Panther Vs T-34 - superior hunter ?

Both of these much vaunted tanks are the showcase for each nations R&D capabilities (excluding Tiger tanks) although how would they fair against each other on the battlefield. Would the Panthers devastating high velocity 75mm reign supreme in one on one combat coupled by the notorious tenacity of the german Panzer crews. Or would the simplicity of design and copious amounts of armour thickness have the upper hand in a confrontation

I've been given the idea that the Panther is simply a german knock-off of the rugged T-34, but I don't agree with that.

I'm under the impression the Panther is a more formidable force than it's T-34 nemesis, even more so in a veteran crew.

Although i'm aware that many of tanks had either support or infantry in it's presence so a one on one tank battle probably isn't common the eastern front. Although the T-34 was produced and more numerous in the field compared to the Panther is not in germanys favour.

 

I'm not sure I'd call the Panther a 'knock-off' but the Diamler-Benz early design looked surprisingly like the T 34. I think that was one of the reasons the M.A.N. design was approved.

 

Can you imagine the problems both sides would have had with differentiating between friend and foe, especially after the introduction of the T34/85?

tom

 

sorry Framer that is one ugly looking panzer............

until the intro of the T-34/85 I would say an easy yes for the Panther variants and even so possibly still longer range and higher velocity than the Soviet type with the 85, as the war progressed the German armor is going to have the upper hand if in soley from the aspect of camo in a defensive position waiting ........

 

I like the Panther for its design and its comfort. I also like the gun on it and that German engineering.

 

The panther was began production from 1942 while the T-34 had to wait until spring 1944 to receive the purpose built 85mm. The Russian's took their time to counter-weight the panther although Tank warfare wasn't their primary concern on the eastern front, but their ease of production and simplicity isn't to be scoffed at especially in light of the number of Panthers or even Tiger series Tanks the Germans managed to produce, far fewer in comparison. So most Panther Vs T-34 battles would be fought with the Russians either version of the Russians mediocre 76.2 mm armament. Although there was also allot of German tanks which suffered technical issues and break downs during their initial use in the field. Also it's my understanding that Russians tank crews had far less capable knowledgeable of tank tactics and early T-34s had insufficient crew members to efficiently operate.

 

I might add that it was found that the Panthers optics were much in favor of their crew than the early T-34's and T-34/85 variant

 

I would say the biggest setback for german APVs was the russian winter which basically rendered the tank immobile while the simplistic t-34 could operate at those temperatures, this i was a serious issue for the Germans which were dumbfounded that the slavs could produce such a excellent piece of mechanized warfare superior to their own.

 

I see we are comparing Apples and Oranges again?
Ok, i'll play!'
Soviet medium tank T-34/76 (weight -26 tonns, first production tanks were completed in September 1940) or T-34/85 (weight 31-32 tonns, first saw action in 1944 ) against German Panther Ausf. A Heavy tank (weight 45 tonns, first saw action during batle of Kursk on July 5, 1943 ).

While T-34's were more manuverable, had a longer action radius, were cheaper to produce they were inferior in frontal ingagement.
Quote from Wiki :"...A German comparison of German tanks with the new Soviet T-34-85 from March 23, 1944, stated that "the Panther is far superior to the T-34/85 for frontal fire (Panther Ausf G could penetrate frontal armor of T-34/85 at 2,000 m, while T-34/85 could penetrate frontal armor of Panther Ausf G at 500 m), approximately equal for side and rear fire.."

So, if i were personally to chouse in wich i'd rather prefer see combat during WWII - the choise is Panther. But if i were a country leader who had to chouse between prodaction of 6000 of Panthers or 40 000 T-34's/Shermans. Well, we know historicly wich one was the right one.

EDIT
Actually, when i think about it, maybe going with 6000 of Pzw V instead for 15 or 20 000 of Pzw IV, was an only right choice for Gemany, who had problem geting enough tank crews as it is.

P.S. and why everybody trying to compare T-34 with Panther? It is so wrong/boring!!!
Let's do comparison of Stuart vs Tiger it's so much more interesting/fun! [sarcasm mode off]

 

The Panther is the germans counter to the T-34 so the argument between between the two is very debatable, for instance some believe the shape and possibly overall design could be attributed to the marvelous T-34 of any variant. While comparing the efficiency and power of each canon is certainly a different story, but the T-34/85 is the most suitable nemesis for the Panther. Although T-34/85 Vs Tiger I or II is probably more correct when comparing the propaganda attention of each nations respective tanks.

Unless someone believes Panther should be compared to IS-tank for the ultimate in the battle of armor between Nazi and Soviet states.

 

Absolutly correct that Panther was a German response to Soviet T-34 and it's not a belive but a fact that Germans stadied captured T-34's and used some of the knowledge and experience in building Panther.

Lol, "comparing the propaganda attention" - that's a whole new way comparing tanks! What a perl!!!

The only fair way comparing tanks off WWII is by classes ( there were 3 : Light, Medium and Heavy ), through the same periode of time. Sure in war you use all resources available at hand. That's why T'34 were fighting often against Panther's and Tigers. But it does not mean that they are a match for each other.

For comparisson, should we say medium tanks of 1941 of Pzw IV and T-34/76
more suitable (weight 25 and 26 tonnes accordingly ) Same perioud of time - same weight class.

Yep, IS-2 and Panther both weight about 45 tonns, both roughly from the same period of war. Much a better comparisson. Unless you're one of the guys who takes pleasure in watching heavyweight boxer beating the crap out of the guy who's 20 kilos off?

 

Other than inspiration neither tank eventually offered much specific to the other.
One a technical triumph.
The other a production triumph.

Some hesitation in calling Panther a clear cut triumph though, Post-war French assessment (when they briefly used 50 of them in their 503rd armoured regiment) was a mere 150km life-span for the final drive, when you consider this is not something that can be easily repaired, if at all, in the field then it's a major flaw to my eye.
Much of the Panther impresses me, you could even call it the first modern tank, but that reliability issue always seems substantial to me.

Cheers,
Adam.

 

Panther being "first modern" tank could be argued.

For me ultimate WW2 tank would be from "What If" category. If Germany and Soviet were allies and build tank together.
Panther turret on T-34 shassi! You'll get German optics and preciouse 7,5 KwK 42 (L/70) Gun (I personaly think it was a best tank gun from WW2 ) and mobile as T-34 with Soviet reliable disel engine.

 

It is true the German mechanized forces are substantially disadvantaged in the respect that their supposedly ubermensch AFVs repeatedly suffered break downs due to numerous issues (im not clear on that aspect). Coupled with the inability to mass produce tanks the germans didn't have the winning hand from the start but if we place a heavy emphasis on easy to manufacture and mechanical issues at times we couldn't compare alot of the germans weapons.

(one attribute to the germans is they did develop excellent technology such as the groundbreaking StG44, feared & revered 88mm plus certain rocket technology like the V2 V1 and some could say the nebelwerfer had its impact on things)

The Panther tank did suffer in a race of arms but once on the battlefield it proved to be a disastrously excellent piece of mechanized warfare which tank crews praised.

If one wanted to judge a tank on pure awe and presence. the T-34 would astound in its rugged and simple design.The Panther on the other hand is a menacing piece of machinery which creates a amazement and ominous feeling when encountered on field.

 

Yes STG44 was a basic for the world most widely produced assault rifle AK-47. And i'm really amaized by German other WWII weapon designs. But if we talk about tanks in particular - German lost in both Qualities and Quantities.
Not Panthers or Tigers won the war! Shermans and T-34's did.

If we should talk quality i.e. ability of a single tank destroing enemy tank "One on One" i'll go with Soviet IS-3. Aproximatly 350 were produced from 1944 til end of the war. They never saw action in Europe theater of WWII.
My guess, Soviets kept them in reserv. That was indeed revolutionary design. I can see why they did't want to risck it at the end of the war, when the end/victory was certan. They probably were thinking about future alredy then. Could be pain in the a$$ if Germans managed to capture one and it end up in hands of "allies" (USA/UK). All that expirience gazered by Soviets through the bloody mess of tank battles on Eastern Front would be given to USA/ UK for free.

And lastly, in 1946 Soviets made 3 prototypes of IS-7 wich comes closer then any othet tank of that time to the modern design.
All new design, weight 68 tonnes, with 130mm naval cannon with autoloader and stabilizer, infrared night scopes, 8 machineguns, armour from 220 to 300mm thickness and 60km/h roadspeed. 5 men crew. Engeen had 1050 H.P. Rate of fire (main gun ) 6-8 s/min. Claimed to be tested and unpenetrable by German 88mm ( Tiger I-II ), 122mm Soviet ( IS-2 ), 128mm German ( Maus ) and it's own 130 mm gun. Unfortunatly Soviets stopped prodaction of all heavy tanks with weight above 50 tonns soone after that. And 50 IS-7's were canseled in production .

Don't trust me? Google it!

Here is some pictures:

 

The psychological effect a new piece of weaponry has upon the opposing force is far can be far more damaging to the morale of troops than the bullet it fires. The Panther was touted as the Uber Panzer for the armed forces (maus and elephant are cumbersome although powerful but a tank at heart more of a artillery/tank hunter role) Both the T-34 and Panther was the respective hero of each party (Tiger and IS-tanks were in the shadows as far a damaging the morale of the other side is concerned and they were not deployed in sufficient numbers to have anything more than a effect on the morale of the Allies ) and alot of pride and strength from each country rested upon their armored fighting units.

Heinz Guderian prophesied 'that if the Tank succeeds surly victory will follow'.

The T-34 was seen as a savior by the Russian soldiers, due to its effective armor sloping and reasonably powerful 76.2m. They now had a weapon the Panzers had dealing with, most tanks crews found that the seam of the turret and body was weak while attacking the front was futile unless the 88mm or 75mm was present.

the Panther on the other hand incorporates essentially the same main body sloping and basic layout as the T-34 while providing the vastly superior high velocity 75mm which was extremely deadly to any soviet tank at the time. The Panther was the amalgamation of the T-34s sloping armor and the Germans viscous weaponry resulting in I'd also agree the basis of the first modern tank, although T-34 design can also be placed into that category but the main canon is severely lacking as a fearsome modern weapon at least until the T-34/85. The 85mm was the Russians reply to the Panther but the T-34 had already done its damage before hand anyway.

 

Knee-jerk digression coming up... Apologies in advance.

No it wasn't.
External similarities do not mean they are related.
In fact both very different weapons.
Russians had their own version of the short/kurz round, and concept, for a long time.
A Spitfire may look roughly like a Messerschmitt, that does not make one a base for the other's design.

Back to the Panzers .

Thinking about it, similar could be said for T34/Panther.

Cheers,
Adam.

 

So, now are we talking/comparing "psychological effect" of certan tanks?
I personaly always belived Tiger I were the most intimidating tank of WWII, but that's just me...
It' seems to me as we are speaking different languages...I trully don't understand where we going with it. First you were comparing "technical data", then "propaganda" effect and now "psychological"...
Pardon me, but i think i'm going to bail out from this thread...

 

Are you sure about that?
I was not speaking about "external similarities"
Wich sure are present btw. I think you should've read on a subject befor making such a critical statment .
I tell you what, why don't you name everything what is differend about those two Assault rifles (AR) and i name what is simular? How's that sound?

You're probably one of those naive belivers that thinks Kalashnikov never held Stg44 in his hands, never studied it to the smalest detail. Ofcouse he did't just copyed it, he improved it by all means!

You would not be talking about Automat Fedorova?

Yeah yeha, Sugar and salt both white, taste quite different. We got it alredy.

Exactly! As i sad with Stg and AK same with tanks!
You take enemy design, study it, take the best of it, improve it and then adapt production to you industry. That is exactly how Panther and AK-47 were born!

 

If you could learn to engage politely I might consider.
Just because something is oft-repeated does not make it true.
Aspects inspired by do not make one a copy or an improvement of the other design.
The main mechanisms, the most important aspect of a firearm, the thing that make them what they are, are quite different.


Onto the thread's actual theme. Other than having sloped Armour and the intention to better it, in what way is the Panther's design influenced by T34's? No system on the Panther that I can think of is related to the T34.