What's your favorite WWII tank?

What's your favorite tank of WWII?

  • PzKpfw VI "Tiger"

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • M26 "Pershing"

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • IS-2 "Stalin"

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    7

Zugman

Recruit
Joined
May 6, 2003
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Country
llUnited States
Best WWII Tank

Pound for pound, and in terms of overall reliability, I have to vote for the T-34 in all its variants, but particularly the T-34 85. What a workhorse, and it could take out almost anything.
 

Klaus Fischer

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
359
Reaction score
2
Location
Germany
Country
llGermany
The German Sherman

The great nightmare for the allied army isn't one of landing on europe to face a huge sea of Panthers. The germans never had a hope of building them in the numbers needed to win the war. Just enough to delude them into thinking they could. No, the great nightmare is the allies landing in Europe to see armor forces 2 to 3+ times bigger being fielded by the Germans. Armor forces made up of PzIV's. An enconomical to build tank that was a good overall performer. Their sherman. You would have no great stories of a single tank taking out an entire platoon. But you would have historians talking about the greater cost to us to defeat the NAZI's.
Darkman, a German Sherman never would've worked, as Germany was by then allready lacking the manpower. Even if Nazi Germany would've been able to build a fleet of Mk IV's they wouldn't have had the crews to man them.
So the (IMHO) only option for the German tank force was to rely on fewer, better tanks.

Nevertheless, going back to the poll, I vote for Panther - eventhough if you'd expand the poll to favourite AFV of the War, I'd probably vote for one of the US TD's Hellcat, Jackson, or M10

Klaus
 

teak

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2003
Messages
144
Reaction score
1
Location
Finland
Country
llFinland
BT-42, of course...

I hope that it'll be on the Finnish module :)

Tuomo (not the first, neither the other...)

ps. There are too many Tuomos in this "scene" :)
pps. Weren't it the favourite, not the best...
 

Darkman

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
132
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland OR
Country
llUnited States
German Manpower shortage?

I'm not sure your exactly correct Klaus. Germany did have huge manpower needs during the last year of war. But my understanding was that they lacked equipment, especially armor, more than they lacked crews.

I freely admit I don't have any deep knowledge on this subject. But I don't recall there being any situations where large numbers of vehicles wern't used because they lacked crews. With more, many more AFV's I believe Germany had good quality personal who could be trained in their use to a functional level. As an example the Luftwaffe had to field large numbers as infantry becuase they lacked sufficient planes. I would speculate that would be a good source of manpower to man more tanks. What I'm saying is that if the PzIV's were there, a way would have been found to man them.

Or so I think.

SUBJECT CHANGE: Any input on how long till this forum goes to a subscrition fee? :twisted: (ok that was just mean, sorry).
 

PT109

Recruit
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
Best Tank

Darkman wrote:

"As an example the Luftwaffe had to field large numbers as infantry becuase they lacked sufficient planes. I would speculate that would be a good source of manpower to man more tanks. What I'm saying is that if the PzIV's were there, a way would have been found to man them."


I think there were Luftwaffe field units because the German Army was in desperate need of Panzer divisions and combat troops, not because there were no planes. Most of the German pilots were expected to fly for the entire war, until they were either dead or wounded in battle.

I think the biggest mistake Germany made was in not keeping with only a few tank designs, say the Panther and the Stug III's and JagdPZ IV's, V's etc. They developed too many variants, especially on the PZ IV chassis.
That's why the Russians and the US could out produce them, with only a few reliable designs that were adaptable to innovation and improvement.

One interesting thing though...the Sturmgeschutz series was responsible for more allied tank losses than the regular tanks. Once the Germans used them as tank destroyers, they became a very feared adversary indeed. In any battle with even odds the Germans usually won, so the allies had to produce more tanks to stop them.

Its too bad the Pershing or the Centurian wasn't available sooner, maybe the Germans would have met their match...although I think the Germans' real skills were in training and better optic systems, giving them a greater advantage and allowing their leaders to have the inititive at the critical moment in those battles.

PT109[/b]
 

Pete AU

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2004
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
Perth & Collie
Country
llAustralia
My fav.
The Jagdpanther - probably the best tank destroyer of WW2. Fast, well armed with the 8.8cm L/71 and well armoured (80mm max). Really if you look at it from the side it just looks 'nice'.

I think they were still in use by France/switzerland until the late 50s.

Yes - not strictly a 'tank'. But...
 

JoeCleere

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Messages
124
Reaction score
2
Location
Auburn, AL
Country
llUnited States
best tank

In spite of its faults, the best tank of WWII was the Panther. This is because of its combination of speed (46kmh), firepower (75mmL70 capable of penetrating 138mm of armor sloped at 30 degrees from 100 meters), and protection (80mm of sloped glacis armor and 100-110mm turret armor). The Germans probably should have concentrated upon producing the Panther and Jagdpanther, as well as tank destroyers and assault guns based on the Pz III, Pz IV, and Pz 38t chassis. The Koenigstiger and Jagdtiger should not have been produced at all.


Coming in second would be the T-34/85, which had a very good combination of speed, firepower, and protection. The Soviets probably should have produced lots of SU 100s to provide overwatch protection to the tanks. ISIIm was very good too, except for the limited ammo supply and slow rate of fire.

The Sherman comes in third, and thats only because of its reliability, numbers, and fast turret traverse and gyrostabilizer. Why the Army stuck with the 75mm for so long and cost many tank crewmen their lives is a real shame. It should have been equipped with the 76.2mm gun from 1944 on, with all 75mm Shermans retrofitted with the 76.2mm gun and turret. Shermans with the 76.2mm gun and M36 tank destroyers equipped with the 90mm would have been a good combination. Too bad the Pershing came along so late.
 

JoeCleere

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Messages
124
Reaction score
2
Location
Auburn, AL
Country
llUnited States
Sherman

Heck, what am I saying? The British offered the 76.2mm 17lbs gun to the Americans, but they were turned down. Imagine all Shermans equipped with the licensed-produced 17lbs gun by D-Day.
 

Nat Mallet

Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2004
Messages
270
Reaction score
4
Location
Canada
Country
llCanada
In spite of its faults, the best tank of WWII was the Panther.
Performance-wise, maybe. Unfortunately, producing the Panther was expensive. Even if Germany had put all of it's armor factories towards producing the Panther, I don't know if they could have cranked out enough.

The Pz Iv, however, could have been produced in far greater numbers, and it had more than enough firepower and protection to take on the Shermans and the T-34.

Of course, I'm talking mostly out of my ass on this one. I'm going to to more research to prove/disprove my theory.

SUBJECT CHANGE: Any input on how long till this forum goes to a subscrition fee? (ok that was just mean, sorry).
Never. While I'm normally a cheap, greedy bastard, I think Forums should be free.

Nat
 

sdkfz

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2003
Messages
248
Reaction score
2
Location
Twin Cities MN South of the River
First name
Rowland
Country
llUnited States
Fav German Tank

Hmmmm, of all the German tanks I'd take the Pz Kpfw V Ausf F, never made it to production, but the schmal turret sure would have made for a hard to hit hull down target.

As to best tank of the war, I'd take the Panther G model with the chin on the turret starting 9/44.

Sure they were expensive, typical German choice between the Daimler Benz and the MAN version, the DB model was effectively a copy of the T-34 and was lighter/smaller to boot (pretty much the same size as the T-34). No large target TH mod.

Interesting side note is that Hitler preferred the DB version and some researchers believe that it would have had longer development
'legs' than the MAN version.

I agree that Germany suffered from too many models of vehicles, supply must have been a real pain.
 

Klaus Fischer

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
359
Reaction score
2
Location
Germany
Country
llGermany
Returning to the manpower issue; my impression (I have to admit I can't support my theory by any hard facts) came from all the late war (6/44+) photos with 16 year olds acting as tank commander in brand new Panthers and even in King Tigers.
Additionally Nazi Germany had to field "sick" divisions to fill the losses in all of the ground forces.
And if you see the pictures of the underground factories captured by the Allies, with halls longer than two football fields being filled with almost completed jet aircraft or tanks.....
Of course, they were suffering from all the bombing, resource shortnesses, and so forth.
But still, if they had decided to stick to the MkIV as MBT - the German Sherman - and maybe a StuG or Jagdpanther and produced these in larger quantities, Nazi Germany would've lost even sooner, because lower quality tanks (to be lost with Shermans on a 1:1 ratio) would've meant even more crew casualities, and thus even sooner exhaustation(sp?) of manpower.
But as said, this is just my private little theory and by now rather off topic.

Klaus
 

Houlie

CEO of HoulieDice (TM)
Joined
Nov 15, 2003
Messages
3,241
Reaction score
1,602
Location
Minnesota, USA
Country
llUnited States
For me personally, I vote for the Panther Ausf G. The trifecta of mobility, armor and firepower. Though not perfect, especially its lack of mechanical reliability in early models, it is a great overall design. It's peers, the Sherman (great reliability) and T-34 (excellent mobility and sloped armor -- firepower later with the 85mm) were formidable designs themselves. However, from an all-purpose infantry supporting, tank-hunting perspective, I'd rather be armor assualting behind a Panther.

Plus, I have never heard of Panthers having to "swarm" a Sherman or T-34.

Cheers!
 

Treadhead

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
3,140
Reaction score
216
Location
Michigan
Country
llUnited States
Since the poll asks for the "favorite", I will vote for the T-34/85.

It is simplicity itself to use; great mobility, nice punch, excellent protection. No real flaws.

Regards,
Bruce Bakken
 

Baktru

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
30
Reaction score
3
Country
llUnited States
I vote for the StuG IIIG.

Not really a tank? I don't care :) I have too good an experience with those in ASL not to like them...

Greetz,

B.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
277
Reaction score
128
Location
Saint-Brieuc
Country
llFrance
Sherman with its white ROF reducing its DRM in bounding Fire (take a look at Chas Smith's article in JOURNAL 2 or 3).

Laurent.
 

ibncalb

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
894
Reaction score
629
Location
La Turballe
Country
llFrance
you guys got to be joking; nothing like running a stuart around in PTO hosing the SNLF with massive MG's and Cannister.

4 armour? more than enough...

b e n
 
Top