Squid Empire Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Here it is, the only working King Tiger in the world in France starting up: thats a v-12 maybach engine: 700 ps A fuel tank with 860L, enough to go 170km A beast of a machine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shnappz Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Awesome.. the tiger tank was way ahead of it's time!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodlied Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Ahead of its time? Nah, just over-engineered. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shnappz Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Their armour and range made them the superior tank of WW2, overengineered or not, they were damn effective 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodlied Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 I'm going to call a bull here. Other nations were just as capable of developing a similiar tank to the Tiger II. However, due to different ideas on how a tank has to operate, they didn't. I'm going to make a claim here by saying that the M4 Shermans and, in some ways, the T-34s were much more effective on the strategic level. (And the strategic level was the most important level in WWII.) Also, great guns and armour don't mean everything. Evidence of that can be found in the early part of the war when the, in terms of guns and armour, inferior German tanks managed to beat the heavily armoured B1 Bis and Matilda IIs, tanks that were armed with pretty powerful anti tank weapons. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWA Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 The Firefly pretty much shat on Tigers later in the war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shnappz Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) I'm going to call a bull here. Other nations were just as capable of developing a similiar tank to the Tiger II. However, due to different ideas on how a tank has to operate, they didn't. I'm going to make a claim here by saying that the M4 Shermans and, in some ways, the T-34s were much more effective on the strategic level. (And the strategic level was the most important level in WWII.) Also, great guns and armour don't mean everything. Evidence of that can be found in the early part of the war when the, in terms of guns and armour, inferior German tanks managed to beat the heavily armoured B1 Bis and Matilda IIs, tanks that were armed with pretty powerful anti tank weapons. It's almost universally agreed that the tiger tank was superior to the Sherman and T34. The armour & 88MM gun was definitely superior. It was pretty unreliable and more difficult to produce than it's counterparts on the opposing side... but if you're talking about a straight up like for like comparison; the Tiger was superior. You can make more of the shermans quicker and cheaper than the tigers and therefore strategically, yes they could be considered more effective in a war enviroment, that does not mean that it was a better tank though. Edited March 10, 2015 by Shnappz 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodlied Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 It was most certainly supperior to the Sherman and T-34 in arnament and armour. However, that's not all that matters. I'll make a comparison on what I think is most important to a tank design. For this I will be comparing the Tiger II with the Sherman 76mm and T-34/85. I will note down points from 1 to 3 for each vehicle on different subjects. Gun performance:Tiger II - 8.8 L/713 pointsT-34/85 - 85mm S-532 pointsM4 Sherman - 76mm M12 points Protection:Tiger II - Pretty damn good3 pointsT-34/85 - Alright at first, not that great at the end1.5 pointsM4 Sherman - Alright at first, not that great at the end1.5 points Mobility:Tiger II - Sluggish despite the high top speed and wide tracks1 pointT-34/85 - Very good3 pointsM4 Sherman - Good2.5 points_________________________________________________________ Reliability:Tiger II - Pretty damn terrible1 pointT-34/85 - Alright2 pointsM4 Sherman - Really good3 points Ease of maintenance:Tiger II - Bad1 pointT-34/85 - Easy2.5 pointsM4 Sherman - Really easy3 points Transportability:Tiger II - Not great1.5 pointsT-34/85 - Easy3 pointsM4 Sherman - Easy3 points Crew comfort:Tiger II - Great3 pointsT-34/85 - Terrible1 pointM4 Sherman - Great3 pointsControls:Tiger II - Pretty easy2.5 pointsT-34/85 - Unusual2 pointsM4 Sherman - Easy3 pointsLife expectancy (Has to do with upgradability):Tiger II - Bad1 pointT-34/85 - Alright2 pointsM4 Sherman - Great3 pointsEnd Result: Tiger II 17 PointsT-34/8519 PointsM4 Sherman 24 Points Remember, a tank is not only made by the ''golden three'', Armour, Firepower and Mobility. A lot of other stuff is involved as well.Also note that part of the King Tiger's as well as the Tiger's success lies with the good crews and the fact that they were introduced when the Nazis were already on the defensive. It is obvious that you're going to get better battle results while on the defensive.EDIT: Missed the ''Situational awareness'' and ''Radio'' parts. Although I don't think it would have made much difference. Especially for the Tiger II vs M4 contest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shnappz Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) while the golden three aren't the only things that make a tank effective, you've assigned and *equal* value to all of the other points you've listed, that isn't neccesarily accurate... 1 tiger Vs 1 Sherman = Sherman dies, that is undeniable. While reliability and life expectancy are Important, maybe they're not as important as, firepower, defence and mobility Edited March 10, 2015 by Shnappz 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neko soldier Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 1 tiger Vs 1 Sherman = Sherman dies, that is undeniable. While in a head to head combat, that's undeniable, but if the Sherman maneuvers and gets behind the Tiger, then tiger will lose. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyryle Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 1 tiger Vs 1 Sherman = Sherman dies, that is undeniable. That one bounced. #wotlogic 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodlied Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 while the golden three aren't the only things that make a tank effective, you've assigned and *equal* value to all of the other points you've listed, that isn't neccesarily accurate...Could you elaborate? 1 tiger Vs 1 Sherman = Sherman dies, that is undeniable.Overal, yes, the M4 will, most of the times, lose. However, see below. While reliability and life expectancy are Important, maybe they're not as important as, firepower, defence and mobility Well, if we go back to the golden three, the Sherman only wins in mobility which would make the King Tiger a better tank, no? If we follow that logic, the Maus must have been one of the best, if not the best tank of the war. Think about that one. The thing is, the golden three might decide a skirmish, but if you sacrifice a bit of the golden three in favour of the, often overlooked, ''soft'' stats, you will most likely end up with a design that may decide strategic fronts. If a tank is not as powerful as its opponent in raw combat is able to make up for it on the strategic level, then that tank is going to contribute more to a war winning victory than the other vehicle. A tank that has a bigger impact on the course of a war is, in essence, the better design, even if it is going to lose in a head on confrontation with its enemy. It's basically the same as to how the T-55 is just as good the Leopard 1 even though the Leopard wins in most golden and soft stat contests. Both tanks are able to contribute more to the war than, let's say, a T-10 or M103 would have. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWA Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Ease of maintenance: Tiger II - Bad 1 point T-34/85 - Easy 2.5 points M4 Sherman - Really easy 3 points I'm pretty sure the T-34 beats the Sherman in this category. There are stories of broken down T34s being repaired by nearby farm vehicles and the tank itself was so reliable that some armies today are still using it. The same can't be said for the Sherman. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodlied Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 While the stories about the T-34s being repaired by nearby farm vehicles is true, there are other things one has to consider. Maintaining the Christie Suspension was a pretty hard job.Switching out a broken road wheel for a Panther one was pretty easy, just as easy as it was to unbold a broken bogie and to bold on a new one. Also, accessing the engine was harder on the T-34 than it was on the Sherman. As for reliability, it was, apparently(?) more common for T-34s to break down before reaching the battlefield than it was for M4s. Although that has most likely got something to do with the manufacturing quality. I could up the score a bit for the T-34 in this area. Also, you're wrong about the Sherman not being used anymore. While it is true that the T-34 will most likely outlive it as an active service vehicle, the Sherman is still in service. From the top of my head I can say that Paraguay still has a couple of them in active service and I know that some other nation is still using (Super?) Shermans. Most nations that used M4s beyond their expected lifetime still had them in service in the '90s, Argentina with their Fireflies and even the Shermans that fought in the balkan wars.I think that the reason both tanks survived this long in the armies that still use them today/used them until recently is that the nations either couldn't affort better vehicles or simply didn't have a need to replace the vehicles.(Random fun fact of the day: IIRC, Peru used Panzer 38(t)s in active frontline service until the 1990s.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shnappz Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Lol... you have serious tank knowledge... TBH i really didn't know what i was talking about and pretty much was going on information obtained through a few google searches... although i think i held my own... you win, i take my hat off to you Nodlied, you know a SHED load about tanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodlied Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Thanks. Tanks are kinda my hobby, but I'm not an expert. I know my stuff, but not everything. So don't ask me about Japanese tanks for example. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 JapTank I must say, I don't know a great deal about tanks. But man I could look and drool over them all day long : 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shnappz Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Lol nice jap-tank... was exactly how i imagined it actually 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodlied Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 A more recent sample of the Tiger II in action. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shnappz Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Thats an awesome video... it certaintly feels menacing!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerad2142 Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 JapTank I must say, I don't know a great deal about tanks. But man I could look and drool over them all day long : This has RA3 stereotype tank written all over it, the only way we can be sure though is if you can zoom out and get a picture of the suicide bombing planes and the giant sword wielding robots. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 That Tiger could use a valve-job (judging by the occasional smoke and header-fire from the right exhaust). Its awesome though! Sounds like a V8 or V10? Again, I don't know tanks, just judging by the sound. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerrorTowers Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 that tiger looks frightening.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.