login   |    register
History Club
Military history and past events only. Rants or inflamitory comments will be removed.
Hosted by Frank Amato
Best German Tank of WW2
SFraser
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Scotland, United Kingdom
Joined: May 21, 2007
KitMaker: 112 posts
AeroScale: 6 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 09:47 AM UTC
Many people think that the Panther was the best German Tank, but I beg to differ. For me it has to be the Panzer IV, and especially the Mark IV Special, it was the better of any Sherman or Comet, and equal on terms with a good crew, against the T34-76. All round it was a winner.
What are your views on this.
Scott
Halfyank
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: February 01, 2003
KitMaker: 5,221 posts
AeroScale: 36 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 11:15 AM UTC
I've heard it said that the loss ratio of the Panther vs the Sherman was 5 to 1, 5 Shermans lost for every Panther. I doubt the Pz IV would have as high a loss ratio. Without digging out the stats it seems the Panther has the edge in every category, except possibly number built.
keenan
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Indiana, United States
Joined: October 16, 2002
KitMaker: 5,271 posts
AeroScale: 74 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 11:19 AM UTC
Jadgpanzer IV.

Shaun

Lucky13
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Scotland, United Kingdom
Joined: June 01, 2006
KitMaker: 1,707 posts
AeroScale: 1,119 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 08:53 PM UTC
I think that I'll have to say Panther G....
SFraser
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Scotland, United Kingdom
Joined: May 21, 2007
KitMaker: 112 posts
AeroScale: 6 posts
Posted: Monday, June 11, 2007 - 08:50 AM UTC
I beg to differ, lads. But the Panzer IV was more than a match for the Sherman, when they first met in the desert, a Panzer IV was equal to the Sherman. Plus don't forget the panzer crews were better trained than the Allied tankers. Even in Russia, the Panzer IV was just about equal to the T34-76. Don't forget though the Sherman was known to Brew Up when hit, hence its nickname of the Ronson. Sure the Panther was a great tank, so was the Tiger, but both Panthers and Tigers had mechanical problems. For as the Panzer IV was mechanically sound.
Scott
Sherman_67
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: May 08, 2005
KitMaker: 265 posts
AeroScale: 8 posts
Posted: Monday, June 11, 2007 - 02:30 PM UTC
I'd Have to say the Panzer III
hellbent11
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Kansas, United States
Joined: August 17, 2005
KitMaker: 725 posts
AeroScale: 55 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 - 06:22 PM UTC
Tough question. It does say something that so many different variants of the IV were produced for such a wide variety of tasks. Many times we take into account the mass production of shermies as being one of the reasons that many consider them to be the best allied tank, so why not the mass production of the IV.
spongya
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
MODELGEEK
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Budapest, Hungary
Joined: February 01, 2005
KitMaker: 2,353 posts
AeroScale: 71 posts
Posted: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 - 01:47 PM UTC
I'm not really sure your evaluation. The pnzIV was in no ways equal in terms with the T-34. The armor protection was certainly worse. The up-gunned versions did have equality in firepower with the T-34/76, but then again, after the 85mm gun appeared on the T-34, it lost it's edge again.

But you're right. The best German tank of WWII was the pnzIV.
CaptainA
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Indiana, United States
Joined: May 14, 2007
KitMaker: 3,113 posts
AeroScale: 2,266 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 01:37 AM UTC
StuG III. Cost wise, about half the price of other German Tanks. Reliable. Good firepower and protection. Smaller crew for better economy of force. Lighter for better manuverability. Smaller, conserving resources.

Yeah, I know it is technically an assault gun...
SFraser
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Scotland, United Kingdom
Joined: May 21, 2007
KitMaker: 112 posts
AeroScale: 6 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 10:33 PM UTC
Well don't forget that SS Hauptsturmfuhrer Michael Whitman started out in a Stugg 111 and he became the greatest tank ace in history.
Scott
jointhepit
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 3,829 posts
AeroScale: 1 posts
Posted: Saturday, June 16, 2007 - 07:28 AM UTC

Quoted Text

StuG III. Cost wise, about half the price of other German Tanks. Reliable. Good firepower and protection. Smaller crew for better economy of force. Lighter for better manuverability. Smaller, conserving resources.

Yeah, I know it is technically an assault gun...



Right!

assault guns make super tankcrews,hens a good tool for combat , and for training .

last tanks standing in the Reich were stug III's

and I wonder If the description of tank includes a revolving turret anyway


Tha Pit
spongya
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
MODELGEEK
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Budapest, Hungary
Joined: February 01, 2005
KitMaker: 2,353 posts
AeroScale: 71 posts
Posted: Sunday, June 17, 2007 - 11:19 AM UTC
Wittman technically wasn't the greatest tank ace -only the best known
(Not that it matters -"tank aces" were good propaganda-material)

If the turret is not requirement, then the Hetzer would be the best German (?) tank...
Sure, a tad small, and not too good when it comes to ergonomics, but hands down the best tank hunter the Germans produced. And it was in use till the '70s... I guess only the T-34 surpasses this record.
blaster76
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Texas, United States
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
AeroScale: 137 posts
Posted: Friday, June 22, 2007 - 09:26 AM UTC
The revolving turret is definitely a requirement in my book. The latter Panthers like the late A's and G's would be my bet. They had ironed ot many of the mechanical bugs. But as a tanker hitting power is real important but of equal importance is survivability. Walking away from a severly damaged tank is essential. If it weren't for the fact tat the Tigers were mechaniclly weak and broke down so much they would be my choice as they maxed hitting power out with great survivability, so the one that has above average hitting and survivability and a fairly reliable drive train is one of the later model Panthers. Panzer IV's were great tanks at beginning, but despite upgrade after upgrade, woefully inadequate by late 1944 for survivability and hitting power.
spongya
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
MODELGEEK
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Budapest, Hungary
Joined: February 01, 2005
KitMaker: 2,353 posts
AeroScale: 71 posts
Posted: Friday, June 22, 2007 - 12:58 PM UTC
People tend to forget that tanks are not just good because of the armor, speed and firepower. Serviceability, weight, ease of use, cost are factors too, if you're looking for the "best".

The problem with the Panther (and any other Ubertanks) is that they were put together like a delicate Swiss clockwork. The notoriously weak transmission took 3 to 4 days in a repair shop to change in a Panther. The same took 3 hours in a Sherman on the field. Which one do you think spent more time on the battlefield, and less on the road to and from the repairshop?
Removed by original poster on 06/24/07 - 22:50:47 (GMT).
robbin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Texas, United States
Joined: August 22, 2006
KitMaker: 30 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, August 17, 2009 - 11:00 AM UTC
The Panzer IV was actually an old design(mid 30`s) that did have it`s limitations.Much like the Sherman though it was good at being reliable and cheap to build.once they got the bugs out of the Panther it turned into an excellent design and it was much liked by the crews.Although for me I would take a King Tiger anyday.
acav
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Auckland, New Zealand
Joined: May 09, 2002
KitMaker: 517 posts
AeroScale: 5 posts
Posted: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 - 08:13 PM UTC
That's a two-year-and-change bump, my friends...
RotorHead67
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Virginia, United States
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 1,174 posts
AeroScale: 226 posts
Posted: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 - 10:25 PM UTC
Best German Tank?
I think I'd Have to say the Panther
HastyP
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: April 23, 2003
KitMaker: 1,117 posts
AeroScale: 47 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 - 04:10 AM UTC
I'd have to say the Hetzer! Great use of the 38t hull, very effective, easy to conceal.

HastyP
bizzychicken
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Wales, United Kingdom
Joined: September 06, 2008
KitMaker: 967 posts
AeroScale: 5 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 - 07:49 AM UTC
Got to be the Panther G, lets not forget the Panther F was just coming off the production line right at the end of WWII it wasn't really a What if so I would go for a Panther F. With every thing sorted out mechanically, the Panther was the king of the Panzers. I don't think that mass produced Pz IV would have worried the T34/85? only the Panther got the Soviet tankers worried. What about 3 upgunned PzIV's against 2 IS 2's no worries for the Russian tankers. 1 Panther G agaist 2 IS 2 the Panther was nearly always the winner. Got to love what the Germans did with the old 38 chassie, the Hetzer was a real winner. Would love to know what the Soviets thought of it. For Me the Panther F as the best German tank. Hetzer tank killer. Cheers Geraint
sbs1701
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Uruguay
Joined: July 12, 2009
KitMaker: 13 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 20, 2009 - 03:08 AM UTC
Hi everyone...!

I will have to go for the Tiger I, they were only above 1200. But how many allied tanks they destroy?, I have got a lot of stories of this ones beating up enemies. If I am not wrong, the Tiger ratio is 10 or 12 to 1.

Also, the major aces were on Tigers, you can say they were on other ones before, but when they ride on Tigers, they score went straight up. Examples, Knispel, Carius, Wittmann.
And do not forget the panic the Tigers (and Panthers) produce on allies crews.

The western allies have to make a special tank to encounter the Tiger, the Sherman Firefly, this is enough to know we are talking about a good tank.
Mechanical breakedowns?, Yes, they where, but this machines were always at the limit every day.

Why would yo go for the workhorse car, when you can chose the sports car?

Best regards
Sebastián
russamotto
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Utah, United States
Joined: December 14, 2007
KitMaker: 3,388 posts
AeroScale: 374 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 20, 2009 - 07:46 AM UTC
If you had to travel 100 miles or more in a week, over varying terrain, far from supply and resource lines, against enemy forces that outnumber you, what are you going to choose to ride in? One vastly inferior M4A1 took out three Panzer IVsIs and one Tiger in North Africa before being knocked out by another panzer IV. The Tiger wasn't invincible. It operated best on the defensive where it's strengths were maximized. The Panther was just as likely to "brew up" as the Sherman when hit. The ratio of tanks produced in Germany was something like 4 panzer IV to every Panther, 7 to a Tiger, and 10 to a King Tiger. The only thing the heavy German tanks did was expedite the end of the war.

Put yourself in the commander's cupola and decide how long you want to live, and under what circumstances. When the Panther was developed there were many who argued that Germany should simply copy the T-34. German commanders in Italy complained that their tanks could not compete with the Sherman's mobility. If you are trying to move with Panthers, Tigers and King Tigers you have to choose your route carefully to avoid bridges and narrow roads that wouldn't allow the larger, heavier tanks access. The work horse may not be pretty, but in a tough spot dependability goes a lot farther. I would say a late panzer IV or the Jagdpanzer IV would be the best German tank based on reliability and reputation.
calvin_ng
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United States
Joined: June 23, 2008
KitMaker: 1,024 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Friday, August 21, 2009 - 12:00 AM UTC
scott sorry but your opinion on the panzer IV being better than the comet is dead wrong IMO. the panzer IV was bound to brew up like a sherman if hit, and dont forget the training and doctrine of the american crews werent as good in the begining of the war, but in the end they caught up. the upgunned shermans like the m4a3e2, m4a3 76mm, and the m4a3e8 were more than a match for the panzer IV. after the normandy landings the germans were begining to lose the war and hastily put together 4 new tank brigades with unexperienced crew members, these were sent to the fighting in france against the allies. they had brand new panthers and equipment but the crews hadnt been trainned well, as a result all 4 tank brigades were wiped out in lorraine. the panzer IV had its equal share of problems. there wasnt a best german tank in WWII, each tank had its fair share of issues, the t34, was a beast compared to the panzer. the american crews started out as a unexperienced armoured force but in the end became even better than their german counter parts. dont get me wrong , the panzer IV was a great tank, it served as the backbone of the german armoured force from the begining to the end. to sum it up, there isnt a perfect tank.
lespauljames
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: January 06, 2007
KitMaker: 3,661 posts
AeroScale: 369 posts
Posted: Friday, August 21, 2009 - 12:41 AM UTC
Panzer one!

why?

because if i bought one it would fit in my garage!!!
casailor
Joined: June 22, 2007
KitMaker: 165 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - 06:40 PM UTC
I have to agree the best was the panzer IV. The Panther was too complicated and over-engineered. The Germans, like every country but the USA and the USSR never designed their tanks for mass production. Simple, dependable, soldier proof vehicles are always a better bet than complicated easy to break vehicles.