Tiger Production/Numbers game

CrazyD · #1 (**permalink**) July 25th, 2002, 07:37 PM

(apologies if this seems in the wrong section- either here or publications seemed appropriate)

So last night I was looking through one of the titles on my shelf- World War II, The Encyclopedia of Facts and Fugure (John Ellis, Military Book Club, 1993, no ISBN??)
While looking this over, one of the recurring problems with studying WW2 crossed my mind- the "numbers game". In all of our studies, we often rely on numbers and statistics for information. And yet, I'm sure some of you have run into the instance where numbers do not match up.
I was specifically looking into production numbers for the Tiger I, and here's what I found quickly...
1350 - from Ellis
1350 - from Michael Green, Tiger Tanks
1354 - George Forty, Tanks of WW2
1354 - Squadron/Signal Armor #27, Tigers in Action
And these numbers are probably some of the better ones- PzIV tank production yields and even greater difference in numbers.
So my thread here consists of two things-
How do we deal with numbers and statistics from ww2, considering both how many records were neglected, falsified, or destroyed, and the research that has come since?
How should one determine the actual number of Tiger Tanks produced?

I'd be ineterested in any thoughts you gents have on this one...

Maybe a challenge/experiment for us-
How many PzIV (including variants) tanks were produced by the end of WW2?
And how many different sets of numbers will we find?

Bish OBE · #2 (**permalink**) July 25th, 2002, 07:50 PM

When i did my artcle, i went for an approxamite figure. I setteled on 1,300. But these nmbers are like all the other numbers you find when dealing with this sort of thing. Most of my numbers dealing with speed, distance, fuel consption and so on are approxamates.

Some figres may include vehicles that were returned to factories and re-built. You should also remember the star that German was in in the latter stages of the war. I doubt keeping accurate figures for guys like us to argue about 60 years later was high on heir list of prioities.

Martin Bull · #3 (**permalink**) July 25th, 2002, 07:53 PM

Agree with Bish - it's now impossible to establish precise figures.

Just to add to your misery, Crazy : -

1355 ( Kleine/Kuhn 'Die Geschichte...' )
1348 ( von Senger und Etterlin 'German Tanks...')

CrazyD · #4 (**permalink**) July 25th, 2002, 08:26 PM

Thanks for the input so far...

I'd agree that precise numbers are impossible to determine. But, and I don't mean to take issue with you, Bish, I have problems with the approximate numbers. The problem is that numbers such as this, when approximated over time, often wind up being VERY inaccurate. In your example, citing only 1300 Tigers produced, that would ignore at least 40 machines, or about 4% of the production run. And in the case of the Tiger, these forty machines likely made a significant difference.

A better example would come in the PzIV numbers- figures here often differ by as much as 500, and 500 tanks can hardly be ignored...

Maybe a way to re-phrase this would be How we determine which numbers to use...

Of course this is academic, since Bish is correct in that we can never be sure about the exact numbers.
Just crossed my mind that this is an intersting issue we all likely run into.

[ 25 July 2002, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: CrazyD88 ]

Friedrich · #5 (**permalink**) July 25th, 2002, 10:16 PM

Interesting topic. I suposse that all those numbers, as well as cusualties are abstract. We will never be entirely sure.

And I will be interested in knowing how many Pz. IV and Pz. III were actually built, knowing that these two were the peasants and workers within the Wehrmacht.

I have heard that there were built, indeed 1.300 Tigers, 5.500 Panthers, 600 Pz I and 2.000 Pz II. And like 500-600 Kinng Tigers. But there are missing the most important tanks... Beside how many Pz 38(t) and 35(t), also important were built?

OK. I will propose you something: All of you, post here from all the books and sources you can find the numbers, we will made averages. But to be more exact, we need a lot of different numbers. Here we go. We need a lot of versions of construction numbers of German Panzers I-VII and 38(t) and 35(t), all the German tanks.

OK?

Bish OBE · #6 (**permalink**) July 25th, 2002, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CrazyD88:
Thanks for the input so far...

I'd agree that precise numbers are impossible to determine. But, and I don't mean to take issue with you, Bish, I have problems with the approximate numbers. The problem is that numbers such as this, when approximated over time, often wind up being VERY inaccurate. In your example, citing only 1300 Tigers produced, that would ignore at least 40 machines, or about 4% of the production run. And in the case of the Tiger, these forty machines likely made a significant difference.

A better example would come in the PzIV numbers- figures here often differ by as much as 500, and 500 tanks can hardly be ignored...

Maybe a way to re-phrase this would be How we determine which numbers to use...

Of course this is academic, since Bish is correct in that we can never be sure about the exact numbers.
Just crossed my mind that this is an intersting issue we all likely run into.

Thats very true but thats why, in my figures, i added the word Approx, so that no one should take it as the final answer.

But those other figures, do they include, as i said, vehicles that were returned to factories and re-built. I found this was common.If you look at enough photos of Tigers, it can get very confusing. I have found tanks with early prodution turrets on a late prodution chassis, and vice-versa. Now, are each of these counted twice, or only once. Some figures may not be Tigers but Tiger hulls. This could include Sturmtigers. You really need to know what factors the author is taking into consideration.

All of these numbers can be confusing, and many factos need to be considered when looking at them.

Timo · #7 (**permalink**) July 25th, 2002, 11:42 PM

Sd.Kfz. Type: Production period: Number produced:
101 PzKpfw I 1934-1943 7571
121 PzKpfw II 1935-1944 8558
(LT-35) PzKpfw 35(t) 1935-1939 424
140 PzKpfw 38(t) 1938-1942 1411
138/2 Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer 1944-1945 2584
141 PzKpfw III 1936-1944 5733
142 Stug III/IV 1940-1945 10548
161 PzKpfw IV 1936-1945 8544
171 PzKpfw V Panther 1942-1945 5976
173 Panzerjager V Jagdpanther 1944-1945 425
181 PzKpfw VI Tiger 1942-1944 1355
184 Panzerjager Ferdinand/Elephant 1943 90
182 Tiger II Ausf. B "Konigstiger" 1944-1945 489
186 Jagdpanzer VI Jagdtiger 1944-1945 85

From the Achtung Panzer website

[ 25 July 2002, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: Timo ]

Friedrich · #8 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 12:11 AM

Very nice information Timo. [img]smile.gif[/img]

If that is right, then the Pz II was the most produced German tank of WWII and well, the Stugs: wow!!!

Martin Bull · #9 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 09:54 AM

1346 production + 3 test series ( Jentz; 'Germany's Tiger Tanks' )

Sorry - just adding to the fun !

Timo · #10 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 10:20 AM

I must say that the goal of this thread is not clear to me. Some researchers give very well researched production figures, so why looking for an average of all different available numbers? Why not look at the sources the researchers used? I mean, if I write a book stating that 37,000 Tigers were produced, will this figure be part in the calculation of this "avarage"?

If a good researcher says 1348 Tigers, why bother with saying that all sources combined give an average of, for example, 1346? Whats the use of an average above the individual figures of well informed writers?

And whatever average you make, the StuG will always be most produced, Pz.IV will always be in second place, etc.

Now, doing a serious conduct at the BA-MA and by contacting the archives of the former manufacturers of the German Panzers, in order to get close to the real figures would be something better to do. But I doubt we'll be able to find all needed documents and even if we do, I doubt if we will come to a conclusion different from Jentz and other serious researchers.

Just my 2 cents,
Timo

[ 26 July 2002, 05:23 AM: Message edited by: Timo ]

Martin Bull · #11 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 01:20 PM

So there you go, Crazy !

My 2 cents worth : -

Henschel Industrietechnik GmbH
P O Box 10 29 69
D34112 Kassel
Deutschland

Timo · #12 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 02:50 PM

Daimler-Benz AG
70 546 Stuttgart
Deutschland

Porsche AG
Entwicklung
Postfach 11 40
71 283 Weissach
Deutschland

[ 26 July 2002, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: Timo ]

CrazyD · #13 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 03:06 PM

Quote:

If a good researcher says 1348 Tigers, why bother with saying that all sources combined give an average of, for example, 1346

Because what if another good researcher says 1354? Who do we believe?
And more importantly, the trend in history is often for authors and researchers to simply use the most common, easiest to find numbers they can. But wars are won with numbers; Production and logistics were far more important than any single tank, general, or battle, in my opinion.

Tigers are a bad example, because, as I thought, while ALMOST NONE of these sources show the SAME number, they all have close numbers, all around 1340-1355.
Friedrich has the right idea- let's look at a more common tank, like the PzIII or PzIV. I don't have time today, but I'll put together my sources tonight. I would imagine the number discrepancies here would be huge.

Quote:

All of these numbers can be confusing, and many factos need to be considered when looking at them.

Exactly, Bish. If approximate numbers are stated, and specifics are not so important in a certain case, I would not expect you or any other researcher to delve into a probably un-solveable problem. I just look at it as an interesting topic, trying to find the numbers.

Thanks for all the input on this one!

Bish OBE · #14 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CrazyD88:
[
Exactly, Bish. If approximate numbers are stated, and specifics are not so important in a certain case, I would not expect you or any other researcher to delve into a probably un-solveable problem. I just look at it as an interesting topic, trying to find the numbers.

Thanks for all the input on this one![/QB]

I agree. But i have found the Tiger to be the hardest to pindown. Those igures Timo gives for othe tanks are pretty much what i fond elsewhere. But i guess the higher number that were produced, the bigger the disrepancies. Its not so hard when youare looking at vehciles that had production runs of maybe a few hundred. You can almost account for every one. But when you are talking thousands,it gets a bit harder.

And when you hadvehicles that were almost rolling out the factory straight to the front, who was counting.

Friedrich · #15 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 03:21 PM

Timo. Who do you think I am? Of course I am talking about serious authors. I bet there are not just one or two...

The only place to research and find the best results should be at the factories of course, which MUST have had records of how many tons of steel, how many wheels, cannon, turrets, and obviusly how many tanks... You must remember that we are people who write everything down... Pathetic we... hehehehe

Martin Bull · #16 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 04:06 PM

I understand that Mercedes-Benz will not allow independent researchers access to their archives regarding production during the Third Reich.

Friedrich · #17 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 04:19 PM

Of course they will not, Martin. Because then they would show the world how rich they became. Imagine 1.350 Tigers. How much did one cost? I can assure that it was a lot of money... Henschel, Mercedes, BMW, Krupp, Heinkel, all they became inmensly rich!!! How would they tell the world that they became rich with other countries and dead jews' gold?

Martin Bull · #18 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 04:43 PM

I think also there's some corporate embarrassment as to how Herr Hitler and friends all had the latest Mercedes cars even in the early days of the NSDAP when funds were low...

Timo · #19 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 05:01 PM

So we have contradicting aims in this thread:
Some want exact numbers, some want an average of the available numbers.

If you want the exact number, you won't need the figures given by other authors.
If you want an average, I don't see the use of this.

If Jentz and Spielberger did not find exact numbers, why do we even try to do it better?

iow: I have more useful things to do

CrazyD · #20 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 05:05 PM

More good stuff, gents.
Although, Friedrich, I would wonder about the existence of original records. And further, if those records do exist, can they be trusted? Even first-hand accounts and records can be problematic- people could have inflated production numbers to impress Hitler, etc.

Quote:

Its not so hard when youare looking at vehciles that had production runs of maybe a few hundred. You can almost account for every one

Exactly, Bish- I look at this as sort of a "detective" kind of thing. You are right about this... with Tigers, we SHOULD be able to pin down nearly every one. But because of the nature of the records and info from ww2, just on this thread we came up with SIX different numbers...

Another example I though of last night- How many Jadgtigers had the 88mm gun, how many the 128?
My sources claim outright not to have these numbers...

Let me clarify one thing though- I'm not actually expecting to discover the correct number. And you gents certainly don't need to be going out and getting me numbers for this. Just an interesting discussion topic!!

But of course, if anyone wants to embark on a little detective work, let me know

Timo · #21 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CrazyD88:
[QB]I would wonder about the existence of original records.

...The do. But the files which survived the war have allready been used by both Walter Spielberger and Thomas Jentz. So nothing new will come from them.

Quote:

And further, if those records do exist, can they be trusted?

...They can. Original files are usually very reliable. What reasons would they have to lie in their own papers?

Quote:

Even first-hand accounts and records can be problematic- people could have inflated production numbers to impress Hitler, etc.

...No way!!! Do you know what happened to you if this was discovered? Would it not ring a bell if tanks "disappear"? Tanks leaving the factory were distributed among the army units. What if a division is assigned 10 new Tigers as replacements but they never show up because they were never produced? How impressed would Hitler be in that case?

Again: if it was possible to get exact numbers, it would have been done by Spielberger or Jentz.

Friedrich · #22 (**permalink**) July 26th, 2002, 07:20 PM

Well, those original records of course can be trusted. The problem is to get them. And if some authors based on them to write their books, then they are the most reliable. But my point is, if even those two, the best authors have different numbers, an average between those two would be the realest chypher, wouldn't it?