I saw someone asked this question not long ago. The T-34 is often toted as the best tank design but that is largely because of the simple design and ease of production. I want to change the question up and say what tank would you most want to be in on the field of battle? That is a different story.
2007-03-13 14:58:23 · 10 answers · asked by Pooky Bear the Sensitive 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Try to give reasons and model numbers. Panzer is the German word for armor. This could be anything from the panzer 2 on up. If you are a real pro, feel free to give a model i.e. T-34/85 etc.
By the way. The T-34, in all of its models, was lacking in radios, visibility, crew comfort (yes that is important as crew fatigue is a factor), and by '44 was a little underarmored.
2007-03-13 15:12:55 · update #1
depends on what field of battle. Mk. V Panther in the open, built in response to the T-34. 75mm gun could penetrate the armor of all Allied tanks, making it a lethal adversary. The tank's top speed was 28 MPH. The Panther's design featured a torsion bar suspension system and interleaved wheels, which allowed it to go practically anywhere.
the PzKfW Mk. IV Panzer was lethal but top speed was only 18 MPH. considerably slower than the Mk V
2007-03-13 15:11:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
M4A3E8 76mm(W) HVSS
o-Beat the T34/85's azz on a regular basis in Korea, so the oft myth of the T34 is just that.
o-Mechanically, the most reliable, adaptive chassis the Allies had. Used for the Sherman series, M7HMC, M32ARV, M40SPG, M12SPG
o-Abilty to use either Gasoline or Diesel engines depending on availability
o-Lafayette Poole of 32nd Armor, 3rd Armored Division knocked out 258 Vehicles with a M4A1, 76mm(W) VVSS between June -Sept 1944
o-Better Optics, than the T34
o- Radio fit in Every example(unlike T34)
o-Engines designing for easier manitenance then T34
o-Easier to Drive than T34
o-Armor could be upgraded, as the M4A3E2 Jumbo showed
Secondary choice would be the M26 Pershing...
2007-03-13 17:04:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The T-34
2007-03-13 15:01:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
i'm partial to the M-36 Jackson. The M-18 Hellcat is oft seen the wonderful all around during this classification in historic previous books yet i like the 90mm gun on the Jackson and it a minimum of had some armor. The Hellcat grew to become into speedy as hell however the allies have been on the offensive and hence have been extra uncovered as they had to look ahead to the defenders to reaveal themselves. The Hellcat's frontal armor must be penetrated by making use of stale bread from the German's rations. besides the certainty that the Jackson is my popular, the Jagdpanther grew to become into the deadliest. interior the shielding function the turretless automobile must be expertly hidden and there grew to become into no longer something like its 88mm gun for smashing the armor of any comtemporary tank. So, I vote for the Jagdpanther.
2016-10-18 07:58:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Certainly NOT the Lee or Sherman !! The only reason US armor worked was because of SHEER numbers, the replacements in vehicles and crew
The T-34 was simple, had the punch, was easy to crew/train, AND could take German hits and keep driving !! As a System and an overall weapon, She beats all.
Sure, German tanks with the 88mm were scary, but they were produced in too small a number to be effective, and were too heavy to work the battlefields that came to be.
2007-03-13 15:34:49 · answer #5 · answered by mariner31 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The German Tiger tank was the best in World War Two.
The standard American tactic to get one was to send FOUR Sherman tanks after it. While the Tiger destroyed three of the Sherman, the fourth could maneuver behind the Tiger and hit it in the one weak spot, the rear end.
The Tiger was also diesel powered vs gas power for the Sherman. The Sherman was so bad, the troops called them Zippos (after the lighters) as they went up in flames quite easily.
The Russian tanks were much better than the Sherman, but still did not compare with the Tiger. The winning factor over all was the USA could churn out Shermans faster than the Germans could destroy them. The battle was won in the factories.
2007-03-13 18:23:03 · answer #6 · answered by forgivebutdonotforget911 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I answered this question once before. It seems a recurrent theme. My vote is for the T34/85 commander's tank (with radios). I'd vote for the PzKw V if it ran, but German armor from the beginning to the end suffered from reliability problems, and spent more time down for repairs than in working order. This applied from the Mark I and II tanks (they lost two thirds of their tanks in the Czech campaign, almost none due to combat) to the Ferdinand & Elefant, and everything in between. It's always been a marvel to me that the land of Mercedes and BMW, the country that had tanks made by Porsche, had a largely horse-drawn army with tanks that couldn't run.
2007-03-13 15:28:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
As far as total badness, I'd have to say the German Tiger tank. It was virtually invincible, but very rare. In overall quality, it was the Russian T-34. It was ahead of its time with its sloped armor and simplicity of design.
2007-03-13 15:14:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The German Pantzer
2007-03-13 15:07:37 · answer #9 · answered by freerenegade1954 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
the jagdpanther a ideal combination off
firepower = the massive 88 mm gun of the tiger
mobility = the chassis of the panther
protection = a well sloped front plate of 80 mm
OK it isn't a tank but a tank hunter but i find it a very well balanced vehicle
2007-03-14 07:24:41 · answer #10 · answered by general De Witte 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋