English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-06-05 23:29:39 · 2 answers · asked by lauandy.12345 1 in Politics & Government Military

2 answers

Tiger tank would win almost every time. It would require LOTS of Panzer 3s to take out a Tiger under combat conditions, just as the typical ratio of Shermans to Tigers was typically ~10-1 (it took, on average, 10 Shermans to knock out one Tiger).

Here's why:

The Tiger has an 88 mm KwK 36 L/56 long barrel high velocity main gun; the PzKw3L had a 50mm KwK 39 L/60 gun -- huge advantage in range and hitting power to the Tiger.

The Tiger had sloped armor of 100 mm thickness, sloped at 60°, to give an effective thickness of 246 mm. The PzKw3 had 50 mm armor sloped at 69°, giving it an effective thickness of 140 mm -- huge advantage to the Tiger.

The Tiger had a road speed of 16 km/hr off road, the PzKw3 could move at 19 km/hr off road -- slight advantage to the Panzer 3.

A Panzer 3 could knock out a Tiger if it got behind and could manage to put a round into the engine compartment at close range. But chances are it would have been scrap metal long before it got close enough to do so.

2007-06-06 03:26:09 · answer #1 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 0 0

your kidding right?

Tiger I had a much more powerful gun, Much thicker armor.
the tiger was known to take out russian t-34's at over 1 mile away

the pz3 had a stubby 75mm howitzer and was meant only to support infantry by taking out fortified postions

2007-06-06 00:10:28 · answer #2 · answered by rsist34 5 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers