Well, what do you think? Were Tigers worth nearly twice the cost of a Panther, and three times as much as a PzKpfw IV?

When used in the hands of aces like Whittmann they were devastating, but they were also VERY thirsty and could only go about 3kmbefore having a maintenance check.

Tigers are my favorite panzer variant of WWII but if it werent for Hitler's fascination with sheer size I bet the Reich's money could have been put to beter use.

I think they could have Come up with something more like the T-34 that was more effective and easily produced and easier to use on the front.

But i think the Germans still should have maintained the Tiger Tanks in smaller numbers as Defensive weapons rather then anything that would be used in Blitzkreig style warfare.

------------------
Out side is America!

I think it was absolutely worth it. Germany would never have the resources to be able to have a quantitative advantage over her enemies. The advantage would have to be qualitative, and the Tiger certainly was undisputed King of the battlefield for 2 full years. However, Germany was never able to streamline mass production until too late, so there were very few Tigers around and they weren't being protected from air attack either. Remember, even deadly tank aces like Wittman often fell prey to the Jabos.

My opinion is that the TIGER was a redoutable but very fragile machine compared to the PANTHER. The Tiger was too much armoured and the engines, specially, in summer didn't often resist. That's why I prefer Panthers to Tigers. Nevertheless, Tigers, it's true, was a formidable war machine, under good hands.

COMET

I wasn't emplying that Germany needed a quantitative advantage over her enemies, you could have two Panthers on the battlfield for every one Tiger produced with half the cost. The Panther was certainly no less battleworthy then the Tiger, and in my opinion, an all-around better tank with beter stopping power then a Tiger I, and better reliability with less firepower then a Tiger II. Not to mention that a Tiger could cross very few bridges in Europe for tactical counterattacks in small French towns, and it becomes mired a lot more easily then a Panther would in any theatre of operations.

The Tigers were definately worth the cost. They would have been improved upon had the Germans had the necessary time, and without Hitlers meddaling.

Problem was, too few and too slow!!
I must confess that the Tiger I is also my favorite German tank. Never mind the lack of sloped armor, and that dinky Maybach straining to move 'er along at a puny 15mph overland (if no mud puddles encountered!)
The thing just plain looks like a big mean brute that's damn well gonna put a hole in ya!
As to its worth, I'll agree that its qualitative edge was needed against the hordes of Crazy Ivan, but that same 'quality' was its downfall.
Heck, a Nashorn fielded the same gun, a weapon used with the intent of long-range knock-out power. What was required was a more mechanically sound platform.

All too true with so few. Also, the Maybach engines were under powered, but they were rugged and trustworthy but, not near as good as the Merlin-Olsen.

In the situation Germany found herself (defensive) when the Tigers were introduced, it was worth it. When the tigers made their appearance en masse at the battle of Kursk, their limited offensive capabilities would be discovered. But as the war went on and Germany was on the defensive, the Tiger had the unparalleled punch and was mobile enough to move to another defensive position. Just listen to what the allied tankers had to say about the Tiger. If a PzKmpfwgn IV destroyed their Sherman, they would claim it was a Tiger. No better compliment can be offered.

------------------
Carpe Diem

Yeah, fear of a weapon goes hand in hand with respect for it's abilities, and the Tiger created a lot of fear.

Exactly right. My grandfather was in France in '44 and came across more than a few Tigers in his day. Many years later, he reflected on two sounds that were unforgetable: a V-1's engine cutting out (which meant that it was dropping somewhere nearby) and the distinct roller whine of the Tiger. He was very animated and had the uncanny ability to actually PUT YOU there when describing his old war stories. Really cool stuff.

As my father told me in the past. The Shermans became excellent Rontos, when confronted by Tigers.

What is a 'Rontos'?

I think he means "Ronson", a then popular brand of cigarette lighter, very much like the Zippo.

Sorry for my misspelling, its Ronson. These were popular lighters, as were the Zippo lighters.

Some time ago, I started a nearly identical thread at www.onwar.com, it developed quite interestingly to about 150 responses, here is some info on the effectiveness of Tigers:

Ok, I've done some further research into the other MAJOR* Tiger formations, here is what the numbers look like:
Formation (SPzAbt/Kompanie) - Losses - Kills

501 - 120 - 450
502 - 107 - 1,400
503 - 252 - 1,700
504 - 109 - 250
505 - 126 - 900
506 - 179 - 400
507 - 104 - 600
508 - 78 - 100
509 - 120 - 500
510 - 65 - 200
13/Pzreg GD - 6 - 100
Pzreg GD - 98 - 500
13/SS Pzreg 1 - 42 - 400
8/SS Pzreg 2 - 31 - 250
9/SS Pzreg 3 - 56 - 500
SS SPzAbt 101 (501) - 107 - 500
SS SPzAbt 102 (502) - 76 - 600
SS SPzAbt 103 (503) - 39 - 500

Total: 1,715 - 9,850

Kill/Loss Ratio: 5.74

SS formations seem to do extremely well, with a kill/loss ratio of: 7.83

Furthermore, 17 "Aces" account for 1,572 kills, 16% of the total.

Seems to me the real success of the Tiger was very localized in a few units and individuals, more a product of skill than of technical superiority.

* There were several minor formations that used Tigers, like company "Hummel", "Meyer". Armour School "Bergen", PzD "Clausewitz". Gruppe "Fehrmann", "Hermann Goring", PzK "Kummersdorf", PzD "Kurmark", PzAbt "Kumersdorf/Muncheberg", that used small numbers of Tigers for some period of time, or wer ad hoc 'emergency' mixed formations of whatever vehicles were available, details are sketchy on their Tigers' performance. Input appreciated

Dear Alex: Can you supply me with any information on: Hauptmann Kraussold? He was Battalion Commander of a GD Panzergrenadier Regiment, in Russia in 1943.

Looking for information on some officers of I/Pg Rgmt GD in late 1944. They are:
Btn CO. Hauptmann Dietrich Kuehne
Btn Adj. Leutnant Bahndorf
____________________________________________
CO of 1st Kompanie: Oberleutnant Straihamer.
CO of 2nd Kompanie: Leutnant Kollmitz.
CO of 3rd kompanie: Oberleutnant Krist.hof
CO of 4th Kompanie: Oberleutnant Schmitt.
____________________________________________
Do you also have any info on Pz Gr brigade Von Werthern?

Major von Courbiere the CO of Pg Rgmt Kurmark?

Do you have any info on the following Knights Cross Recipients?

Hauptmann Otto Pfau of Pg rgmt, GD.

Major Ruprecht Sommer of Pg Rgmt 4.

Oberfeldwebel Heinz Bergmann 4th Btn PG Rgmt 26.

Oberfeldwebel Martin Beilig of 17th PG Rgmt.

Oberleutnant Jorg Burg of 7th PG Rgmt.

Obergefrieter Wilhelm Czorny of 2nd Kompanie, PG Rgmt GD.

Oberst Wolfgang Heesemann Co of PG Rgmt GD.

Feldwebel Rudolf Larsden of 1st Btn PG Rgmt GD.

Oberst Karl Lorenz Pg Div, GD.

Hauptmann Leonhard von Mollendorf of 3rd Btn PG Rgmt in the Fuhrer Begleit Brigade, of GD.

Feldwebel Fritz Plickat of 2nd Btn of PG Rgmt GD.

Major Otto Ernst Remer of 1st Btn PG Rgmt GD.

Major Clemens Sommer of 2nd Btn of PG Rgmt GD.

Oberstleutnant Erich Schmidt Co of a PG Rgmt in the Fuhrer Grenadier Division.

Hauptmann Hubert Schulte of 1st Btn PG Rgmt Fuhrer Begleit Division.

Major Rudolf Schwarzrock 1st Btn PG Rgmt GD.

Hauptmann Georg Storck of 1st Shutzenpanzerwagon Btn in a PG Rgmt in the Fuhrer Begleit Division.

I know this is asking alot but, any info-mundane or not, will be very appreciated. Thanks.

Aarghh!!!
I would have to excuse myself on 'its too much' grounds

However, the info you are seeking can be found on "Panzerregiment Grossdeutschland" by Hans-Joachim Jung, "God, Honor, Fatherland" by Thomas McGuirl & Remy Spezzano and the GD trilogy by Helmut Spaeter (the best) at JJ Fedorowicz publishing http://www.jjfpub.mb.ca/products.htm

Scroll down until you find the three volumes.

Happy New Year!

[This message has been edited by Alex (edited 31 December 2000).]

Many thanks Alex, sorry I put that many here, I have no, or very little info on those RKT's.

In fact, most of the little info I do have comes from the book on the Grossdeutschland Panzer Korps. Its a good book but, leaves you gussing.

To get back on the topic, yes, I do feel that Tiger tanks were worth the cost.

I agree, anything that did that well foe so long, (2 years), at a time when so much technological advancement was taking place is definitely worth it.

Durability and build quality of the Tiger tank: typical of German engineering.

I think he germans should have switched to the panther as soon as it was ready. You can build twice as much of them, the are fast, need little mantaince, got sloped armour and got a gun (at least) as good as the one one the tiger.

Thats true but, you have to admit that the Tiger 1's and 2's and the King Tigers; were some very powerful cats. I recently saw some good video of them in combat with the T-34's, and (i'm sure the footage was biased) the Tigers literally ripped them to shreads.

All-in-all, the King Tiger was my favorit tank in WW2, it not only had thicker armor, but a better main gun, sloped armor, and better speed.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

Also take a look at the panzer aces such as Wittman. Holding off a British unit single handed. Other stories are similar. My grandfather would have given both nuts to have been assigned a Tiger instead of his sturmgeshutz.

__________________

American by birth, TEXAN by the grace of GOD!