This thread is entitled the best tank of WW2...therefore you must take into account the reliability and production rate. I have already stated that the Panther has a better chance of winning in a fight (which rarely happened anyway, i.e. one on one tank battles) against a T-34/85 as long as it doesn't break down or malfunction in any other way. Furthermore, who the heck wouldn't want to go into battle in a tiger (heavy) opposed to a Sherman (medium). However, if the question was which one would they rather have to fight a world war with, most of the answers would be changed over to the Sherman.

Moderator Edit. Threads merged.


I have limited the choices to just 5 different tanks that each weighed 40 tons or more but less than 55 tons.

Which tank do you feel was the best all around battlefield performer based on any number of different qualities.

1. Firepower: Tanks overall capabilities against hard and soft targets. Qualities like: Gun optics / Turret rotation speed / Ammo supply / Rate of fire all being taken into account.

2. Protection: Tanks overall protection ( armor ) provided against all weapon types. Tanks size and profile are also factors.

3. Performance: Cross country and hard surface abilities ( speed ect. )

4. Reliability & Service ability: Tanks ability to reach and stay on the battlefield.

5. Communication: Tanks ability to communicate with other tanks or troops via communication equipement.

My five choices and not in any particular order are.

1. German - Tiger I
2. German - Panther ausf G
3. Russian - IS-2 Model 1944
4. American - T26E3 Pershing
5. American - M4A3E2(76)Jumbo

All right I feel I should jump in here.

Which Spitfire model?, Mk I, II, III, XXIV? what good is comparing a Mk XI spitfire against a ME109E, they are from different times of the war, with different targets and oppurtunities. Same as the Tiger Vs the Sherman, but in this instance one is again a HEAVY TANK, and one is a MEDIUM TANK, should we start comparing which tank is better in this regard as well, which is better, a MK I tank from ww1 or a German leopard of today? Which one would win? Wow not a hard question, but different times, with different technolgies, with different deployments and training. We need to be more specific.

Ok again which models and in which roles? Would you use a tiger to exploit an open front? or use a group of tigers to encircle an enemy? would you use a sherman to face a tiger one a frontal one on one? no. Each tank in all weights have there pros and cons, light tanks subtract armour and gun calibre for speed, heavy tanks subtract speed and reliablity for armour and gun calibre size, and medium tanks are a mixture of both. AGAIN The sherman did well in its role at taking on the medium tanks it faced since it was a medium tank, but obviously except to the most stupid, would never be used on a one on one with a heavy tank, that was left to tank buster planes, Tank destroyer units, or antitank infantry.

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

What about it terms of time production, cost, fear factor, roles in the field, influcences on tank design, tactics, which tank was liked by its crew, which one was hated and so on and so on.

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

Tomcat, you have a history of stealing posts from me. This one can be added to the list.

__________________

The boy with an arse for a face, every week on five...

Try here. http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/207...-tank-ww2.html

__________________
The Muslim Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands..." — Mohamed Akram. http://jihadwatch.org/

Aren't there already hundreds of threads like this?

__________________

But really can you every talk too much about tanks.

__________________
The Muslim Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands..." — Mohamed Akram. http://jihadwatch.org/

In addition to that thread there are quite a few similar threads just to name a few.

Tanks with most influence in the war...

Top 10 tanks of the war

Which tank is the most cost effective tank in the war

__________________
For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

I'm the "Confederate with a pipe"!! LOL

A question for the moderators; could we merge all the "best" and "favourite" tank threads into one and make it a sticky?

__________________

The boy with an arse for a face, every week on five...

I would never do that mate, and even if I did, it just means they were great posts.

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

If this thread title was changed, maybe it might get an answer to ones preference...say, what type of tank would you, having to command in WW2 would each person had chosen if such a myth or fact was able???Their are numerous arguments over costs, speed, maneuverability,armor...but simply...what tank design would you like to be posted with to use as your armor...regardless of either being Japanese, or Soviet, British, American, French,German...etc.

I would still prefer a Panzer V or VI (tiger I) unless perhaps my posting with this tank was in a swampy area, as in the Pacific, or if my posting required it to swim ashore at Normandy...

A Light tank, generally the lesser to be targeted in a tank engagment

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

heavy tank choice...Tiger I or panzer V

light tank T-34 or sherman with a 17 pounder..as shown in this video, at least the 17 pounder could counter the firepower of the Tiger or T-34
YouTube - SHERMAN TANK VERSUS GERMAN TIGER

bf109 Emil

I'd be inclined to agree on the Tiger as the best heavy tank but I depending on your definition of "best" a case can be made for the IS series.

As for medium tanks I'll go with the T34 and M4 being too close to call. The 17lber however is only an advantage vs the cats. A tank so armed isn't as well equipped to deal with the more common threats and tasks as the other M4 variants. One of the strengths of the M4 is all the different armament variations.

For light tanks how about the M24.

Ah-ha!
I would prefer to be commanding an IS-3 in Manchuria, thank you very much.

And Tomcat, weren't you the guy who a while ago was saying light tanks where useless?
(sorry, I just HAVE to keep bringing that up! )

__________________

The boy with an arse for a face, every week on five...

Tank in World War 2
can experimental tanks be used...
click tank then USA, and then the top or T-28 experimental tank with a 105 mm gun, and over 300mm of armor...the 14 kmh max speed might have been a hampering, as would changing the inside tread if knocked off....

Given a choice, I'd ride in/command a StuG, of course. I would NOT want any parts of a Tiger.
They look 'cool' in movies, but in the real world it's a different story. Constantly broke down, humping jerry cans of fuel.
Wadeing through mud to hook up cables to be pulled out. Change tracks for train ride, re-change tracks once there. Constantly being shuttled to every hot-spot that is in danger.
Not my cup of tea.

__________________

For just plain vicious prototypes the US T 29 heavy tank is right up there

T29 Super Heavy Tank

The hull with slope is 8" thick in front while the turret front is 8 to 11" thick with 7" sides and a 5" thick rear.
The main gun is the 105mm T5E1 that could penetrate about 6" of armor with solid shot at 1000 yds, 5" at 2000 yds, and with HVAP could drill through almost double that at either range.
It could manage 22 mph and weighed about 70 tons.

__________________
Truth is stranger than bullshit!

The T-34 or the sherman are not light tanks but medium ones, and if the sherman has the 17pdr it is no longer the sherman but the firefly. Plus why would the Firfly want to counter the firepower of the T-34? And a counter for the tiger, it still had trouble.

Joe. Here we go again

I never meant that the light tank is useless just that it should be capable at taking on enemy tanks, not shooting and scooting, such as arming them with 50mm cannons instead of the 37mm such as the Puma AFV, a good speed crossed with firepower but only without compromising the speed and the original deployment of the light tank. Of course there will be times when you will need to shoot and scoot but why not take a few enemy with you.

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

Do we have to bring that argument back up again?


Why would it need to take on a front-line tank such as the Panther when It's main enemy would be other armoured cars and/or infantry?

__________________

The boy with an arse for a face, every week on five...