T-34 had the numbers, and out classed the panzer III and perhaps the IV...but to claim it as the best tank??? the panther outclassed it in fire power, electronic radio sets, optical range finder, gunnery as the 75 was a semi automatic, and didn't require a loader, as opposed to the 88 used on the tiger...their was a revised t-34 produced in '44 with improved firepower, but was still not a match for the panther...

it states in may of 44 only 304 panthers where on the eastern front opposed to 1200 t-34 being produced per month...through attriction, the t-34 was superior, but even or slightly numerically advantaged,,,the victor would be the panther...hands down...

"Perhaps"? It was far superior to the Mark IV in almost every aspect.

__________________

You are downplaying the importance of the T-34's easy production and reliability. The Russians need a tank like the T-34 to back their war effort and overwhelm the Germans with numbers. Yes the Panther did outclass the T-34 in a lot of ways, and in a one on one battle would probably have more wins than losses. However, you say yourself that only 304 Panthers were on the Eastern Front in may of 44 (I have no idea if this is true I am just going with what you said) against 1200 T-34's! That is why the T-34 was a better tank.

If the minutiae of the T34 is to be compared, it's well worth considering the different models and their relative strengths. eg. a /76 model & a /85 model, of whichever type, are rather different beasts when playing the 'best' game with a late model Pz.IV as a comparator.
'T34' is rather a blanket designation.

Cheers,
Adam.

__________________
"Wars cannot be fought with dream stuff" - Sir Percy Hobart.

Sorry, I guess I meant the T-34/85 model.

Well the differences between the T-34 and the panther which ever model is simply the fact that the weights are different. The Panther in all regards should be classed as a heavy tank while the T-34 is a a medium tank, yes the T-34\85 had been upgunned to take on the heavier tanks but it was still a medium tank.

So with that in which regards are we referring to? Tank Vs Tank? The Panther over the T-34, but now in terms of numbers of being produces and the sheer amount that could be deployed is the T-34 over the panther.

Now what about in terms of "effects" after the war? Which tank has stayed in active service even to now in secondary countries? the T34, so which one is better?

Yes in a one on one engagment the panther would win, again because it is a heavy tank by nature. It is like comparing a sherman to a panther.

__________________
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

Time, time, time, time. It all depends on timeframe. On June 22nd 1941 what good tank did the Germans have to oppose the T-34? Ditto for 1942? Only in '43 did the Pz IV with long 75s started to show up in significant numbers and even so. By then the T-34 was being overtaken by a better gunned Pz IV, balance being later recovered by the T-34/85.

As for comparison with Pz V and Pz VI, just remember to look at tonnage. Otherwise you'll always be comparing coconuts to nutmegs, better look at the KV/JS series, and even then the JS-2 will carry a much bigger punch at a much lesser weight.

__________________
Bah!

In 1943 I would still think the T-34/76 to be the "better" tank to the Mark IV, even with the L 43 gun. It was still cheaper, faster, and had that good sloped armor.

__________________

Ah yes the firepower, better optics and radio sets.....

All very important, until the mighty Panther would break down. Then the German crew could use their radio sets to call for help and request another Panther to come to their aid which in turn would also break down. The optics would then be used between the two to establish how much time they have to run away before the hundreds of T-34's which they see would close in.

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

Probably more like thouands of them, hmmm should we bother running?

__________________
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

Nice reply, you are out of sorts today. I want you to know that I expect better.

When the panther would break down, which was generally fixed by late 43, no self respecting T-34 commander is going to run up to them, because that big gun didn't break. Yes if they could go around and flank him and his other compadres, they would do that as a tank unit. More probably you would have a busted down Tiger than a Panther. Although they may also taken the run option, during Bagration or another large offensive when running was the game.

__________________
"Well, I don't believe that climate change is just an issue that's convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it's one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation."
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/
Barack Obama

The Panther's major problems were fixed in 1944. And mechanical failure remained at levels unknownst to their Allied counterparts all the way up to the end of the war.

If a tank burns out its engine, breaks a track, shatters a sprocket, etc., the result is pretty much the same as a direct knock-out. A broken-down tank is generally abandoned by its crew, despite the "heavy" gun. You know why? Because an enemy tank doesn't even have to engage the target in order to knock it out. The enemy can simply bombard the broken-down tank with artillery, then move on. The enemy doesn't even have to risk his armor to engage the "broken down" tank. Tank vs. tank combat was a minority as to how tanks died. Most tanks were destroyed by artillery, mines, or AT guns. Also, for the broken-down tank to engage enemies, it has to break down in an awfully convenient place...

What happens when an enemy captures your broken-down tank? Ask the Soviets; they equipped some divisions with Panthers. And, if you check the forums for "pictures of captured Axis equipment", you can spot a few Tigers in Anglo-American hands.

The Soviets did not necessarily equip some "divisions" with the Panther. But the strength of the units were attached to mainly Companies, Battalions,Regiments and Brigades and in small numbers.
http://wio.ru/tank/capt/capt.htm

And you can read about and see pics of the German tanks and AFVs in use by the Western Allies and Soviets in the thread I created about them.
Allied use of captured Axis AFVs and Tanks

__________________
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 liked the first thread JCF

__________________
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

I was replying to Slons statement about the Panther crews running because some T-34s were coming. Neither he or I think that the only way to knock out a tank is with a tank. Please also note that if a tank breaks down you will not see the crew instantly jump out of it. Oh and in the case of the Tiger the number cause for destruction we demolition by the crew.

__________________
"Well, I don't believe that climate change is just an issue that's convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it's one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation."
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/
Barack Obama

[QUOTEYou are downplaying the importance of the T-34's easy production and reliability. The Russians need a tank like the T-34 to back their war effort and overwhelm the Germans with numbers. Yes the Panther did outclass the T-34 in a lot of ways, and in a one on one battle would probably have more wins than losses. However, you say yourself that only 304 Panthers were on the Eastern Front in may of 44 (I have no idea if this is true I am just going with what you said) against 1200 T-34's! That is why the T-34 was a better tank.][/quote] was quoted from Is this thread titled best number or cheapest to produce tanks??? or best tank of WW2...earlier someone claimed to try andclaim the Sherman to be in this category...I remember seeing a clip on history channel, might even be on you tube where they did comparison of spitfire vs bf109 Emil, and as well as tiger vs Sherman...all asked to pick which tank they'd have would liked to be sent to battle in....all poled replied the Tiger??? has a pole been done for whom would prefer a T 34 preference, from actual combat veterans chosen preference over a panther???

Now if the best tank was which side could produce the most and send piecemeal into a battle of attriction, the T-34 wins...

In 1941? In 1942? In 1943? In 1944? In 1945? Which year do you mean? Are you sure the answer is the same in every year?

Battle of attrition? Please provide examples of that in the Eastern Front (or any other front).

__________________
Bah!

HMMMMM..Really? Which would you choose to be sent into combat with? The HEAVY Tiger I with heavier armor and larger caliber gun in small numbers or the MEDUIM M4 with lighter armor and lighter caliber gun in great numbers? Freaking no brainer there. The Tiger was a good defesive vehicle while the M4 was designed as an "Assault" tank.

__________________
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

Best tank

I vote the Type 95 Te-Ke

What other tank can the football team turn over on it's side after a night of drinking ?

Panther vs T-34 thread

__________________
"Danger Will Robinson!"

that is even a better question, if year of battle determined which tank was superior during that time or conflict, as chasis design or model which proved superior earlier, had since maybe lost it's advantage later on...

as for attrition, i will have to look at sources, but Stalingrad is a good example, where troops, and armour where fed piecemeal, and as stated in a book by Anthony Beevor, where T-34 where sent into battle before being painted or fitted with optical lenses and gunners peered down the barrel to take aim...another, although better planning and anti-tank defenses came to play is Kursk, where shear numbers overwhelmed the panzer corp. bogging down the thrust, and taking it's toll there after by anti-tank guns and sappers...