MadeInChina
Active member
pick ur favorite world war II armored vehicles, post reasons why :tank: :tank:
World War II armored vehicles
Germans made the best and the most advanced tanks in WWII, and the most propably still do. The only bad thing was lack of german manufacturing capability and since advanced features often complex construction which increased manufacturing times.
Russian T3485 has it's legend but it is mostly only legend. Tank was so called massproduction tank which only purpose was to be quicly manufactured and outnumber german tanks.
Something about products of german tank industry and their users tell kill counts. We know many german tank aces like Otto Carius or colonel Franz Bäke, and combat situations where only few german tanks destroyed dozens of T34s, and no need to mention herr Wittman.
For example straightly from achtungpanzer.com:
"One of those actions was five-day battle in January of 1944 at the "Balabonowka Pocket", where Panzer-Regiment Bäke was credit with destruction of 267 Soviet tanks, while losing one Tiger and four Panthers."
T34 bad features:
-Bad sights
-Bad command system
-Bad visibility outside
-No radios
-Overemployed tank commander
-Low quality armor steel since ancient manufacturing systems (high concentration of coal -> weaker)
-Compared to caliber AP ammunition was under efficient (T34 with 76mm)
Good features:
-Fits for fast massproduction (simplified construction)
-Sloped armor (not unique feature in WWII)
-Effective aluminium diesel engine
Russian T3485 has it's legend but it is mostly only legend. Tank was so called massproduction tank which only purpose was to be quicly manufactured and outnumber german tanks.
Something about products of german tank industry and their users tell kill counts. We know many german tank aces like Otto Carius or colonel Franz Bäke, and combat situations where only few german tanks destroyed dozens of T34s, and no need to mention herr Wittman.
For example straightly from achtungpanzer.com:
"One of those actions was five-day battle in January of 1944 at the "Balabonowka Pocket", where Panzer-Regiment Bäke was credit with destruction of 267 Soviet tanks, while losing one Tiger and four Panthers."
T34 bad features:
-Bad sights
-Bad command system
-Bad visibility outside
-No radios
-Overemployed tank commander
-Low quality armor steel since ancient manufacturing systems (high concentration of coal -> weaker)
-Compared to caliber AP ammunition was under efficient (T34 with 76mm)
Good features:
-Fits for fast massproduction (simplified construction)
-Sloped armor (not unique feature in WWII)
-Effective aluminium diesel engine
Charge 7
Master Gunner
You should also list the bad features of German armor. Such as that it constantly broke down, was too heavy for long distance high speed manouver, and most simple of all - was so complicted it couldn't be produced fast enough. All of what you say it true, but was eventually negated by what I just listed. The T-34 wins because although in quality it was not a match to the Tiger I and Tiger II, it was far superior in reliability, speed of manouver, and mass production. The Germans would've been better served to have kept to a modification of the Panzer IV - give it sloped armor and perhaps wider tracks for Russian steppes and they would've been able to make many more tanks that worked well and ran fast.
Charge_7 said:
Yes, i had a hurry and no time to write longer post.
General bad features of german tanks:
-Unrealiable engine (PzV)
-Complex and expensive construction combined with lack of production capability, that itself doesn't make german armors bad.
-At early war too light armor and weapons
German tanks weren't the best ones to manufacture and PzIV wasn't the best product of german tank engineering since it's light and unsloped armor, but personally i prefer StuGIII serie, PzV later models, Tiger II, Jagdpanther and in some cases Jagdtiger.
godofthunder9010
Active member
Everything that had a 100mm or bigger main gun showed up too late in World War II to have much of an impact on the outcome. Sure, there were better tanks than even the King Tiger, but they were still very new on VE day.
Doppleganger
Active member
Charge_7 said:
Guderian, when he was Inspector General of Panzertruppen, recommended that German factories cease production of Panthers and Tigers and instead focus on the long barrelled Panzer IV, because many more could be made, they were very reliable, and they could be repaired in their sleep by the tank crews. Of course, Hitler would have none of this but Guderian had excellent reasons for recommending this course of action.
When you think about it, Germany's greatest victories came about when neither the Panther or Tiger were in service with the Wehrmacht. Germany would have been better served to scrap the development of the Tiger II and instead focus on making the Panther and Tiger I more reliable and easier to build.
Just to add, that I don't believe the negative factors you listed outweighed the positive factors when it came to the Panther or Tiger. Both were able to dominate the battlefield and it was only the greater application of air power and the eventual lack of fuel supplies that prevented either tank from having a greater influence over events than they did.
Charge 7
Master Gunner
Yep, the later tanks took the "blitz" outta blitzkreig.
As to your last point, you have some case for an arguement there, but still they could not be produced fast enough. That really is what it boils down to. 1400 Tigers vs 50,000 Shermans made and not even counting the T-34s yet alone other makes.
As to your last point, you have some case for an arguement there, but still they could not be produced fast enough. That really is what it boils down to. 1400 Tigers vs 50,000 Shermans made and not even counting the T-34s yet alone other makes.
I was thinking that maybe this should be sperated in self-propelled artillery and tanks. Its kind of hard to compare the two. But overall I like the JS-3 even though very few were made by the end of the war.
http://www.battlefield.ru/is3.html
http://www.battlefield.ru/is3.html
MadeInChina
Active member
the best tank overall, i think is the pz IV H version
it has mobility, a very reliable engine and easy to repair chassis
it has wider tracks than previous IV versions, giving it an advantage in traction
it is armed with a longbarreled 75mm cannon, said in achungpanzer.com that it could pentrate up to josef stalin 2 tanks and below
the side skirts, got to love those, makes heat wewapons very worthless aginist and is a hassel to soviet anittank infantry
magnetic paste on armor is a burden on soviet antitank infantry as well
easy to produce means alot more could be made
armor is sufficient in which it could survive t-43 shots and in some cases could survive even 88mm shots, together with mobility it is a good advantage
the best part of all: huge ammo allwance, at the end of the war soviet heavy gunn vehicles, could only carry 28 ammo, while the pz IV H could carry around 40 and more rounds, very good advantage as german goes into its late war and its badly mauled supply lines
a combination of these advantages and it makes it the best tank of wwii i think
another good tank is the KV-85, with similar features like the PZ IV H
it was realized by germans to make bigger better tanks when they saw KV 1's invincibility
it has mobility, a very reliable engine and easy to repair chassis
it has wider tracks than previous IV versions, giving it an advantage in traction
it is armed with a longbarreled 75mm cannon, said in achungpanzer.com that it could pentrate up to josef stalin 2 tanks and below
the side skirts, got to love those, makes heat wewapons very worthless aginist and is a hassel to soviet anittank infantry
magnetic paste on armor is a burden on soviet antitank infantry as well
easy to produce means alot more could be made
armor is sufficient in which it could survive t-43 shots and in some cases could survive even 88mm shots, together with mobility it is a good advantage
the best part of all: huge ammo allwance, at the end of the war soviet heavy gunn vehicles, could only carry 28 ammo, while the pz IV H could carry around 40 and more rounds, very good advantage as german goes into its late war and its badly mauled supply lines
a combination of these advantages and it makes it the best tank of wwii i think
another good tank is the KV-85, with similar features like the PZ IV H
it was realized by germans to make bigger better tanks when they saw KV 1's invincibility
The common opinion is that the Panther was the best tank to come out of WWII. I have to agree that the Panther was the best "All-around" tank of the war.
The Panther was a medium tank like the Sherman and the T-34. Neither can compare with the Panther's firepower, frontal armor, and mobility combination. The T-34/85 is close but doesn't have the Panther's ability to hit at long range. The Sherman can't even keep up with the Panther on the open road so it's not even a factor. Even the later "Easy 8" Sherman compares poorly.
Yes, when it first rolled out it had some problems. Yea well, so did the M-16 rifle and the F-14 Tomcat. ...big deal. Problems can be fixed.
The question may be what about the King Tiger, JS-III or the M-26 Pershing (not listed but probably should have been)? They are all monsters with thick hides and killer guns. True.
The King Tiger was to heavy and slow to get around very well. However it may rank as the best tank in "defense".
The JS-III is the Russian answer to the King Tiger. Slightly more mobile than the King T with a better armor layout. But it's 122mm gun can't complete with the Tiger or the Panther at range. One heck of a punch but not too accurate.
The M-26 has good mobility, fair armor for a heavy, and a decent gun. But like the JS-III it came out too late to really be considered a WWII tank.
What I like about the Panther against the heavies is that it can easily take them from the side or rear, even at range. It's gun is that good. No other medium tank can make that claim. (Later Shermans maybe.)
Speed, mobility, armor, firepower, the Panther is the only medium that compete with the heavies on anything close to equal terms. A WWII medium tank is an "all-purpose" weapons platform. In this respect, the Panther wins.
The Panther was a medium tank like the Sherman and the T-34. Neither can compare with the Panther's firepower, frontal armor, and mobility combination. The T-34/85 is close but doesn't have the Panther's ability to hit at long range. The Sherman can't even keep up with the Panther on the open road so it's not even a factor. Even the later "Easy 8" Sherman compares poorly.
Yes, when it first rolled out it had some problems. Yea well, so did the M-16 rifle and the F-14 Tomcat. ...big deal. Problems can be fixed.
The question may be what about the King Tiger, JS-III or the M-26 Pershing (not listed but probably should have been)? They are all monsters with thick hides and killer guns. True.
The King Tiger was to heavy and slow to get around very well. However it may rank as the best tank in "defense".
The JS-III is the Russian answer to the King Tiger. Slightly more mobile than the King T with a better armor layout. But it's 122mm gun can't complete with the Tiger or the Panther at range. One heck of a punch but not too accurate.
The M-26 has good mobility, fair armor for a heavy, and a decent gun. But like the JS-III it came out too late to really be considered a WWII tank.
What I like about the Panther against the heavies is that it can easily take them from the side or rear, even at range. It's gun is that good. No other medium tank can make that claim. (Later Shermans maybe.)
Speed, mobility, armor, firepower, the Panther is the only medium that compete with the heavies on anything close to equal terms. A WWII medium tank is an "all-purpose" weapons platform. In this respect, the Panther wins.
EagleZtrike
Active member
There was a documentary on which was the best tank in WW2 it was between the german tiger and the sherman. The Tiger is better. It took 4 sherman tanks to kill 1 tiger. That 1 tiger can kill 3 shermans while the 4th sherman kills the tiger.
No question the Tiger was more than a match for any Allied tank when it came out. This was still true on the western front thru 1944. The Tiger's rep became legendary. As such, every german tank became a Tiger to the Allied troops. Many of those "Tigers" were actually Panthers.
On the technical side, The Tiger I was only superior (slightly) in firepower. The Panther was much faster and could cover terrain the Tiger couldn't cross without bogging down. Indeed the Tigers had a bad habit of getting stuck.
As far as Armor, the Panther had thicker armor on the front turret while the Tiger did on the front hull. However the Panther's armor was well sloped (idea stolen from the Russian T-34 it was designed to fight). You would have to look pretty hard to find any slope on a Tiger I.
On the King Tiger this problem of sloped armor was improved. And oddly enough, it's hull was shaped just like a.....Panther!
The Panther was a much better design than the Tiger I.
In addition, Allied tankers were quoted saying the same thing about the Panther. It took 5 Sherman to take one out.
Don't get me wrong. I have always loved the Tiger I. Honestly if I could have any tank sitting in my front yard on display, it would be the famous Tiger I. It's an awesome looking tank.
On the technical side, The Tiger I was only superior (slightly) in firepower. The Panther was much faster and could cover terrain the Tiger couldn't cross without bogging down. Indeed the Tigers had a bad habit of getting stuck.
As far as Armor, the Panther had thicker armor on the front turret while the Tiger did on the front hull. However the Panther's armor was well sloped (idea stolen from the Russian T-34 it was designed to fight). You would have to look pretty hard to find any slope on a Tiger I.
On the King Tiger this problem of sloped armor was improved. And oddly enough, it's hull was shaped just like a.....Panther!
The Panther was a much better design than the Tiger I.
In addition, Allied tankers were quoted saying the same thing about the Panther. It took 5 Sherman to take one out.
Don't get me wrong. I have always loved the Tiger I. Honestly if I could have any tank sitting in my front yard on display, it would be the famous Tiger I. It's an awesome looking tank.
MadeInChina
Active member
honestly i think the best firepower defensive tank was the tiger series, for example, they were only staffed with experienced crew, and were put into seperate tank regiments to promote its capabilties
a tiger tank somewhere in the holland region had distrupted the offensive by a british tank division for a day, it killed some 40 tanks in all with only one tank, AWeSOME
however, the best tank desotroyer was the ISU122, because its gun has a great range with the best penetration power of any selfpropelled gun.
the gun is the a-19 122mm heavy gun, which one battery of it had completely halted an ss tank regiment during kursk
wha?? shermans is in the list for the best world war ii tank??
hell no, that things a piece of crap
a tiger tank somewhere in the holland region had distrupted the offensive by a british tank division for a day, it killed some 40 tanks in all with only one tank, AWeSOME
however, the best tank desotroyer was the ISU122, because its gun has a great range with the best penetration power of any selfpropelled gun.
the gun is the a-19 122mm heavy gun, which one battery of it had completely halted an ss tank regiment during kursk
wha?? shermans is in the list for the best world war ii tank??
hell no, that things a piece of crap
Agreed, the King Tiger is the best tank going for defense. Terrific gun even at long range. Frontal armor nearly impossible to penetrate.
Best TD? Either the Jagd Panther or the SU-100. The M-36 wasn't bad either. The SU-122 did pack a punch.
Like the King Tiger, the Jagd Tiger is a mean one if it gets a chance to set up for you. Great gun, 128mm. Same size as a 5" gun on a navy destroyer.
Best TD? Either the Jagd Panther or the SU-100. The M-36 wasn't bad either. The SU-122 did pack a punch.
Like the King Tiger, the Jagd Tiger is a mean one if it gets a chance to set up for you. Great gun, 128mm. Same size as a 5" gun on a navy destroyer.
MadeInChina
Active member
huh?
u mean the ISU 122, the su 122 was a self propelled howtizer, firing only he rounds, so its some what useless aginist tanks
u mean the ISU 122, the su 122 was a self propelled howtizer, firing only he rounds, so its some what useless aginist tanks
