Is-2 or King Tiger?

Such a hard choice.My 2 favourite tanks of WW11.The King Tiger was almost invincible,but unreliable,and a gas hog.The Is-2 had a pretty good record,reliable,big,tough,and a 122mm gun.Just it didn't carry much ammo!But the weight of the 122mm shot was a lot,and when used for high explosives(not always tank to tank action)it was good.Whadya think?

 

Welcome to the forum, trappermike. I think we've discussed this question before here on the forum, but I'm told I shouldn't bother new members with that sort of thing.

The Tiger II was superior to the JS-2 in AT firepower, ammunition stowage, and armour thickness. However the JS-2 was considerably lighter and had a much greater range due to its external fuel tanks; besides, it used a lot less fuel than the Tiger II anyway. Its greatest disadvantage was ammunition - it only carried 22 rounds for the main gun, and this gun fired two-part ammunition, significantly slowing the tank's ROF.

 

You also ahve to realize that the Russians only carried enough ammo for one day and that the Germans packed in as much ammo as they cound (not a good idea if you ask me) because they did not know the next tiem they could resupply. I remember reading this from the Russian Battlefield website Iam sure someone know what Iam tlaking about, but onfortinly the link in my favourites stopped working and I deleted the link.


found the website url but I dont remeber where i read that sorry.

www.Battlefield.ru

 

I would prefer the German approach. After all, the JS-2 is a breakthrough tank, and have to be expected to make deep penetrations without the possibility of resupply.

trappermike
Do you have any evidence that the Tiger II was unreliable and that the JS-2 was reliable.

 

"Reliable" is a relative term, too. Any AFV is "unreliable" if it does not recieve its required servicing.

 

King Tiger reliability

I have a good book"German tanks in WW11" It states that the king Tiger was built on the Tiger 1 chassis.It's massive weifgt was too much for the chassis.Most abandonded king Tigers weren't knocked out,they broke down or were out of gas!

 

If the book says the Tiger II was base on the Tiger 1 chassis then it's wildly out. The 2 had no relation to each other in design or chassis. The Tiger II was based on the Panthers chassis so far as I am aware, it was lengthened ( think made higher too?) with different running gear but shared the same engine as the Panther I think.

It's also worth bearing in mind that a retreating army doesn't always have the time to repair tanks (or the crews etc end up behind enemy lines ) and likewise doesn't always have the fuel. This may explain why so many were "abandoned" as opposed to being knocked out. Interestingly there is no record I can find of a Tiger II ever being penetrated frontally but I suspect there were IS-2 knocked out that way

Other more knowledgable folk can correct us

 

Still I would take the Is-2.According to what I have read the Tiger11's weight taxed the transmission and drivetrain,and thats why I say it was unreliable.Don't get me wrong,I love it's armour and gun,just I don't think it would go real far.

 

Aside from the fact that there were more than knocked-out and broken-down Tiger IIs, I still haven't seen any evidence towards the JS-2 being reliable.

 

Js-2 reliabily?

Well they made it all the way to Berlin!

 

So did the Tiger II, what is your point?

Like I said, the JS-2 had a significant problem when it came to firepower which is that it would run out. You won't be enjoying a more reliable engine (if this is even the case) if you don't have anything to fire at your slow and helpless enemy.

 

Actually I have seen several pictures of TigerII tanks with the star painted on it (it was bright and teh crew looked like Americans).

 

Never heard of that, though I do know of at least one Panther in British use.

 

It could be a knocked out / abandoned tank marked up for salvage/collection

 

The US forces did use at least one captured Tiger II (or maybe it was the British? Can't remember).

 

Really? I never knew that. Anybody (looking hard at Christian!) got any pictures or info?

 

I found a picture - turret number 211 from 2 Kp./s.Pz.Abt.506 - you can see it on p. 119 in Germany's Tiger Tanks vol. 3

 

I might have a picture saved on my computer but if I find it I cannot give credit to where i found it, but I will look.

 

IS2 was a better tank.King Tiger wasn't that better as he was heavier.
Many broke down because of the transmision and driving wheels.
Also King Tiger's armour didn't have materials that would stop it from fragmenting when being penetrated.Or cracking.Lack of molidben.
I can say that the only good thing on tiger 2 was it's good gun.

 

If 180 mm of front armor isn't "good" in a WW2 context, then I don't know.

:roll: