The Pershing, IS-2 and Tiger 2

i think i saw that program, and is not a kt is a panther and yes it was kill by a pershing,

 

Yes, that is famous footage of the Pershing heroically dispatching a Panther at near point blank. This incident is referred to very often by followers of the Pershing. The fact is, however, that this event proves very little. Had any tank armed with the American 76mm gun rounded that corner into the Panther, the same thing would have likely happened.

I still stand by my claim that 76mm armed Sherman tanks were the most well-rounded, efficient, and generally best tanks America sported in WWII. The Pershing was not as fantastic as the media makes it sound.

In conclusion, the History Channel sucks and should die in a fire.

 

Well the Pershing would be able to take out a Panther from a greater range because of the 90mm rather than the 76mm. I think the Pershing would have been better if they had more then 12 in combat.

"The history channel should die in a fire" haha thats great.

 

Some parts of that are true (Sherman was well-rounded)...but i think most tankers would rather be in a Pershing than a Serman as it's better armed and better protected by far!!!
So how can a Sherman with only 76mm gun bet better than the Pershing :-?

 

A bit strong perhaps but I know what you mean - I#'ve lost count of the number of times I have seen and heard that channel use the pictures of the Barham blowing up to describe a German or Japanese ship blowing up....

 

Don't get started on another History Channel bash.
I saw a program about the T-34 on it once, and they showed various 'authentic footage' of T-34s, including KV-1s and PzIVs!
:roll:

 

Iwould go with the king tiger as the best.

 

based on your name- who would a guessed


" I would go with ' seems a bit of a stretch based on their realiability however- LOL

 

The king tiger was one of the best tanks of world war 2. along with the tiger 1 and the panther tank. i use to work at the old va hospital in allen park michigan and i talked to alot of ww2 vets and heard alot of stories from them about the king tiger.

 

YEP THEY WERE TOUGH :bang:

 

Um, define 'best'.
Actually, good luck with that - we have posted page upon page trying to do just that...

Bear in mind that the Tiger 2 could not cross most of the bridges in the ETO where it was deployed...

I'll certainly agree that it was a fantastic tank for fighting over nice flat landscapes like out east, but a more balanced design, ie with better mobility, is preferable for a 'best' tank. Like the Panther...

 

I have seen the Panther voted 'best' at other forums also.

 

On forums filled with not-too-well-informed people the Tiger usually gets voted best because it has the fanciest stories being spread about it. When people start realizing that maybe a more balanced, more developed design than the boxlike Tiger may be better, the Panther gets voted best. But when people start thinking in terms of strategy and economy, it should be either the T34 or the Sherman that wins the vote (which neither consequently ever does).

Anyway, "Best Tank of WW2" isn't even this thread's subject...

 

I don't agree, Roel. The T-34 and Sherman worked for the Allied, but it wouldn't have worked for the Germans, because of a lack of raw materials, subcomponents and manpower.

Christian

 

Yes, the Germans are an exception. Their situation must be judged independently, and the Panther will probably come out best. But as we all know this didn't win them the war, the "economic" tanks did.

The most worthless argument ever! I used it! Yay!

 

So basically, everyone's a winner (or looser)...

Christian

 

Except the Italians...

 

Didn't the Italians change side, though?

Christian

 

Yeah, but their tanks were still obsolete.

 

Not compared to what the Ethiopeans had...

Christian