Poll: Best Western Allied tank of World War II

This one's for our member Patton!

 

I won't vote for the Pershing since it came onto the scene so late. The Firefly was a good AT vehicle, but lacked the all around capabilities of the Easy Eight.
The Jumbo 76 should have been on the list!

 

I refuse to vote in this thread due to the absense of several Allied vehicles that should have made it onto the list.

 

Poor Roel - You can't please all of the people all of the time!

Maybe you should have asked for nominations first!!

 

But that would have sort of defeated the purpose of the entire poll. Which tanks are missing? These are definitely the best ones around. The only other nominees I could think of are types of Sherman that are inferior to the E8 (like the Jumbo, because it had the old suspension and narrow tracks), and types of Cruiser tanks that are inferior to the Comet.

Or did you want to vote for the Ram Mk.II? :lol:

 

Churchill Mk VIII?
Sentinal (I still like it!)?
Vickers Independant?

 

Vickers Independent! Lol

 

Just read MkVIII in place of MkVII when you see the Churchill.

Sentinel, same story as the Ram Mk.II...

Vickers Independent, sorry, I should have had that one! :lol:

 

Cromwell? Sherman (76)w? Most of these tanks you have in your list didn't make it untill during or after bulge, which is when Germany was pretty much incapable of waging war anyway.

 

Yes, and what about the only western allied tanks clearely superior to their german counterparts at the time, the B1 and Somua S35?? :lol:

 

I don't think that the french tanks should be on there and I'm glad they are not. 1, the char B1 was a piece of crap because it lacked manuverability, it was slow, and it was under manned. 2, the S35 was the best French tank of the war, however, it was under armored and under manned.

 

Patton, the King Tiger wasn't exactly the most mobile thing either and it is constantly cited as the greatest thing to ever bless the scene of ground warfare.

 

Then why was in invulnerable to all german tank guns at usual combat distances??
Did Gen.Hoeppner order his tank crews not to engage the S35, exept at very short distance because it was underarmoured?
I don't think so.

Besides that, the german crews that had faced the B1 did not think it was crap....

 

However, how good was the Cromwell?
Could a Souma stand up to a Comet?
We are after the best, not the 'best during a certain time period' - which is a totally different question.

 

The S35 was excellent for its time, but it was way obsolete by 42 and onwards ! Same goes for the B1.

The Heaviest armored allied tank was the Churchill, and the best armed allied tank was the Firefly !. If they had combined those two, then they would have had a serius breaktrough tank wich was on par with the Tiger-I in many aspects !.

KBO

 

...except for the relatively poor HE round, which limits the abilities of a breakthrough tank...

 

Hey you could fit the damn thing with a flamethrower !! And even keep its main gun while you have it

However i must let you know that the HE capability of the 17pdr was better than that of the U.S. 76.2mm gun !. (eventhough they are the same caliber)

The 17pdr did have a decent HE capability.

KBO

 

Didn't the high velocity of the 17pdr preclude it from having a useful H.E potential? A bit like the Tiger, whose Battalions had to be supplemented with III N to give them a tank gun capable of firing a good HE round.

 

The 88mm gun on the Tiger had a killer of a HE round ! The 17pdr less so, but, it was still decent enough for Anti-personel purposes. (But far from being purpose build for it )

 

KBO said

The round may have been good. But the gun was not suitable for firing it, except at directly observed targets (How difficult is that! In a battened down tank; nearly impossible).
The low velocity 7.5KwK was much more suitable for firing a shell in an indirect role, which was, after all what 90%# of artillery fire was all about. Hence the NEED to supliment Tiger Battalions with III N.

(# = my approximation only)