Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Best Tank Destroyer

Discussion in 'Tank Warfare of World War 2' started by tj, May 14, 2004.

  1. Heinrichi

    Heinrichi New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    I personally would prefer the Jagdpanzer IV as it was well protected, mobile, with a good gun and wery mobile. The biggest attribute is though that it had extremely low silhouette wich can be crucial in an ambush. Focusing on Jpz IV would have allowed for more Panthers to be made as the chassis would not have been used for the Jagdpanther which was btw an extremely good tank killer but maybe an overkill in late 1944.
     
  2. jeaguer

    jeaguer New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Sydney Australia
    via TanksinWW2
    there was a jagdpanzer canone , 90Mm on a leopard 1 chassis
    made in the mid sixties for germany and belgium , if anything it looked
    inspired from the soviet look with a low gun position on the chassis
    toward the end off production it was modified for carrying missiles


    .
     
  3. Ome_Joop

    Ome_Joop New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    I think the Jaguar and Kanone are one and the same...
     
  4. Oberstjon

    Oberstjon recruit

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Tank killer? It's the 88mm Anti-tank gun. That gun alone was a tankers worst nitemare. As far as tank killers go theres my vote.
     
  5. Christian Ankerstjerne

    Christian Ankerstjerne Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,801
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Denmark
    via TanksinWW2
    There were two main versions, though. The L/56 and the L/71. The former was not nearly as good as the 7,5 cm Kw K 42 (L/70), because of the shorter barrel.
     
  6. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    A tank destroyer is a vehicle type, though, not just a gun. Do you have any particular vehicle in mind? There were quite a few carrying the 88mm gun, particularly the long-barreled version.
     
  7. Miller phpbb3

    Miller phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    California
    via TanksinWW2
    king tiger
     
  8. Gunter_Viezenz

    Gunter_Viezenz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Windsor, Ontario
    via TanksinWW2
    Don't think the King Tiger would be at the top of that list evan thought it had a big gun it was not the most mobile and it would often be more offecient to reload a different weapon that was less powerful.
     
  9. TISO

    TISO New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    A wierd blue planet
    via TanksinWW2
    ISU-152 SP assault gun with it's ML-20L howitzer calibre of 152,4mm. Not the best but most interesting. Intended for anything but fighting tanks.
    AP round BR-540 weighted ~48,5 kg (this is just a shell as propelant charge in brass casing was separate~15kg) . Penetration was low but it coud diasble a tank without penetrating. It could also take a part of a tank clean off especcialy if hit it by HE round. Carious lost part of commanders cupala that way before he was knocked out by another ISU-152.

    152,4mm BR-540 AP round for ML-20 howitzer
    [​IMG]
    BR-540 shell:
    1- shirt - high quality forged steel, made from one peace and specialy thermicaly improved (for higher hardness) - 47,450kg
    2- explosive charge -heksogen and aluminium powder - 1,2kg
    3- detonator MD-7 - 120gr

    propellant charge for BR-540 (for other shells this charge is slightly different):
    1- compound for sealing
    2- cardboard plugs
    3- casing - brass - 7,5kg
    4- bag with gunpowder
    5- gunpowder (NDT-3 16/1) - 7,2kg
    6- incendiary cap BD

    entire round (shell + propellant charge with casing + all detonators) weighted 63,325kg. Now imagine getting hit with that :smok:

    Why Zveroboi (beast fighter) was abush predator if used against tanks:
    Penetration for BR-540 (all info for impact angle of 90 degrees):
    range - penetration
    100m - 140mm
    500m - 132mm
    1000m - 124mm
    2000m - 109mm
    3000m - 96mm
    5000m - 85mm

    BTW they also found out that for knocking out King Tigers, G-530 (penetrating HE - weight of the shell :40kg of which 5,1kg of TNT) bunker busters were more effective that BR-540 when KT was hit from a side.
     
  10. BMG phpbb3

    BMG phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ontario Canada
    via TanksinWW2
    I also think the ISU 152 and the SU 152 were very good tank distroyers. The Soviet infantry even went so far as to call them "beast killers" :bang:
     
  11. BMG phpbb3

    BMG phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ontario Canada
    via TanksinWW2
    i forgot to add the T34/57
     
  12. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Split off the Great Decimal Point Controversy - it is now in the Member's Lounge.
     
  13. Wotan

    Wotan New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Slovakia
    via TanksinWW2
    I vote for nashorn it have the best weapon, the 88 can kill any tank, i have read that one of the nashorn have kill a IS2 on 2km.
     
  14. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Certainly a good choice, but I've read that the chassis and the engine were both quite strained by its weight - which also limited the armour to the general level of "paper thin".

    Why not the Jagdpanther? Same gun, but all-round thick sloped armour and a good chassis.
     
  15. crossbow

    crossbow New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Antwerp,Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    Not exactly... the Jagdpanzer Kanone was related to the Leopard but it did not have the same chassis, it was shorter. It did have a similar engine, only two cilinders less than the Leo.

    BTW, the JPK could go the same speed forward and reverse...

    JPK:

    [​IMG]
     
  16. Wotan

    Wotan New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Slovakia
    via TanksinWW2
    Becose the nashorn is very light and have good speed on terrain, good outlook to sides, goog manoeuvrability. Genius Jäger :cool:
     
  17. P5

    P5 Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    ISU-122 and Sturmgeschütz III.
     
  18. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
    The Hetzer, a deadly-mini-tank-destroyer

    [​IMG]
     
  19. machine shop tom

    machine shop tom Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2007
    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    43
    via TanksinWW2
    The JagdPanther was far superior to the Nashorn in protection and mobility. The Nashorn was built on a hybrid pzk III/IV chassis and was lightly armored (and open on top) and was no faster than the JagdPanther:

    Nashorn:Speed: Road: 42km/h
    Cross-Country: 20-24km/h

    JagdPanther:Speed:Road: 46km/h
    Cross-Country: 24km/h

    So the JagdPanther had equal mobility (probably better due to it's wider tracks) yet had far better protection. It also had an MG-34 for infantry protection, while the Nashorn had no dedicated, mounted anti-infantry weapon.

    This is not to knock the Nashorn as a tank destroyer. Indeed, it is one of my favorite German vehicles. But, compared to the JagdPanther, it gives up too much in terms of crew protection.

    tom
     
  20. Gunter_Viezenz

    Gunter_Viezenz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Windsor, Ontario
    via TanksinWW2
    You should also keep in mind that a tank with an open top can easily be knocked out by accurate mortar fire, giving the vehicle even less of a chance to get away or survive a preliminary bombardment. But if I do recall correctly it was designed to pick off Russian tanks at long ranges.
     

Share This Page