Best Tank of WW2 - Page 3 - Aircraft of World War II

Vincenzo · 08-20-2009, 10:50 AM

Armour data

Tiger
Hull front: 100
Hull sides: 60/80
Hull back: 82
Turret mantlet: 110
Turret front: 100
Turret sides: 80
Roof: 25
Bottom: 25

Churchill VI
Hull front: 89+13
Hull sides: (64+12/51+12)+20 (fw)
Hull back: 25/51
Turret mantlet: np?
Turret front: 89
Turret sides: 76+20
Roof: 19
Bottom: 16/19

KV-1 model 1942 (the heaviest, unlucky i found info only in english source on this variant maybe some missinterpretation?)
Hull front: 110/ 75+31
Hull sides: 90/130
Hull back: 60/75
Turret mantlet: 120
Turret front: 100
Turret sides: 120
Roof: 30/40
Bottom: 30

from Tzaw1 post
Hull front: 40/ 75+25
Hull sides: 75/75+25
Hull back: 75
Turret mantlet: 90
Turret front: 75
Turret sides: 75 or 82
Roof: 30/40
Bottom: 30

Condora · 08-20-2009, 12:53 PM

Sorry, Vincenzo.

You have... two tanks descriptions there, or more?
I'm not quite sure on how and where to separate them...

Vincenzo · 08-20-2009, 02:20 PM

ok try to put in different format

proton45 · 08-20-2009, 07:57 PM

I went with the T34 for most of the reasons listed here, but I also agree that the absence of the Tiger I is a bit of a mistake...it was far more important then the Panther....

Vincenzo · 08-20-2009, 08:10 PM

too me within listed go to T-34, was so superior tank until Pz IV with 75/43

Condora · 08-21-2009, 07:50 AM

Thanks Vincenzo, much clearer now...
Age takes away one's faculties, these days I can't even see the last two figures of the last line of the "torture old men" thread.

Juha · 08-21-2009, 08:21 AM

Hello Vincenzo,
what is your source for the armour of Churchill VI. Otherwise it is as what I have seen but according to my sources turret sides were 76,2mm ie 3”.

Churchill Mks VII and VIII were even better protected, hull and turret fronts were 6”/152mm and turret sides 95mm. Hull sides upper 95mm, lower 83mm.

Hello Deanimator
now 76mm gun, which was common gun in Shermans in 1945, maybe the most common at that time in ETO, was more or less equal to the 85mm gun of T-34-85 in armour piercing but it had weaker HE round than either 85mm or US 75mm.

Generally speaking, I also like Tiger I. But it is also question on the job. For a dash from Rheine to Elbe I'd choose Comet.

Juha

Vincenzo · 08-21-2009, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juha

Hello Vincenzo,
what is your source for the armour of Churchill VI. Otherwise it is as what I have seen but according to my sources turret sides were 76,2mm ie 3”.

Churchill Mks VII and VIII were even better protected, hull and turret fronts were 6”/152mm and turret sides 95mm. Hull sides upper 95mm, lower 83mm.

Hello Deanimator
now 76mm gun, which was common gun in Shermans in 1945, maybe the most common at that time in ETO, was more or less equal to the 85mm gun of T-34-85 in armour piercing but it had weaker HE round than either 85mm or US 75mm.

Generally speaking, I also like Tiger I. But it is also question on the job. For a dash from Rheine to Elbe I'd choose Comet.

Juha

true i read wrong line,
http://www.wwiiequipment.com/index.p...anks&Itemid=56

yes but coming on batte late (d-day) when Tiger was near to be put out of production

Juha · 08-21-2009, 09:08 AM

Hello Vincenzo
Yes, "heavy" Churchills (Mk VII and VIII) were late comers, combat debut in Normandy. They had very heavy armour but still had the 75mm gun. It had a good HE round but was inadequate for A/T work.

Juha

Vincenzo · 08-21-2009, 10:04 AM

Somebody can check that KV-1 model 1942 was a true tank, and not a missinterpretation of KV-1e?

MrCreak · 08-21-2009, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

Somebody can check that KV-1 model 1942 was a true tank, and not a missinterpretation of KV-1e?

Wiki

Quote:

Model 1942 (KV-1C) – Fully cast turret with thicker armour or welded turret with thicker armour, again up-armoured and used an improved engine and the 76 mm ZiS-5 tank gun.

Also:

Quote:

That on the left is a model 1941 with the up-armored cast turret (sometimes referred as the model 1942 and recognizable for the armor ring around the turret's rear MG);

And that's not even mentioning this or this.

Vincenzo · 08-21-2009, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrCreak

Wiki

Also:

And that's not even mentioning this or this.

Thank for help but i indeed russian source, too me found some english source, unlucky i don't laod the pic for campare it with a pics of KV-1e

MrCreak · 08-22-2009, 11:07 PM

KV-1C Model 1942 (KV-1S in English).
Not to be confused with the KV-1s (s = skorostny/ fast).

Vincenzo · 08-23-2009, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrCreak

KV-1C Model 1942 (KV-1S in English).
Not to be confused with the KV-1s (s = skorostny/ fast).

the page that you linked it's for KB-1c called KV-1s in latin letters it's sure a model 1942 but was not a over armoured KV, do you do confusion?

PJay · 09-03-2009, 04:39 PM

No mention of the German Mk4? Upgradeable, fought through most of the war.
On the subject of the Tiger, I seem to recall the Syrians still had some in '67 but memory is fickle.

View Poll Results: Best Tank of WW2
King Tiger	4	8.70%
Panther	23	50.00%
Sherman	2	4.35%
T-34	17	36.96%
Voters: 46. You may not vote on this poll

08-20-2009, 10:50 AM	#31
Vincenzo Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Lazio Posts: 806	Armour data Tiger Hull front: 100 Hull sides: 60/80 Hull back: 82 Turret mantlet: 110 Turret front: 100 Turret sides: 80 Roof: 25 Bottom: 25 Churchill VI Hull front: 89+13 Hull sides: (64+12/51+12)+20 (fw) Hull back: 25/51 Turret mantlet: np? Turret front: 89 Turret sides: 76+20 Roof: 19 Bottom: 16/19 KV-1 model 1942 (the heaviest, unlucky i found info only in english source on this variant maybe some missinterpretation?) Hull front: 110/ 75+31 Hull sides: 90/130 Hull back: 60/75 Turret mantlet: 120 Turret front: 100 Turret sides: 120 Roof: 30/40 Bottom: 30 from Tzaw1 post Hull front: 40/ 75+25 Hull sides: 75/75+25 Hull back: 75 Turret mantlet: 90 Turret front: 75 Turret sides: 75 or 82 Roof: 30/40 Bottom: 30 Last edited by Vincenzo; 09-04-2009 at 02:47 PM. Reason: corrected error

09-03-2009, 04:39 PM	#45
PJay Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: London UK Posts: 49	No mention of the German Mk4? Upgradeable, fought through most of the war. On the subject of the Tiger, I seem to recall the Syrians still had some in '67 but memory is fickle. __________________ These are my principles, if you don't like them I have others. (Groucho Marx) 'A L'Eau C'est L'Heure!' French Navy Motto

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-20-2009, 12:53 PM	#32
Condora Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Europe, currently Portugal Posts: 205	Sorry, Vincenzo. You have... two tanks descriptions there, or more? I'm not quite sure on how and where to separate them...

08-20-2009, 02:20 PM	#33
Vincenzo Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Lazio Posts: 806	ok try to put in different format

08-20-2009, 07:57 PM	#34
proton45 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 415	I went with the T34 for most of the reasons listed here, but I also agree that the absence of the Tiger I is a bit of a mistake...it was far more important then the Panther....

08-20-2009, 08:10 PM	#35
Vincenzo Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Lazio Posts: 806	too me within listed go to T-34, was so superior tank until Pz IV with 75/43

08-21-2009, 07:50 AM	#36
Condora Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Europe, currently Portugal Posts: 205	Thanks Vincenzo, much clearer now... Age takes away one's faculties, these days I can't even see the last two figures of the last line of the "torture old men" thread.

08-21-2009, 08:21 AM	#37
Juha Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki Posts: 1,361	Hello Vincenzo, what is your source for the armour of Churchill VI. Otherwise it is as what I have seen but according to my sources turret sides were 76,2mm ie 3”. Churchill Mks VII and VIII were even better protected, hull and turret fronts were 6”/152mm and turret sides 95mm. Hull sides upper 95mm, lower 83mm. Hello Deanimator now 76mm gun, which was common gun in Shermans in 1945, maybe the most common at that time in ETO, was more or less equal to the 85mm gun of T-34-85 in armour piercing but it had weaker HE round than either 85mm or US 75mm. Generally speaking, I also like Tiger I. But it is also question on the job. For a dash from Rheine to Elbe I'd choose Comet. Juha

08-21-2009, 09:08 AM	#39
Juha Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki Posts: 1,361	Hello Vincenzo Yes, "heavy" Churchills (Mk VII and VIII) were late comers, combat debut in Normandy. They had very heavy armour but still had the 75mm gun. It had a good HE round but was inadequate for A/T work. Juha

08-21-2009, 10:04 AM	#40
Vincenzo Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Lazio Posts: 806	Somebody can check that KV-1 model 1942 was a true tank, and not a missinterpretation of KV-1e?

08-22-2009, 11:07 PM	#43
MrCreak Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Scunthorpe UK Posts: 19	KV-1C Model 1942 (KV-1S in English). Not to be confused with the KV-1s (s = skorostny/ fast).