King Tiger came late, and too few to turn the war. Once uses in Battle of Bulge.
2007-08-06 19:24:42 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Definitely the King Tiger. That thing was a monster. Huge 88mm gun, sloping armor that was hard to penetrate.
2007-08-06 19:34:38 · answer #1 · answered by phjun8383 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
IF your talking about 1 on 1 then the Tiger by a wide margin. Saw the movie 'Fury' and the part where 3 of the 4 Sherman's are knocked out while taking on 1 Tiger is probably pretty realistic. Its a good thing we built so many Sherman's during the war. Found this bit of info kind of depressing. The 3rd Armored Division entered combat in Normandy with 232 M4 Sherman tanks. During the European Campaign, the Division had some 648 Sherman tanks completely destroyed in combat and another 700 knocked out, repaired and put back into operation. Thats an average of 3 destroyed/knocked out per day (11 months) for the entire European Campaign. This was a loss rate of 580 percent. And that was just one division! Plus the losses in tank crew must have been really high. Not all to Tiger's obviously but still says something about the Sherman's vulnerability to anti- tank weapons.
2016-04-01 03:05:50 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both were excellent tanks however they had their problems which negated their effectiveness. They broke down a great deal and parts were very hard to come by. They also burned fuel like crazy and both were quite cumbersome and slow. The American tanks did not have the armor or powerful weaponry but they were very fast and hit the German tanks in the tracks knocking them out. Furthermore the Sherman tank rarely broke down because it had a simple design (the German tanks were extremely complicated) and when it did break down the Americans had spare parts available very quickly.
2007-08-06 19:48:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The word PANZER is a generic name for any German Tank its part of the word "Panzerkampfwaggan" - literal translation: Battle -Tank Wagon.
PANZER = TANK, no German TANK was simply called TANK they all had Manufacture Code-numbers and Code-names,
Tiger, Panther, Bison, Fuchs, Marder, Elephant, etc.. etc..
2007-08-07 01:49:26 · answer #4 · answered by conranger1 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The panzer tank was a tremendous war machine, the only draw back was it's slow rate of speed and heavy fuel usage...but it's armament and armor far exceeded any thing in the allied forces arsenal. they could rip the US Sherman tank to pieces! The Tiger was there answer for the faster more economical tanks of the US army....So you have to way speed and economical .vs. armor and power.......my choice PANZER!
2007-08-06 19:40:22 · answer #5 · answered by bigblackmon 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you have to define what is BETTER.
stronger armor, stronger weapon, better fire-aquisition equipment =koenigtiger
workhours per piece, speed, crosscountry features, deployability =Panther.
2007-08-06 22:15:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you mean "panzer"??? if so yea the panzer was waaaaaaaaay, better.
2007-08-06 19:32:29 · answer #7 · answered by sambucca 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋