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

What is your favorite tank?

Discussion in 'Armor and Armored Fighting Vehicles' started by Allied-vs-Axis, Jun 9, 2016.

  1. Allied-vs-Axis

    Allied-vs-Axis New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2016
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    United States
    I want to know what was the best tank in the second world war in your opinion. Please also describe it. Tell us what made it great and why you would prefer it. Be specific.[​IMG]
    WW2 German Tiger tank.
     
  2. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Your question is sort of like "which daughter of yours do you like best?" Each tank had its advantages and disadvantages. It depends on what you are going to use the tank for. Since no one tank was good at everything.
     
    belasar likes this.
  3. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,562
    Likes Received:
    752
    i like the prettiest daughter. Form over function...If it looks good, it probably is.
     
    YugoslavPartisan likes this.
  4. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Well in the case of tanks, not sure pretty was all that important. But you do have a point
     
  5. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,562
    Likes Received:
    752
    Trying to think of an ugly good tank.
     
  6. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,562
    Likes Received:
    752
    WW1 tanks were ugly, and they were horrible machines. The Matilda,even, grew into a queen.
     
  7. Otto

    Otto Rested & Resupplied with MREs. Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,532
    Likes Received:
    1,660
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    StuG III Ausf. G

    I know, not a tank, but a solid AFV. So ugly, she's pretty.
     
  8. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    The Matilda was a sweet tank. Slow as heck, but a good tank. Early WW II not many could stand up to it
     
  9. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Well the T-34 series comes to mind. Good tank, but in my opinion ugly as heck
     
  10. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,562
    Likes Received:
    752
    Sloping armour. Think it had great lines.
     
  11. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    I suppose you could call the Churchill line of tanks ugly. Big, slow, bulky and UGLY
     
  12. mac_bolan00

    mac_bolan00 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Messages:
    717
    Likes Received:
    20
    not the "best tank" but it impacted on the (early years of the) war more than most other tanks. i like its looks is all. it's the one i'll drive around in the streets, given a chance.

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    I think you could call any early French tank ugly
     
  14. belasar

    belasar Court Jester Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,417
    Likes Received:
    1,138
    Thing is the title ask's 'what is your Favorite tank' but in the Op ask's 'what is the best' tank' which in my mind is not necessarily the same thing.
     
  15. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    I agree. I personally like the Matilda. But a lot dislike it. The Matilda was a pretty good tank and could stand up to most things early in the war. The biggest disadvantage of it was its speed. But then it was designed with WW I in mind where tanks were infantry support and not to operate on their own. So it was designed so infantry could walk with it
     
  16. OhneGewehr

    OhneGewehr New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2016
    Messages:
    411
    Likes Received:
    28
    Location:
    Germany
    Char B and the Somua S-35 with their hidden suspension had clean and distinctive designs - but weren't great as battle tanks and needed well trained crews.

    The M3 Grant is ugly as hell, especially the ones with the added turret for the machinegun. But as soon as they were available, the brits threw away their sleek Crusaders and were happy with their new reliable tanks.
     
  17. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    The Crusaders were a nice looking tank just undergunned in my opinion.
     
  18. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,562
    Likes Received:
    752
    The early French tanks were better than the Germans. Armour was great, mobility ok, gun was prolly better. The problem was the tank commander had to direct everything and fire the main weapon, while stuffed into a tiny turret.
    Lessons learned- the turret became larger in order to hold a sufficient crew.
     
  19. Rantalith

    Rantalith Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Not only all that, but early in WW II the French armor was still using flags for coordination
     
  20. Pacifist

    Pacifist Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    90
    The only good thing about the crusaders was their looks. Poor armor, gun, and reliability for their time. I believe they were still using flag communications for the most part.
     

Share This Page