Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

What is the worst tank of WWII?

Discussion in 'Weapons & Technology in WWII' started by PzJgr, Mar 12, 2001.

  1. WALT

    WALT Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2002
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    0
    YOUR RIGHT BILLY....MANKIND OWES MUCH TO THE BEAST WHO SERVED US SO WELL AND SO LONG.
     
  2. Friedrich

    Friedrich Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    6,548
    Likes Received:
    52
    Hallo!

    I would say that Japanesse tanks were awful. But tanks were not very useful in the Pacific theatre. China did not have armoured forces nor any significative adversary of Japan until 1939 when Zhúkov wiped their asses with his KV-I and II. So it was not necessary to have enormous and powerful tanks in the war, which probably would have been difficult to produce by Japan's poor industry and difficult to carry...

    The training was also very important. If the Soviet crews would have been weel trained. With a lot of excelent tanks Germany would have been defeated by 1942...
     
  3. Smoke286

    Smoke286 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    0
    Considering the Sherman was King in the Pacific, thats true.
     
  4. Andreas Seidel

    Andreas Seidel Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2001
    Messages:
    528
    Likes Received:
    5
    I have not read all the posts above, but found mostly the usual suspects, Sherman, Tiger, Maus, FT 17, Japanese tanks and the Italian tankettes amongst them.

    I think perhaps we must take another angle.

    The worst tank would be the one that:

    - was incapable of conducting the task it had been made for
    - was totally incapable of dealing with situations it encountered (but was not made for)
    - did not protect its crew
    - broke down a lot without enemy help
    - was expensive, difficult to repair, maintain

    If those five points are all met, then we're probably looking at the worst possible tank.

    Even though it doesn't have a rotating turret, I nominate the Ferdinand (Porsche Tiger) as the worst tank of WW2. It was capable of knocking out enemy tanks and protecting its own crew at long range, and that is all the positive things there are to say about this vehicle.

    Tigers achieved great successes and were instrumental in some of the defensive battles, Shermans and T-34s basically won the war by being avaialble in quantity and being rugged and reliable. All tankettes are really a seperate issue because they were made for something entirely different than what they eventually had to face. And even then they could be used in a recon role quite profitably. The same goes for the Japanese tanks.

    There is also a whole bunch of interesting tanks that never made it into combat, such as the TOG or the Marmon-Herrington tanks made in America in the 30s. A tank with five bow machine guns and no other armament for example. That might also fit the designation "worst tank ever".
     
  5. C.Evans

    C.Evans Expert

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    25,883
    Likes Received:
    857
    Walt--no problem--I know you have respect for these men, and I fully agree with what you posted. I was only pointing out that these soldiers were elite and were wasted with no result other than having more bodies for the grim reaper to sweep up.

    Way to GO Canada--WAY TO GO--Peter Sellers--one of my all-time favorites.

    Andreas has some excellent points there on how to fairly choose the worst tank of ww2.
     
  6. WALT

    WALT Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2002
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    0
    10-4 my friend.
     
  7. Madcap7

    Madcap7 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Any tank that isn't late war german or the pershing :D
     
  8. Doc Raider

    Doc Raider Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2002
    Messages:
    659
    Likes Received:
    1
    A vet told me a great story about Jap tanks. Said there was a model that was an open body with an armored wall and gun on the front of it (no turret). He said that they'd wait for them to pass, toss a grenade in to get the crew, then a squad of marines (yes, a squad) would run up and flip it over. Now I know that all of this "worst tank" must be taken into context of time and place, but man, any tank that can be flipped over by a squad has gotta suck! ;) :D
     
  9. mp38

    mp38 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2002
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Andreas,

    I have to disagree with you.

    First of all, the Elephant (Ferdinand, or Porsche Tiger as you call it) was not a tank!! :mad: It was a tank destroyer! :eek:

    Second of all, they were incredibly effective, when used properly! Just ask the Americans and British who ran into them in Italy! :(

    Third, mechanically they did have a few problems, but so did the Panther when it was hurried into battle, as are most new untested weapons. The same thing happened to the Elephant! It was rushed into battle (for the Kursk offensive), way too soon (so soon that they didn't even put a bow MG in them! :eek: ) Most of the Elephants were used as a spearhead on the northern pincer. They were not made for that. Seveal of them broke down, while the majority fell victims to Russian tank destroyer infantry units.
    IF they had been used for the purpose that they were built, which was destroying enemy tanks at long range, they were very effective. Later the Jagpanther, and King Tiger adopted the same gun that the Elephant had. These were also very effective.

    Matt :cool:
     
  10. Panzerknacker

    Panzerknacker New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2001
    Messages:
    1,537
    Likes Received:
    6
    The GRANT TANK for sure-its off-centre 75mm main gun couldn't traverse and engage tanks to it's left-and it's 37mm turret cannon was a proverbial pea-shooter to such targets-
     
  11. Friedrich

    Friedrich Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    6,548
    Likes Received:
    52
    The Ferdinands and Elephants were very effective tank destroyers. But as mp38 says, when well used.

    My grandfather says that they used to hide them on the Italian hills and wait for the Shermans. Nearly at a thousand metres they fired and knocked them out. The Amerikans never knew what they hit them. They were pretty effective as self/proppelled artillerie. When they put machine guns on it and its technical problems were solved they were very apreciated by their crews. It was just in a close combat when its lack of mobility affected them (a very bad quality for a thank destroyer!).

    In the other hand we have got the Jagdtiger. That was a bad tank destroyer! It was two bloody heavy and had very little mobility! The engine and the direction broke very often because they did not handle the weight... To expend so much money and resources in that stuff in that time of the war was a very bad idea.

    But Andreas is right about his five points.

    I do not think there would be any tank which had those five!

    The Japanesse light tanks could do their job> against infantry. They were not designed to engage enemy tanks... So, the filthy Sherman could easily knock them out...

    But I do not agree that the T/34 just won because they were too many. The T/34 was without any doubt the best tank of the war! From 1941 to 1943, T-34/76 made us tremble. And certainly, during Kursk, low mobility-Tiger and wrong-tested Panther had no posibilities to face the fast, well armoured and strong T-34s.

    Then came the T-34/85 and it was even worse for the Germans. Tigers and Panthers destroyed many of them, because of the poor training of Russian crews, not because they were bad tanks. When the Germans had Russian tanks under their service, they prefered them than complicated German tanks...

    What do you think?
     
  12. C.Evans

    C.Evans Expert

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    25,883
    Likes Received:
    857
    Great posting Friedrich--keep it coming my friend. Ill try to post a reply better than this later today or tomorrow evening.
     
  13. Affentitten

    Affentitten Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    You guys obviously don't know enough about WW2 tanks. :D

    What about the only ever New Zealand devloped tank, the "Bob Semple"?

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Otto

    Otto Spambot Nemesis Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,781
    Likes Received:
    1,818
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    My God, that thing is absolutely shameful!!! :rolleyes:

    Is this a WW2 vehicle? Or maybe an earlier model

    [ 20 May 2002, 04:03 AM: Message edited by: Otto ]
     
  15. C.Evans

    C.Evans Expert

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    25,883
    Likes Received:
    857
    Am I seeing things--or is that tank made of corregated sheet metal? :eek: :eek: :eek: Jaysus--talk about outdated and VERY static ww1 thinking. :rolleyes:
     
  16. Smoke286

    Smoke286 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its a bulldozer, some sort of armed bulldozer
     
  17. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    It's an armored lawnmower ! ........ :eek:

    Freidrich, the most numerous panzer that was klnocked out on the Ost front from 43-45 was the T-34. The /85 variant was a just an upgunned version. I do not argue it was a very fast tank and quite mobil and this is just what the Soviet forces needed to take on the German Panzers in 42, but when the Panther did come into play and had the mechanical problems worked out the Pz V was superior in almost every way. The T-34's biggest problem was it's engine deck/engine and fuel system which was terrible !! Not to take away from the German engines problems in all the three main variants......Pz IV, V, and the Tigers too......still believe the best resources the Soviets had was sheer numbers in material and men and the great land battles of 43-45 show this to be very true.

    E
     
  18. Friedrich

    Friedrich Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    6,548
    Likes Received:
    52
    No! I absolutely do not agree!

    If you knew things a little better you should know that T/34s won the Kursk battle. It wasa tremendous machine, well armoured, Fast (55 km/hr), very manouvrable and with a good cannon (76 mm ), reliable and very simple. Their superior mobility made them destroy a lot of slow Tigers, bad armoured PzKpfw IV and bad tested Panthers. Beside there were too many. If they had had a radio and good crews they would have done better!

    It is the same case for other magnific Soviet tanks like KVs or IS... They were destroyed in great amounts because their crews were very bad trained.

    I have read a lot of books which qualifies the T-34 as the best tank of WWII. And my grandfather who commanded Tigers, Panthers, etc. says that also... The bloody Shermans could not know them out in Korea neither...

    I do respect Soviet engeneers and industry for that tank, a headache for the Germans.
     
  19. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    Friedrich:

    Read my post again, you are not fully understanding my thread. I am not argueing with you at all except you believe it was the best tank. I've given it high marks except for it's engines but all panzers during the war, both German and Russian both failed due to their engines. Your info on many Tigers being destroyed at Kursk is not quite correct sir, what is your source(s). I suggest reading Nipes' book on the Decision in the Ukraine summer 1943 and Sylvester Stadler's book Die Offensive gegen Kursk II. SS Panzerkorps als Stoßkeil im Gorßkampf.
    Your relative may think it was the best panzer in the war and I will not argue with him, but that is his opinion which you totally agree with, and you better !!.........
    I have no problems with that, just that I have read many first person accounts and interviewed several panzer truppen members with different accounts.
    Hey, why are we argueing the T-34 wasn't the worst tank anyway.......so we better stick with the thread at hand. maybe we can start another one comparing our notes Freidrich......maybe something along the lines of T-34 against the Panther, Pz. IV and Tiger eh ?

    E
     
  20. Affentitten

    Affentitten Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Bob Semple tank I posted the pictures of is indeed a WW2 vehicle. It was produced in a bit of a panic by the New Zealand government at the height of fears about the Japanese invading the Pacific. It's basically an International harvester bulldozer chassis with a thnily armoured fighting compartment on top, There was a two pounder and a couple of MGs. I think the commander and gunner were forced to lie on their bellies when in action.

    They only made a dozen or so of them and they never saw service.
     

Share This Page