WW 2 German tanks that make you cream your pants

>Build a tank with a final drive that fails after 150 Km's
>Good

not true.
Panzer III, IV, Panther, Tiger I & II were all very good vehicles that simply suffered from a lack of logistic support and / or premature deployment

>people will reply to this
Fuck all of you

Hye that's not true, the Pz IV J series was very good

The Panther was fucking shit as anything except an entrenched gun

>they were good at everything except for things that are the most important on tanks
Panzer IV wasnt bad, but it suffered from basic problems like not slopped armour and it wasnt better in anything compared to the Allied tanks of its era

>>they were good at everything except for things that are the most important on tanks
nice reading comprehension, I didn't say nor implied that.

Tigers wrecked everything in their way if there wasn't complete allied air supremacy.
Panthers were superior to allied tanks too unless they fought on close ranges with lots of cover

Panzer III and IV were the first to come with 3 man turrets which gave them a huge tactical advantage as could be seen in their success against French tanks or even Russian tanks (in the beginning)

>it wasnt better in anything compared to the Allied tanks of its era
The KwK 40 was a fucking great gun, far superior in penetration to the shitty 76mm Shermans when loaded with AT rounds

>The Germans had SEVEN different models of tanks in production with multiple variants within each model range,
Go ahead and name these SEVEN different models.

>Tigers wrecked everything in their way if there wasn't complete allied air supremacy.
thats like being a medieval knight and putting set of armor that weights 700kgs on you and your horse and then saying that you could wreck everything in your way if there wasnt for your horse dying of exhaustion after walking 10m
>Panthers were superior to allied tanks too unless they fought on close ranges with lots of cover
*breaks down*
>Panzer III and IV were the first to come with 3 man turrets
3 men turrets existed long before Panzer III and IV
76mm is much better, 75 isnt

Panzer I, II, III, IV
Panther
Tiger
Tiger II
Panzer 35 (t)
Panzer 38 (t)

9, actually

>tanks get exhausted
Tigers were as fast and maneuverable as Shermans: youtube.com/watch?v=dXP0QhbBDC8
Watch this documentary if you believe Wehraboo exaggarations mean this was some toy: youtube.com/watch?v=J1_hifqjmP4
>*breaks down*
exaggarated meme; read this: scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1842&context=cmh
>3 men turrets existed long before Panzer III and IV
in which tanks? Which tanks had three man turrets in 1940-41?

Panzer I was not being built at the same time as Panther and the Tigers.
Panzer II was a training tank well before the Tigers and Panther were in production.
Panzer 35t and 38t are Czech tanks built in Czech factories. Panzer 35t also ceased being built before the Tigers and Panthers.
You are so desperate to make WW2 Germany look irrational and stupid. Why? Do you say that US had ELEVEN different models of tanks in production because it had
>M2 Medium
>M3 Grant
>M4 Sherman
>M7 Medium
>T23 Medium
>T26 Pershing
>M2 Light
>M22 Locust
>M24 Chaffee
>M3 Stuart
>M5 Stuart

>You are so desperate to make WW2 Germany look irrational and stupid. Why?
not my intention, I'm not even the guy replied to, I just answered his question, and my post is factually correct you know. calm down.

Sorry how is your post factually correct? Do you not understand what "factually" means? or do you just not understand the concept of time? Help me understand.

yeah, he didn't specifically say "seven models in production at the same time" so I didn't consider that temporal part... I get your point now

He does say seven "in production." His post is clearly making the commonly-made implication that Nazis were turboautists who couldn't into streamlining, even though Nazi Germany built fewer models of pretty much everything compared to the US.

Unlike the Germans, the American industry could actually support this and didn't rely on slave labor

Panzer IV and III had about 8 models between them, even panthers had about 3-4 models.

Should have stuck to a baseline

Also you literally listed different types of tank, I think we're talking about individual tanks but with different autistic designs

Also some of the tanks he listed didn't even exceed production number of 300, fuck there were only 7 M7s built.

>Panzer IV and III had about 8 models between them
They were variants. M4 Sherman had about 10 variants.

Not any worse than listing Czech tanks made in Czech factories to prove supposed German autism.

>10

Attaching hedge cutters and adding machine guns don't count as variants

No but using different guns, engines, or hulls do.

What the other person was saying is that the sheer amount of tanks in the German arsenal were just not needed, at all they would have fared much better to focus on a handful of vehicles like the allies

>focus on a handful of vehicles like the allies
Are you retarded? Major allied nations had as many models in production, if not more.

No they didn't

Panzer III A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
Panzer IV, A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H, J
Panther A,D,G
Stug III, H, IV, G,
Hetzer (czech but still German produced in Czecn)
Panzer 35(t),38(t)
Jagdpanzer IV
Jagdpanther (Not needed)
Tiger IE
Tiger II (Not needed)
Jagdtiger (lmao)
Panzer II (all variants)
Marder I,II,IIIM
Panzerjäger I,II etc

Pretty sure I've missed a ton as well

Sturmtiger (lmao)
Brummbar (based)

So many tanks

Soviet union in ww2
>T28
>T34 (really should count as at least 2 different models)
>T44
>BT2
>BT5
>BT7
>T26
>T60
>T70
>IS2
>KV1
>KV15
Wow Germany really should've taken a page from them and focus on a handful of vehicles.

If t34 counts as 2 different models then I'm sorry to say but Germany's list is a whole post long just for the III and IV

>counting variants as models
>counting tank destroyers as tanks
>counting czech tanks as German production even though retooling czech factories was clearly the less rational path
So desperate lmao.

Panzer III A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
Panzer IV, A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H, J
Panther A,D,G
Tiger IE
Tiger II (Not needed)
Panzer I all variants

There you go lad

At least 3 pages long with II,III and IV alone

The whole argument is that the Germans were too autistic to stick to a handful of designs as apposed to the allies

Tank destroyers are built on tank chassis with tank armament. Tank destroyers are literally a type of tank.
>counting variants as models
This post here established that we should indeed consider variants as individual models.

M4 Sherman and T34 also had shitloads of variants. Usually more.

>The whole argument is that the Germans were too autistic to stick to a handful of designs as apposed to the allies
Which you retards keep making despite blindingly obvious evidence to the contrary.

Yes and was the Soviet and US industry hard pressed to keep up this level of production or are you comparing a mountain of industrial power to a literal German molehill?

None of the tank models listed in are variants. Do you even understand what the "M" stands for in US military nomenclature?

>Tank destroyers are built on tank chassis with tank armament. Tank destroyers are literally a type of tank.
Tank destroyers are not tanks and in any case Allies had more models of tank destroyers.

...

>He listed tanks of which only 10 were built

2 secs lad, I need to list every tank the Germans made with only 10 as well it could take a while

>in any case
The allies could sustain this production, my dear brainlet.
>TDS are not tanks
Technically, they are. In doctrine? No.

>more models
>literally 4

>Germans had at least 6 models of tank destroyer if you make the argument tank destroyers are built on tank chassis

noggin is joggin

The list doesn't count M3 Lee and Grant as two different models. Try again.

Go ahead and take out M2 and M7 mediums. My point still stands.

>The year is 1944, the normandy invasion is in full swing
>As a German soldier you are pretty much guaranteed to only fight Shermans and m10s

>As an allied soldier you are guaranteed to fight:
Panzer III A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J
Panzer IV, A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H, J
Panther A,D,G
Tiger IE
Tiger II (Not needed)
Panzer I all variants

Notice the confidence of the German soldier knowing that Krupp steel will triumph over shoddy allied armor. It wasn't until near the end of the war that UK and US developed ammunition that could penetrate German Krupp steel.

That shell hit the wire rope as well, I bet.

>futility of opposing the German tank
*Destroys your Panzer with impunity*
Sorry m8 but Air power > Armour
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_raid_on_La_Caine_HQ

>my theoretical point that is based on the US, Soviet, and German industrial capacity being the exact same despite the verifiable fact that it still stands
Well yeah, because you’re ignoring the elephant in the room.

a lot of these vehicles had been out of production by the time the war began, such as the T28, BT2, Bt5, Bt7, T26,

Forgot pic

>blocks the path of every single German fighting vehicle

They were all in production until 1941. Meanwhile you autists are counting Pz 1 which was out of production before Poland. It's like you are only interested in twisting facts to fit your narrative.

The T-26 was by far the most numerous tank in the Red Army at the start of Barbarossa.

>they were in production until Hitler invaded the Soviet Union and brought Russia into the war
Just like the PZ1 was out of production before Hitler invaded Poland?
Also based on what I’m reading about 100 PZ1s were produced between 1940-1943, so it wasn’t quite out of production yet.

>Also based on what I’m reading about 100 PZ1s were produced between 1940-1943, so it wasn’t quite out of production yet.
I don't know what source you are using but in any case I think we can all agree Pz 1 and 2 were not built for combat use after BoF.
There were a lot of things Germany did wrong but having too many tank models was not one of it. Pz 1-4 scheme was rationally conceived given the technology of the time, with 1 being training tank, 2 recon tank, 3 AT tank, and 4 infantry support/ exploitation tank. Tiger was rationally conceived. Tank tech at the time did not allow for a true MBT and there was a need for a specialized breakthrough tank. Tiger 2 and Panther were both attempts to improve on existing designs.
This thread proves that Veeky Forums is mostly kiddies who read some forum posts and think they are experts afterwards.

The allies was three different countries making their own equipment, so yes you had the Sherman, the T-34, and the Crusader for instance, because each major country had it's on manufacturing, if you compare the Allies to the Axis in this regard the Axis will have far more models, in large due to Germany.

There were multiple models of Shermans in the Normandy campaign, I think there were even a small handful of Easy Eights in time to fight in Normandy.

The US Army claims to have engaged Tiger I's a total of 3 times:
*single Tiger in North Africa vs. Stuart tanks, Tiger disabled
*squadron of Tigers in Europe at railyard unload vs. Shermans, squadron destroyed
*single Tiger in Germany town fight vs. Pershing, Pershing holed from ambush

I dont know why these threads always turn (or start) as fanboi shitfests.

All the major powers (not you IJA) had some fucking dope vehicles

I prefer cold war era myself, much cooler stuff came out.

Firefly was a meme.

Tank autism is the worst kind of autism.

The chatter concerning flaws in German armor is a sad reminder of communist propaganda. The so called 'tiger killer' British 17 pounder could NOT penetrate the frontal of armor of both the Tiger (I and II) nor the Panther. I submit for your perusal an image of a 17 pounder shell that failed to penetrate the frontal armor of a Tiger 1.

ww2 autism is the worst kind of autism.

I've spent a lot of time on ww2 aviation forums too. You don't know a fanboi till you've run into a luftie

I'm surprised that the notoriously scattergun 17-pounder actually hit the thing.

WW2 Plane tastes ranking:
>Lord of the Olympus-tier
U.S Naval
>Shit-tier
everything else

Kampfwagen ausf IV, tho the production numbers were lower than I thought
The 100 order got canceled but 30 were in production from 41-42
And no, user, the argument that you fail to address and keep ignoring is that regardless of what the allies were doing Germany was literally strangling it’s industrial capacity to meet quotas and often did not.
The Soviets in the midst of refucking assembling half of their industrial potential outproduced the Germans at peak performance.
If your industry can’t support the amount of tanks you’re producing it’s a fucking dumb idea and it’s even dumber to point at countries with literally 4-5X your industrial capacity and say “b-b-but daddy they did it”
Well bucko they did it cause they could afford to. Germany could not.

...

>IV
F, whoops, it’s Ausf F not IV

Heavy tanks were tactically successful but strategic failures. They were unreliable, and enormous resources hogs. Sure, when they worked they could be a terror, but all the resources spent on just one heavy tank could have fielded many medium tanks which we're far more versatile weapons.

you shut your whore mouth, squid

...

> peeeee3 fifffty o neeeeeee

t. Spitfire pro

Did the Soviets have 4-5 times the industrial capacity of Germany?

> Panzer I was not being built at the same time as Panther and the Tigers.

It was still in service in small numbers until the end of the war.

> Panzer II was a training tank well before the Tigers and Panther were in production.

Still in service until the end of the war.

> Panzer 35t and 38t are Czech tanks built in Czech factories.

Both remained in service until the end of the war and the Czech 38 was the planned basis for Germany’s late war tank fleet.

>M2 Medium
>M3 Grant
>M4 Sherman

All the same chassis.

>M7 Medium
>T23 Medium

Prototypes that never went into production.

>T26 Pershing

And the basic design continued to be used into the 1990s.

>M22 Locust

Only small numbers produced.

>M24 Chaffee

Late war design that continued to be used into the 1990s.

>M2 Light
>M3 Stuart
>M5 Stuart

All the same chassis.

>The KwK 40 was a fucking great gun, far superior in penetration to the shitty 76mm Shermans when loaded with AT rounds

The German 75mm L/48 on the Panzer IV was on par with the U.S. 76mm/3" gun.

>It was still in service in small numbers until the end of the war.
Name one tank battalion that used Pz I or II in 1944. Go ahead.

None of those Ts should be on this list.
T desginates a prototype line not a production line, anything that goes into production gets an M.

Existing vehicles didn’t disappear or transmogrify into something else, they continued to be used and continued to be a drag on Germany's already fucked logistics system until the very end.

The Germans were even using captured French FT-17 tanks in 1944, as they simply couldn't afford to not use any tank they got their hands on.

Most of them used the Chassis still.
It was the chassis for many of the German SPGs.

Were Sherman tanks any good?

Yes

unironically the best of the war

after the Panther

Why does it have a reputation for having a weak gun, weak armor, and being named for a lighter or whatever?

> Why does it have a reputation for having a weak gun,

The 75mm gun could penetrate the Panther’s side armor.

> weak armor,

The Sherman had an effective frontal armor thickness of 84-92mm

> and being named for a lighter or whatever?

Germans tanks all used gasoline engines also.

Because it was more of a cruiser tank, and because of propagated memes.
The M4A3E8 had a high velocity 76MM gun and was more then a worthy opponent for a Panther.
Also when looking at a Sherman you need to see what model it was a 1942 Sherman is a very different beast from a 1944.

Because Sherman was do everything tank in its 75mm version. It went into production before Panther, and still had good armor. It's just that big cats were pretty much anti tank tanks so when you compare them at effective penetration range then Sherman looks bad until you upgun it.

It was even used as an artillery piece in Italy and I think even Africa with 75mm.

What I mean is why does the Sherman have such a negative reputation compared to German and Soviet tanks?

Everything I hear is "Tigers, Panthers, T-34s, etc".

And British tanks get almost no love.