Best Tank of WW2 - Aircraft of World War II

carman1877 · 08-13-2009, 08:01 PM

Which was the best tank of WW2: King Tiger, Panther, Sherman, or T-34
(All versions of thye tanks such as the firefly)

Doughboy · 08-13-2009, 10:22 PM

I don't know how you can start a thread labeled 'Best tank of ww2' and only include four tanks in your poll?

Anyway, the T-34 is probably the best of the tanks in the poll because it had speed, sloped armor, and a good main Armament. IMHO.

carman1877 · 08-13-2009, 10:31 PM

I was going on the four main tanks of World War two, I would have included the Pershing, and others but I felt that they did not have as big an impact on the war as the others that I listed.

Doughboy · 08-13-2009, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carman1877

I was going on the four main tanks of World War two, I would have included the Pershing, and others but I felt that they did not have as big an impact on the war as the others that I listed.

Okay. That makes sense.

Watanbe · 08-14-2009, 02:22 AM

Panther is the best in my opinion, superb tank. Its a selection of the best bits from all the above tanks. Good main gun, strong armour, relatively mobile.

Juha · 08-14-2009, 09:00 AM

For arguments sake, A34 Comet
Plusses
Excellent gun (almost as good in A/T work as the Panthers 7,5cm KwK 42)
Fast
Very good power weight ratio
Reliable
Reasonable good armour protection

Minusses
old-fasioned boxlike hull
narrow tracks

Juha

Graeme · 08-14-2009, 09:36 AM

You guys obviously know a lot about tanks whereas I know jack. I love buying those coffee table style WW2 picture books but they tend to let themselves down in the captioning and text department. This is captioned as "Russian troops capture a German tank."

What's the tank?
And what are those Jet Turbine looking wheels(?) on top?

Juha · 08-14-2009, 09:44 AM

Hello Graeme
the tank is PzKpfW IV and those mysterious rotors are for engine cooling.

Juha

timshatz · 08-14-2009, 09:57 AM

Best tank would probably be the Panther. But in terms of serviceability, ease of use and bang for the buck I went with the T34. It's just a very good tank, especially the T34-85. Panther is a better design but a maintainence nightmare in comparison.

IMHO, best tank would have to cover all the way from manufacture to logistics. Just considering battlefield use is too limiting.

Juha · 08-14-2009, 01:27 PM

IMHO for Allied the best tanks for deep penetration attacks were T-34-85 or Comet. T-34-85 had a little better protection, better HE shell and broader tracks. Comet was probably more reliable, had gun with better penetration power and had better power/weight ratio.

Panther on the other hand was a good tank for Germans in late 44 onwards. In 43 Germans would have needed more reliable tank, even slightly less powerful would have been perfectly adequate. But during last 9 months of war Germans were fighting almost purely defensive war along much shortened frontlines so Panther in much more reliable form with excellent gun for A/T work and with very good frontal armour suited well for Germans.

On the other hand IMHO King Tigers didn’t help much Germans. They were simply too heavy, underpowered and expensive and still vulnerable for flanking fire.

Juha

Catch22 · 08-14-2009, 02:30 PM

I can't remember which book it was in, but I think the author summed it up well:

"If you want to win the battle, choose the Panther. If you want to win the war, choose the T-34."

Having said that, I'd still probably choose the Panther just for quality, and I would focus production on that instead of the King Tiger, Tiger, Jagdtiger, Panzer IV etc as the list goes on and on. Keep the StuG IV and Jagdpanther and maybe the odd other specialized tank, but do away with the massive numbers of types that the Germans had. I think they would have been fine (armor-wise) if they kept with the Panther only and developed the Panther further.

carman1877 · 08-14-2009, 05:49 PM

I picked the King Tiger becuase it has great armor and amarment. heres how I see it, OK it did not have ghreat mobility so then the germans could use the panther or Panzer but when you need a a heavy tank go with the Tiger, Plus Tigers were usually brought to the battle area by trains i think, could be wrong. The gun could destroy a target at over 3km that means that even if it could be flanked they would not get close enough. also the US would send 5 shermans against it, 4 decoys and one that would flank, three were almost always destroyed by the time the 5 tank had destroyed the Tiger if it did, the fouth and fifth would usually make it. The production totals were low becuase they could barely find materials to make it, if they had been doing better than there would have been more.

Messy1 · 08-14-2009, 05:52 PM

I had to go with the T34. It had a good mix of the qualities needed for a tank. Speed, firepower, armor and most of all numbers.

Juha · 08-14-2009, 06:41 PM

Hello Carman
77mm cannon of Comet could pierce the turret front of King Tiger from 500y with APDS and turret sides from over 2000y with normal APCBC shot. The latter was more than adequate in normal NW Europe environment.

The first 3 King Tigers lost at the Eastern Front were destroyed by a well camouflaged T-34-85, if we believe the Russian version on what happened. The few German tankers from those King Tigers who got back to their own troops by foot claimed that they had run into a Pak front and overwhelmed. Anyway the Russian version is fully possible, according to it the Russian crew observed three very big German tanks rolling past them, the commander ordered the use of the special APCR rounds and to aim to rear sides of turrets. Hits destroyed 2 of the King Tigers, as Germans later found out to their horror a penetrating hit onto the rear sides of the King Tiger turret usually resulted an ammo fire among the ready use ammo on the racks along the rear sides of the turret. Because of that those ready use ammo racks were removed by some King Tiger units. The crew of the third King Tiger panicked and got stuck when they tried to escape and run into a big ditch.

Sometimes Allied simply bypassed King Tigers, somewhere around Beauvais Germans lost 7-8 King Tigers. Germans at first kept US tanks at bay by long range gun fire but then noticed that US troops were bypassing them and when they tried to withdraw they lost their tanks, mostly because technical defects.

Of course sometimes KTs were very effective, 2 platoons from 3./sPzAbt 507 destroyed 17 Shermans and 17 M3 half-tracks from TF Welborn on evening 30 March 45 near Paderborn without own losses. But Panther was powerful enough against Allied tanks so MHO King Tiger was a bit superfluous, an overkill.

Juha

Graeme · 08-14-2009, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juha

Hello Graeme
the tank is PzKpfW IV and those mysterious rotors are for engine cooling.

Juha

Thanks Juha! It just looks odd to me. I'll google and have a gander.

View Poll Results: Best Tank of WW2
King Tiger	4	8.89%
Panther	23	51.11%
Sherman	1	2.22%
T-34	17	37.78%
Voters: 45. You may not vote on this poll

08-13-2009, 08:01 PM	#1
carman1877 Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 42	Best Tank of WW2 Which was the best tank of WW2: King Tiger, Panther, Sherman, or T-34 (All versions of thye tanks such as the firefly)

08-13-2009, 10:22 PM	#2
Doughboy Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 885	I don't know how you can start a thread labeled 'Best tank of ww2' and only include four tanks in your poll? Anyway, the T-34 is probably the best of the tanks in the poll because it had speed, sloped armor, and a good main Armament. IMHO. __________________ "This is the day which the lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it." Psalms 118:24

08-14-2009, 02:22 AM	#5
Watanbe Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Adelaide Posts: 510	Panther is the best in my opinion, superb tank. Its a selection of the best bits from all the above tanks. Good main gun, strong armour, relatively mobile. __________________

08-14-2009, 09:44 AM	#8
Juha Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki Posts: 1,356	Hello Graeme the tank is PzKpfW IV and those mysterious rotors are for engine cooling. Juha Last edited by Juha; 08-14-2009 at 09:49 AM.

08-13-2009, 10:31 PM	#3
carman1877 Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 42	I was going on the four main tanks of World War two, I would have included the Pershing, and others but I felt that they did not have as big an impact on the war as the others that I listed.

08-14-2009, 09:00 AM	#6
Juha Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki Posts: 1,356	For arguments sake, A34 Comet Plusses Excellent gun (almost as good in A/T work as the Panthers 7,5cm KwK 42) Fast Very good power weight ratio Reliable Reasonable good armour protection Minusses old-fasioned boxlike hull narrow tracks Juha

08-14-2009, 09:36 AM	#7
Graeme Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 2,081	You guys obviously know a lot about tanks whereas I know jack. I love buying those coffee table style WW2 picture books but they tend to let themselves down in the captioning and text department. This is captioned as "Russian troops capture a German tank." What's the tank? And what are those Jet Turbine looking wheels(?) on top?

08-14-2009, 09:57 AM	#9
timshatz Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa Posts: 3,446	Best tank would probably be the Panther. But in terms of serviceability, ease of use and bang for the buck I went with the T34. It's just a very good tank, especially the T34-85. Panther is a better design but a maintainence nightmare in comparison. IMHO, best tank would have to cover all the way from manufacture to logistics. Just considering battlefield use is too limiting.

08-14-2009, 01:27 PM	#10
Juha Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki Posts: 1,356	IMHO for Allied the best tanks for deep penetration attacks were T-34-85 or Comet. T-34-85 had a little better protection, better HE shell and broader tracks. Comet was probably more reliable, had gun with better penetration power and had better power/weight ratio. Panther on the other hand was a good tank for Germans in late 44 onwards. In 43 Germans would have needed more reliable tank, even slightly less powerful would have been perfectly adequate. But during last 9 months of war Germans were fighting almost purely defensive war along much shortened frontlines so Panther in much more reliable form with excellent gun for A/T work and with very good frontal armour suited well for Germans. On the other hand IMHO King Tigers didn’t help much Germans. They were simply too heavy, underpowered and expensive and still vulnerable for flanking fire. Juha

08-14-2009, 02:30 PM	#11
Catch22 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Posts: 4,293	I can't remember which book it was in, but I think the author summed it up well: "If you want to win the battle, choose the Panther. If you want to win the war, choose the T-34." Having said that, I'd still probably choose the Panther just for quality, and I would focus production on that instead of the King Tiger, Tiger, Jagdtiger, Panzer IV etc as the list goes on and on. Keep the StuG IV and Jagdpanther and maybe the odd other specialized tank, but do away with the massive numbers of types that the Germans had. I think they would have been fine (armor-wise) if they kept with the Panther only and developed the Panther further. __________________

08-14-2009, 05:49 PM	#12
carman1877 Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 42	I picked the King Tiger becuase it has great armor and amarment. heres how I see it, OK it did not have ghreat mobility so then the germans could use the panther or Panzer but when you need a a heavy tank go with the Tiger, Plus Tigers were usually brought to the battle area by trains i think, could be wrong. The gun could destroy a target at over 3km that means that even if it could be flanked they would not get close enough. also the US would send 5 shermans against it, 4 decoys and one that would flank, three were almost always destroyed by the time the 5 tank had destroyed the Tiger if it did, the fouth and fifth would usually make it. The production totals were low becuase they could barely find materials to make it, if they had been doing better than there would have been more.

08-14-2009, 05:52 PM	#13
Messy1 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Ankeny, Iowa Posts: 1,411	I had to go with the T34. It had a good mix of the qualities needed for a tank. Speed, firepower, armor and most of all numbers. __________________ Bryon O P-61 Black Widow-Mistress of the Night! "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." George S. Patton "Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government." "Oh but if I went 'round sayin' I was Emperor, just because some moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away."

08-14-2009, 06:41 PM	#14
Juha Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki Posts: 1,356	Hello Carman 77mm cannon of Comet could pierce the turret front of King Tiger from 500y with APDS and turret sides from over 2000y with normal APCBC shot. The latter was more than adequate in normal NW Europe environment. The first 3 King Tigers lost at the Eastern Front were destroyed by a well camouflaged T-34-85, if we believe the Russian version on what happened. The few German tankers from those King Tigers who got back to their own troops by foot claimed that they had run into a Pak front and overwhelmed. Anyway the Russian version is fully possible, according to it the Russian crew observed three very big German tanks rolling past them, the commander ordered the use of the special APCR rounds and to aim to rear sides of turrets. Hits destroyed 2 of the King Tigers, as Germans later found out to their horror a penetrating hit onto the rear sides of the King Tiger turret usually resulted an ammo fire among the ready use ammo on the racks along the rear sides of the turret. Because of that those ready use ammo racks were removed by some King Tiger units. The crew of the third King Tiger panicked and got stuck when they tried to escape and run into a big ditch. Sometimes Allied simply bypassed King Tigers, somewhere around Beauvais Germans lost 7-8 King Tigers. Germans at first kept US tanks at bay by long range gun fire but then noticed that US troops were bypassing them and when they tried to withdraw they lost their tanks, mostly because technical defects. Of course sometimes KTs were very effective, 2 platoons from 3./sPzAbt 507 destroyed 17 Shermans and 17 M3 half-tracks from TF Welborn on evening 30 March 45 near Paderborn without own losses. But Panther was powerful enough against Allied tanks so MHO King Tiger was a bit superfluous, an overkill. Juha Last edited by Juha; 08-14-2009 at 06:43 PM.

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