Best battle-tank of WWII?

Question

If you had to go to battle in the WWII tank of your choice, what would it be and why??

Answer 1

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion as to which tank was the best of WW II. One on one, mano e mano, would be the German King Tiger Tank (Panzerkampfwagen VI Sd.Kfz 182) with the Henschel turret, the most powerful tank during world war 2. With its powerful 88mm gun and an almost impenetrable front armor, it was one of the most feared weapons of world war 2. Up to the end of the war, the allies had not introduced any effective means to counter the threat.

If you'r talking about reliability, speed, profligacy, and numerical superiority...then it's the T-34 handsdown.

Answer 2

My nomination is the Sherman Firefly with the outstanding 17# gun which was produced in great enough numbers to equip 25% of the Sherman batallions in the British Army.

The Firefly could destroy a Tiger at any range the Tiger could destroy it, and it had all the virtues of the basic Sherman, mechanical reliability, ease of maintence, adequate speed, the capacity to be up armored and up gunned, and, surprisingly important, crew comfort and the fastest turret traverse of the war. Both of these are very valuable in a long fight. Think about it.

The basic Sherman is undervalued. If you start your comparison with a 500 mile road march, a Sherman batallion will arrive with more than 85% strength available to fight. Even the best other tanks could seldom exceed 40%. Most were worse. Even if you ignore maintence, overall, the basic Sherman was a little better than the Panzer Mk IV, the most numerous German MBT.

The Tiger I (PZ VI) had a fine gun and thick armor, but was a slow, expensive, underpowered maintenance hog. The Tiger II (Pz VIa) was a better design, but due to German lack of tungsten for alloy, the armor was far poorer than the Tiger I (PzVI). The Soviets published a study based on captured examples of both tested against their guns and concluded that due to the lack of tungsten, the Tiger II armor was far inferior. Also, the underpowered and unreliable chassis was never improved enough to make a difference. The tungsten problem also affected the Panther (PZ MkV), an excellent design which never fully overcame teething troubles.

The Soviet designs were what the Soviets needed to win the war, relatively easy to produce, great mobility, great armor design, diesel for low flamability, and adequate quality, but wore out quickly, and horrendous ergonomics (for example, no turret basket in the T-34 which means that the fighting compartment did not turn with the turret so, as you traverse, everyone has to shuffle left or right). Also Soviet guns, size for size, seem to be inferior to German or Western Allied in penetration. I don't know if this is a problem in gun design or ammunition, but there is a lot of evidence out there on the subject.

The Pershing was a maintence hog too. That's why it was replaced so quickly after the war, but good design and a very good gun.

Remember too, after WWII only the Sherman continued to be up armored, up gunned, up engined, and given better electronics. The last Shermans I know of on front line duty were the Israli Super Shermans w/ a 105 High Velocity which were in the 1967 6 Day War, and probably served into the early 70's, when every other WWII design had been scrapped for 20-25 yrs.

If your criterion is personal safety, then I guess the Tiger I. When it breaks, you can surrender (at least if you are on the West Front). If you want a "win the tank battle vehicle" which can be mass produced, maintained, used for pursuit, won't fatigue the crew, can kill anything it can see, and be continuously upgraded, I take the Sherman Firefly.

Answer 3

I would say that the German Panther (aka Panzer V) was the best because of its awesome combination of firepower, mobility and armour. It was the only Axis tank that could compete (or outcompete as it did frequently) with the T-34, thankfully for us however German fuel and manpower shortages stopped the dreaded panther from turning around the war in late 1943 early 1944.
I would also say that the Panzer IV is another tank i would pick for its reliability and its versatility, the chasis was the only German tank to stay in production for the whole war and could be made into an awesome tank buster when needed (like Kursk).

Answer 4

In my opinion, the T-34 series was the best tank of WWII. Its Christie suspension and wide tracks enabled good mobility and speed over different terrain. The main gun armament (especially the 85 mm gun) was largely adequate against the Panzers it faced over time. More importantly
, the relatively simple design and construction facilitate mass production leading to numerical dominance the Germans could not match. Lastly, the sloped armour design heralded a design evolution lasting well past WWII.

Answer 5

Well, for most of the war, the US main tank was the Sherman, it was easy to make and easy to fix, also it was one of the fastest tanks around, so it could get out of trouble faster than it could get into it. And we could make them faster than the Germans could shoot them. Armor and gun were average. Overall it was a good tank. The Pershing was our answer to the German monster tanks, it was a great tank, but only saw less than a year of combat.
The Tiger and King Tiger were monsters, but they had horrible mechanical problems and the Germans couldn't make enough of them to really make a difference. The Panzer V was probably the best all around design, but still had some mechanical problems and they couldn't make enough.
The T-34 series were very good tanks, simple, reliable, and produced in huge quantities. It would beat out the Panzer V in terms of numbers produced. And the Soviet heavy tanks were monsters, but about as maneuverable as a brick stuck in mud.
Japanese and Italian tanks were very light machines.
Overall, it's a tough call between the Panzer V and the T-34/85 in my opinion.

Answer 6

Super Tiger because it had the best gun and the thickest armor. It was virtually invulnerable on the battlefield. I think your question might be better if formed, "What is the best battle tank of world war 2." Obviously people would want to be sent to war in a tank that was survivable. The American tanks were far worse than anything the Germans or the Russians had in their arsenal. While the tiger was far superior than any other tank of the war, it was very hard and expensive to make and required extensive maintenance to keep running. Shermans were worse in every category, but were simple to make and easy to maintain. If I had to pick the best battle tank of the war, I would choose the Russian T34 without a doubt. They were simple to make, well armed, and well armored. Sheer numbers won the allies the war, not technical brilliance by any standard.

Answer 7

German Panzer. Best armour, biggest gun. The only reason they were defeated is that we outproduced them. Something like 35:1. Our Shermans were outgunned, but shear numbers overwhelmed the Germans. The German Tiger was by far the largest gun in the field, but it's weight and poor mechanical relialbilty soon rendered them useless. Later in the War, the Russian T-34 was a force to be reconed with. I guess the best answer to your question would have to come from a WWII veteran. The rest of us are working without first hand knowledge.

Answer 8

The T-34 was the best tank. Why? big gun, sloping armour, millions of them! I knew a fella who served with the 5th SS Panzer division from 39-45. He said the T-34 was the toughest tank he came up against in his P-4. Hesaid no matter how many they destroyed, the Russian s would just replace them. I think this goes back to the failure to produce the Ural bomber before the war. This allowed the Russians to pull back the tank plants to relative safety.

Answer 9

The Soviet T-34 before 1943 and the Nazi Panther after.

They both struck good balances of armor, armament, and mobility. The Panther was designed in direct response to the wholesale slaughter of Panzer IV's and Panzer III's by the T-34's on the Eastern Front.

Answer 10

Though it didn't see much service, coming in near the end of the war, I think the U.S. Pershing tank was pretty good, well armored, and good firepower.

Now lots of folks might answer you with the German Panther, which had weak side armor, or the Tiger II, which was dog slow and underpowered, but the Allies' last tanks were probably better overall.

The Russians had some incredibly advanced designs near the end, in terms of sloping armor and such. And the T-34 and KV series were no slouches.