Best tanks

Removed by Moderator

 

Skua: The S/he comment was not in any way meant to be an insult until you and he (or she) made it into one. I honestly don't know what Gender he (or she) is. I would look like an idiot if I called him (or her) a "he" and she (or he) turned out to be a "she," wouldn't I?

You might be able to, you know, actually be able to see the validity of my posts if your attention wasn't turned to twisting every thing I say into some form of insult 24/7.

This is funny. You have proven my point, and I thank you for that much. Just yet another flame that Skua, and Roel while we're at it, will turn a blind eye to.

I get a bit tired of having to repeat myself and list my sources about 3-5 times per thread. We're even. So, Roel, you would rather base your conclusions on the opinions of others rather than actual facts? Oh yeah, that’s fantastic. Never have I said that I won this thread either. Just more Moderator lying to try to find a reason to ban me. Well, here’s a perfect reason: I'm about to prove you wrong; yet again.

Roel, the Panther ausf G has a silhouette 10'1 high. The Sherman is 9'9. Bet you wish you did your research, don't you? No, of course you don't. You'll just wait for the Hitler channel to spoon feed you more and more BS.

The Weight difference IS great, Roel. Infact, it’s greater than the weight difference you pointed out when we were comparing the T-34/85 vs. the Sherman 76(w). Wow. Simply wow. How did you like that one? Well, here’s another one.

So, Kubinka is biased, huh? Well, maybe I should get my information from Achtung Panzer now. Yeah, that’s it. The Germans can't be biased, now can they? Nope, I am looking at Achtung Panzer and not seeing one bit of bias. Wow, Achtung Panzer, the site that tells you only about German tanks and has ads for everything German, is a really great source for unbiased information. I think I’m going to print it out! In all seriousness, The Russian Battlefield site that the live fire test charts are located on actually does state that American and German designs were superior to their T-34. And get this: They freely admit that the American 76mm round out penetrated their domestic 85mm round. How’s that for bias?

 

Use the PM fuction Danyel, if you have anything to say to me or Roel.

SgtBob, leave the moderating to the moderators. Danyel is not free game. PM me or Roel if you have anything to complain about.

 

Red ink for moderating? I am indeed hurt. :cry:

Anyhow, Danyel I'll check through my written sources to see if I can find it. I distinctly remember it reading it and seeing it reported on a tape. And I'm sure it wasn't a King Tiger in the case I'm referring to.

 

Hey Greg Pitts.

Bear with us on some of the topics, what I think has happened is there has been much discussion on a lot of topics.
Perhaps you can, if you wish, do a selective search by member to see just that member's postings on a subject, and filter through them as best you can.
I too wonder sometimes about certain . . . opinions but hey no one is perfect. I know I'm not, but I have posted my reference material on several other posts; some I believe some I don't.

Keep up your posts

 

1:Königstiger(cuz it outclassed other tanks easy)
2:T100
3:SturmTiger(becouse its rocket launcher lol)

 

Interesting opinion, TC. Here is my response:

1. Arguable. Konigstigers had massive armor and firepower, but were sluggish and slow. Their mechanical reliability was not terribly impressive, either. They were, however, excellent when operating from ambush, in a defensive role. But they could be knocked out from the flanks or the rear, just like any other tank.

2. What on earth is a T100?

3. Sturmtiger is an assault gun, not a tank.

 

perhaps he is refering to the E-100, but not even the prototype was finished , :-? :-?

 

No, I'm not about to base any conclusions on other people's opinion. As far as I'm concerned, all posts made here are opinions unless sources are mentioned. You made some splendid posts here, but your conclusion is an opinion to me still.

Telling this sort of thing is the same as saying you win an argument. You say you prove me wrong as if it were a trophy, an accomplishment; like winning something. What's there to be proud of?

Okay, you said it, I'll believe you. But you have to conclude that, my god, the difference is amazing. And I cannot watch the History channel here in Europe so what's that again? And right now I do wish I was capable of doing more extensive research, you don't know anything about that.

All you say here is that achtungpanzer is biased, not that Kubinka is not. And admitting that the American gun is better is no proof of anything. I'm just saying that such tests are very likely to be biased because of when and where they were made. Achtungpanzer is just obviously selective in its information, not biased in stating wrong information, by the way.

 

T100 is Heavy tank T-100 :Armament: 76.2 mm Gun, 45 mm Gun, 4 x MG 7.62 mm
Crew: 6
Armor (max.): 20 - 60 mm
Speed (max.): 36 km/hr
Dimensions: 8.38 x 3.4 x 3.42 m
Weight: 58.0 ton

 

Let's see...


An interesting choice, I must say. The many multi-turreted tanks designed by Germany and the Soviet union before the war never saw much success in battle, as their double turrets caused many shot traps to appear. Also this tank's armament isn't too impressive.

 

I definitely would not have wanted to be in the forward turret when the after one was firing its gun! :-?

 

What is a M6 heavy tank?

 

http://wwiivehicles.com/html/usa/m6_heavy.html

Never used. Would have been a joke.

 

and everybody complaint with the maus :lol:

 

The Maus was a horrendous waste of resources that would have had absolutely no impact on the Allied advance what-so-ever.

The M6 was a heavy tank that had the armor of a medium tank and an inadequate gun.

Difference? The Allies didn't constantly try to come up with retard "get rich quick" schemes like the Jagdtiger and the Maus.

 

I wouldn't call them "get rich quick" schemes, but plain and simply stupid.

 

Given how many of the German procurement programs were run, it's a wonder that the German armed forces weren't completely armed with junk. :roll:

 

I'm almost ashamed that the US built such a bad tank like the Sherman. The Pershing should have come about long before it did.

 

Oh my god..