found her a new vehicle, it was new off the production line, had that classic shape and European styling and best off all no matter how badly she drove it would be hard to dent.

She was impressed until I showed her the video then I got told to F**k off.

:)
Click to expand...

That's the problem with wives, no sense of humour, or adventure.
 
I'm just too green with envy, to adequately express my feelings.

Imagine calling the RAA service bloke and telling them that you'd thrown a track getting out of your parking space at the local Supermarket.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what the fuel consumption is like.

A fella in UK runs a Scorpion with the Jaguar 4.2 litre 6 cylinder engine, he manages something like 1.6km a litre or 4.5 miles per imperial gallon.

Another fella years ago, ran a Daimler Dingo, he was often seen driving along the North Circular Road in North London with his missus in the turret. I bet he didnt get many dents from clumsy buggers throwing their doors open when parking along side him in supermarket car parks.
 
Last edited:
BritinAfrica said:
I wonder what the fuel consumption is like.

A fella in UK runs a Scorpion with the Jaguar 4.2 litre 6 cylinder engine, he manages something like 1.6km a litre or 4.5 miles per imperial gallon.

Another fella years ago, ran a Daimler Dingo, he was often seen driving along the North Circular Road in North London with his missus in the turret. I bet he didnt get many dents from clumsy buggers throwing their doors open when parking along side him in supermarket car parks.
Click to expand...


I can't tell you about fuel consumption,

But if I had one state side I could garuntee there would be one helacious gas guzzler tax,

But considering the ride that would quickly become irrelevant:thumb:
 
Estimated fuel consumption: 1 tank a year. ;)

The main issue as far as I can see is the noise level inside that thing.
I'm pretty sure they didn't build that replica of armour-plates, more likely max. 10mm. (3/8") steel plate in order to gain stability.
Add a noisy russian diesel engine to that and you have a resonance-box in bad need of heavy duty padding in order to keep you from going insane. :p
 
:mrgreen:
84RFK said:
Estimated fuel consumption: 1 tank a year. ;)

The main issue as far as I can see is the noise level inside that thing.
I'm pretty sure they didn't build that replica of armour-plates, more likely max. 10mm. (3/8") steel plate in order to gain stability.
Add a noisy russian diesel engine to that and you have a resonance-box in bad need of heavy duty padding in order to keep you from going insane. :p
Click to expand...

You ought to drive our old AEC 10 tonners (on my avatar), drivers had to wear ear defenders they were so noisy with the diesel alongside the driver. Crash gearbox, no power steering and 29MPH or 46KPH max speed, empty, loaded, uphill, downhill or over a cliff. Some drivers tried knocking it into neutral when going down hill, it got a speed wobble at 35MPH! Its a wonder they were fitted with padded seats instead of a plank. I ended up in a British Military Hospital in Germany after trying to jump a ditch with one. The truck stopped, I didn't. Broken arm and broken ribs, but I got clean sheets and nice nurses to look after me. :mrgreen:

They were good for driving over civilian cars though lol
 
Last edited:
84RFK said:
Estimated fuel consumption: 1 tank a year. ;)

The main issue as far as I can see is the noise level inside that thing.
I'm pretty sure they didn't build that replica of armour-plates, more likely max. 10mm. (3/8") steel plate in order to gain stability.
Add a noisy russian diesel engine to that and you have a resonance-box in bad need of heavy duty padding in order to keep you from going insane. :p
Click to expand...

The lifting/support cables in the video do look a bit light to be supporting a 57 tonne tank.
 
I'd like to see the Patton Muesum take some of it's peices out for private renovation....complete renovation, then take it out on the armor range for some high calibre plinking :p

All private so we can save from speding federal funding on any reborne Jag Panthers or Tigers, and send those federal funds instead towards veterens programs for troops coming home...

Maybe even take proceeds from shows and donate it to such a cause...

Cause I can say for certain, who here wouldn't pay money to see a Sherman Firefly or Tiger MK. I throw a few downrange?
 
Last edited:
It would be a beatiful sight to see a true functional re built tiger...

Until then, like these guys in Russia, we can only dream...

But even so, these guys did a remarkable job!
 
BritinAfrica said:
The specs say its around 26 ton
Click to expand...
At 26 tons, it must still have some very serious steel plate in the construction. If you wrote off 10-12 tons for the drive train and engine, that would still leave 14-16 tons for framing and plating of the hull and turret.

With 12mm plate coming in at just under 100kg per sq.mtr., you might start to get a bit of an idea of exactly how thick it would have to be to get that sort of weight.
 
BritinAfrica said:
A better description would be a "Light weight Tiger." Even so I'd love to lay hands on one, though I doubt if the ANC would allow it into the country.
Click to expand...

Or you could call it a Tiger Jr. Either way, if I had access to one of those when I was doing armored logistics, security would not be a problem.:tank:
 
senojekips said:
At 26 tons, it must still have some very serious steel plate in the construction. If you wrote off 10-12 tons for the drive train and engine, that would still leave 14-16 tons for framing and plating of the hull and turret.

With 12mm plate coming in at just under 100kg per sq.mtr., you might start to get a bit of an idea of exactly how thick it would have to be to get that sort of weight.
Click to expand...


The tracks on the original alone made up 5.5 tonne so I am guessing the superstructure is not all that heavy.

Don't get me wrong it is an excellent replica and I wouldn't say no getting my hands on one.

Here are a set of spec's for the original:

Technical specifications for Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger I Ausf. E (SdKfz 181)
General Data
Manufacturer Henschel, Krupp (turret)
Fgst. numbers 250001-251346
Radio (internal) Intercom
Radio (external) FuG5 and FuG2
Crew 5 (Driver, radio operator, gunner, commander and loader)

Measurements
Length (with gun) 8.45m (27.7 ft)
Length (without gun) 6.316m (20.66 ft)
Width with combat tracks 3.72m (12.2 ft)
Width with transport tracks 3.14m (10.3 ft)
Height to hull 1.78m (5.8 ft)
Height to cupola 3.00m (9.8 ft)
Combat weight 57,250kg (126,214.5 lbs)
Transport weight 52,250kg (115,191.4 lbs)

Automotive specifications
Engine model Maybach HL 210 P45
Maybach HL 230 P45 (from Fgst. 250251)
Engine type Water-cooled V-12
Displacement (HL 210) 21 liters, (HL230) 23 liters
Horsepower (max) (HL 210) 650 @ 3000, (HL 230) 700 @ 3000 rpm
Transmission Maybach Olvar Type OG 40 12 16, 8 fwd, 4 rev gears
Max speed 1st gear 2.8kmph (1.8mph)
Max speed 2nd gear 4.3kmph (2.7mph)
Max speed 3rd gear 6.2kmph (3.8mph)
Max speed 4th gear 9.2kmph (5.7mph)
Max speed 5th gear 14.1kmph (8.7mph)
Max speed 6th gear 20.9kmph (13mph)
Max speed 7th gear 30.5kmph (18.9mph)
Max speed 8th gear 45.4kmph (28mph)
Max speed 1st reverse gear 2.8kmph (1.8mph)
Max speed 2nd reverse gear 4.3kmph (2.7mph)
Max speed 3rd reverse gear 6.2kmph (3.8mph)
Max speed 4th reverse gear 9.2kmph (5.7mph)
Track contact surface 3.605m
Track width 720mm (2.36 ft) combat, 520mm transport
Links per track 96 links
Weight per link (combat) 26.76kg (59lbs)
Total weight of track per side 2880kg (6349lbs)
Suspension type Transverse torsion bars
Number of roadwheels on each side 4 double and 4 triple
Road wheel type Rubber (early) or Steel (late)
Road wheel size 800 x 75mm (31.5 x 2.95ins)
Speed (maximum) 45.4kmph (28mph)
Speed (on road) 20 kmph (12.5mph)
Range (on road) 125km
Range (cross-country) 80km
Climbing (step) 0.8m (2.6ft)
Climbing (degrees) 35°
Trench crossing 2.5m (8.2ft)
Fording depth 1.6m (5.24ft)
Ground clearance 470mm
Ground pressure combat tracks 1.04kg sq cm (14.8psi)
Ground pressure transport tracks 1.43kg sq cm (20.4psi)
Minimum turning radius 3.44m (11.28ft)
Maximum turning radius 165m (525ft)
Steering ratio 1.28
Steering type Wheel controlled hydraulic operated regenerative
Weight-to-power ratio 12.3 hp/ton
Fuel capacity 569 liters (approximately 125 gallons)
Fuel type Gasoline
Fuel consumption (on road) 4.32 liters/km
Fuel consumption (cross-country) 6.75 liters/km

Firepower
Primary weapon 8.8cm Kw.K. 36 L/56 rifled cannon
Muzzle velocity 600m/second (HE)
773m/second (AP)
930m/second (AP/tungsten core)
Effective range 3000 m with armour piercing and 5000 m with HE rounds
Capacity 92 rounds, sometimes modified to carry 106 or 120
Gun sight TZF9b 2.5x, 24°, later TZF9c
Elevation -6.5° - +17°
Traverse 360° (hydraulic and hand traverse)
Traverse speed 25 to 60 seconds depending on engine speed
Firing height 2.195m
Secondary weapons 2 x 7.92mm MG-34 (1 coaxial in turret, one in ball mount)
Ammunition 4800 x 7.92mm
Gun sight K.Z.F.2 (1.8x 18°)
Elevation -10° - +20°
Traverse 15° both sides (hand traverse)

Armor
Armor type Rolled homogeneous nickel-steel plate
electro-welded interlocking-plate construction
Hull front 100mm (3.94in) @ 24°
Hull side (upper) 80mm (3.15in) @ 0°
Hull side (lower) 60mm (2.36in) @ 0°
Hull rear 80mm (3.15in) @ 8°
Hull top 25mm (0.98in) @ 90°
Hull bottom 25mm (0.98in) @ 90°
Turret front 100mm (3.94in) @ 8°
Gun mantlet 120mm (4.72in) @ 0°
Turret sides 80mm (3.15in) @ 0°
Turret rear 80mm (3.15in) @ 0°
Turret top 25mm (0.98in) later 40-45mm (1.57-1.77in) @ 81-90°


http://www.alanhamby.com/technical.shtml
 
Last edited:
senojekips said:
At 26 tons, it must still have some very serious steel plate in the construction. If you wrote off 10-12 tons for the drive train and engine, that would still leave 14-16 tons for framing and plating of the hull and turret.

With 12mm plate coming in at just under 100kg per sq.mtr., you might start to get a bit of an idea of exactly how thick it would have to be to get that sort of weight.
Click to expand...

Well, as the tracks and the drive-train has to come from somewhere, I suppose you'll find plenty ex-Soviet tank parts in that Tiger replica, and that would explain the weight.
 
84RFK said:
Well, as the tracks and the drive-train has to come from somewhere, I suppose you'll find plenty ex-Soviet tank parts in that Tiger replica, and that would explain the weight.
Click to expand...
Yes, that final drive looked distinctly "solid", and I couldn't imagine any other easily accessible heavy enough specialised parts being available, perhaps some other pieces have found their way out of a Soviet junk yard too, particularly the castings. To be honest, I still can't see where all the weight is, even if the mechanical parts were 18 tons, which I seriously doubt, that would need a lot of very heavy plate to bring it up to the 26 ton mark.

From the view of the partially formed turret, the steel plate used appears to be no more than about 6mm.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top