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

bazooka v. panzerschreck

Discussion in 'Weapons & Technology in WWII' started by drache, Nov 19, 2004.

  1. drache

    drache Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which had better armor penetration? which one was better overall?
     
  2. T. A. Gardner

    T. A. Gardner Genuine Chief

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,136
    Likes Received:
    904
    Location:
    Phoenix Arizona
    The panzerschrek had better penetration due to a larger warhead.
    The bazooka was the better of the two in accuracy and range.
    Of the two, I would have prefered the bazooka; you can stay further away from that evil 30+ tons of enemy tank and, it is far lighter to tote than the steel (bazookas were aluminum) panzerschrek. Penetration is not as critical since flank shots are likely anyway.
     
  3. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    Panzerschreck was primarily a two man weapon as it weighs well over 20 plus pounds.

    What is the Bazooka's range ?

    The Panzerschreck 54 could easily blow away a T-34 at 100 yards range. Essentially you have a mobil 88mm weapon fired by hand and it could penetrate frontal armor of the Sherman and other allied tanks if the range was close enough and the two man crew had protection from debris from the exploding vehicle.
     
  4. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    Portugal
    How frequently do tanks explode?

    The main need for protection for the crew would be because of vehicular machine-guns and accompanying infantry. Compared to that, the risk of getting a turret landing on your helmet seems somewhat weak ;)
     
  5. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    let me slightly rephrase this, should of stated exploding debris off the vehicle(s). Tanks do blow up which is correct. the face protector or rectangular shield was to protect the firer from back blast of the launched rocket. I own a Panzerschreck 54 which I picked up in the late 1960's..........

    for now
     
  6. Martin Bull

    Martin Bull Acting Wg. Cdr

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,578
    Likes Received:
    1,487
    Location:
    London, England.
    2.36" Bazooka is quoted as having a maximum range of 700 yds in A J Barker's 'British & American Infantry Weapons Of WWII'.
     
  7. drache

    drache Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    700 yards? but what kind of accuracy can you get at that range? Practical usage would be a lot closer don't you think?
     
  8. T. A. Gardner

    T. A. Gardner Genuine Chief

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,136
    Likes Received:
    904
    Location:
    Phoenix Arizona
    Realistically, about 200 yards, 400 for a stationary target. For the panzerschrek the practical range is about 75 yards, 100 or so for a stationary target. But, both are far more dependent on the operator than the weapon. I have read numerous accounts of how much this effects accuracy with these weapons. In one case with the bazooka US troops were practice firing at about 300 yards at a boxcar the first gunner fired 6 rounds in succession missing every time. Another soldier then tried, hitting on his first and each successive shot thereafter.
    Another thing that is in the bazooka's favor is that the rocket is far more reliable than the one used in the panzerschrek.
    A drawback of the early bazooka was the use of batteries for the firing circuit. It always seemed that the batteries would die or be dead just when a Panther tank appeared.... This was rectified in the M9A1 model by using a magneto like the panzerschrek used. Another smart innovation in this weapon was its 2 part tube that clamped togeather. This made it more portable again. This was really an important consideration in leg infantry units who had to tote it.
     
  9. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    interesting T.A. The Panzerschreck 54 and also the shortened version could take on any tank with success and have never heard of unrealibility with this unit. the rocket was just plain ugly and destructive, one reason why the head was used on the end of the R4M rocket of JG 7 Me 262 unit, the unit having ample success with it during ground attack runs with the Soviets. As three pilots of the jet unit have said, "we slaughtered them"

    good thread here guys ...
     
  10. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    remember my 1st Infantrie Division friend Helmuth Reichert who was a waffenmeister in his regiment 43 of the division// told me that they would set up numerous traps in the trees with variants of the Panzerfausts and then 2-3 two man teams of Panzerschrecks with ranges overlapping so no Soviet armor would get through.....

    here is a pic of my "toy" the SA is an after war Finnish code. the shield is in German field grey

    [​IMG]

    E ♪
     
  11. Friedrich

    Friedrich Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    6,548
    Likes Received:
    52
    Amazing pic, Erich! :D Thanks for sharing! ;)
     
  12. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    Hey Fried, here is another pic I have posted elsewhere I think ? in any case three upright oak book cabinets which are a series of about 12 in the home with the collections/research data from the 1960's onward..........the Luftwaffe Nachtjagd is in a secret compartment only known to a chosen few..... ;)

    geez I'm an old poop :D that "toy" is a heavy thing

    [​IMG]

    Erich
     

Share This Page