Jump to content


The Best Tank of World War II


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
85 replies to this topic

Poll: Best Tank (145 members have cast votes)

Best Tank?

  1. The M4A1 Sherman (U.S.A) (14 votes [9.66%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 9.66%

  2. M3/M5 Stuart (U.S.A) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Panzerkampfwagen III (Germany) (3 votes [2.07%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.07%

  4. Panzerkampfwagen IV (Germany) (9 votes [6.21%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 6.21%

  5. Panzerkampfwagen V "Panther" (Germany) (33 votes [22.76%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 22.76%

  6. Panzerkampfwagen VI "Tiger 1" (Germany) (15 votes [10.34%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.34%

  7. Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausführung B. "Tiger II" (Germany) (21 votes [14.48%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 14.48%

  8. Char B1 (France) (2 votes [1.38%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.38%

  9. Char G1 [Later "G1B"] (France) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  10. T-34 (USSR) (24 votes [16.55%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 16.55%

  11. KV-1 (USSR) (3 votes [2.07%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.07%

  12. IS Series (USSR) (5 votes [3.45%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.45%

  13. Cruiser Mark II,III,IV (United Kingdom) (1 vote [0.69%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 0.69%

  14. Crusader (United Kingdom) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  15. Valentine Mark II,III,IV (United Kingdom) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  16. Churchill Mark I,II,III (United Kingdom) (2 votes [1.38%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.38%

  17. Matilda Mark II,III,IV (United Kingdom) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  18. Sherman Firefly (United Kingdom) (13 votes [8.97%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.97%

Vote Hide poll

TheHolyRoller #1 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:19

    Captain

  • Players
  • 7068 battles
  • 1,152
  • [-UV-] -UV-
  • Member since:
    11-17-2012
Okay, I want an answer from everyone. This is about which tank basically outperforms the others in your opinion. Of course, I am not going to include all the tanks that took place in WWII but only the ones that were main contributors.

If you think another tank should be on here, I will add them if necessary.

For me, I think the Panther tank was the best. It was not reliable at first due to engine and transmission problems but, once they were resolved to an extent, they became very lethal opponents. The frontal sloped armor could take almost every allied anti-tank weapon of the period. The Panther's 75mm L/70 could easily take out any opponent they saw until the U.S and USSR threw heavier armored tanks at them later in the war. I think the fact that it was fast, cheaper to make than Tigers, durable in the sense that it could absorb shot after shot from enemy tanks and could return fire with lethal outcomes. If Germany had stopped production of the more expensive tanks, like the Tiger and Tiger 2, more Panthers probably could've been produced and the allies could've hit a wall for a period of time. Would it have won the war for Germany, probably not but it definitely was a game changer for a long time. Of course, like all German tanks, the Panther became a horrid vehicle towards the end of the war due to the shortages on valuable metals and decreased workmanship of the tank. Example: Welding was of less quality so the weld line would possibly weaken with every shot the hull took and the electronics were also faulty due to the rushing of production.

venomjoe #2 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 6814 battles
  • 2,654
  • [XBBX] XBBX
  • Member since:
    08-31-2012
Tiger II hands down

Grumpy_Turtle #3 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:24

    Suggestions Volunteer

  • Community Contributor
  • 12708 battles
  • 3,913
  • Member since:
    03-01-2011
Depends on what you define as best. The T-34 and M4 Sherman could be considered the best because America and the USSR were pumping those things out like there's no tomorrow. On the other hand, they got obliterated by the Tiger, Panther etc. who were superior when it came to tank vs tank battles. Quality or Quantity?

venomjoe #4 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 6814 battles
  • 2,654
  • [XBBX] XBBX
  • Member since:
    08-31-2012
T-34... i mean really... it wouldnt stand a chance against a Tiger II

venomjoe #5 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 6814 battles
  • 2,654
  • [XBBX] XBBX
  • Member since:
    08-31-2012

View PostGrumpy_Turtle, on Apr 16 2013 - 23:24, said:

Depends on what you define as best. The T-34 and M4 Sherman could be considered the best because America and the USSR were pumping those things out like there's no tomorrow. On the other hand, they got obliterated by the Tiger, Panther etc. who were superior when it came to tank vs tank battles. Quality or Quantity?
Exactly

icoleman #6 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 5891 battles
  • 6,913
  • [ARMDA] ARMDA
  • Member since:
    01-31-2012
Panzer.VI VIB

PelicanGuy #7 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:26

    Captain

  • Players
  • 2916 battles
  • 1,119
  • Member since:
    11-30-2012
Sherman Firefly. All of the good things of the Sherman, but also able to kill Tigers with ease.

Daigensui #8 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:29

    Major

  • Wiki Staff
  • 19759 battles
  • 19,115
  • [MUP] MUP
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
Please add the criteria for "best". One-on-one? Tactical front? Strategic front? Overall influence on the war? Design?

Vardoxx #9 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:29

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 18645 battles
  • 118
  • [-LEG-] -LEG-
  • Member since:
    07-29-2010
take it a step further along the lines of mass prduction but add in the cost to make.  If 1 panther could be made at the same price/time as 5 T34's or Shermans then that would make them better for yet another reason, yes it took 5 of them to kill 1 but you were still ahead of the game if you had 1 sherman left after killing a panther.

killswitch95 #10 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 23414 battles
  • 4,318
  • [DEMON] DEMON
  • Member since:
    04-12-2012
Tiger II, nothing could touch it till AFTER the war, when allies were doing weapons testing on captured Tiger IIs... so tiger II all day son!

sax202 #11 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:31

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10221 battles
  • 1,287
  • Member since:
    11-29-2011
Probably tiger 2 and panther

HaikuFoxy #12 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 5418 battles
  • 12,752
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    01-30-2012
Why do you not include Japanese Tanks?
Sure they has only up to a 75mm Gun equipped but....
Er.....um.....

PelicanGuy #13 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:41

    Captain

  • Players
  • 2916 battles
  • 1,119
  • Member since:
    11-30-2012
The Tiger II had some huge issues:
1. Extremely hard to mass produce.
2. Slow and heavy.
3. Unreliable.
4. An easy target for aircraft.

If the allies could produce 10 Shermans or T-34s for every Tiger II the Germans could, the Tiger II's armor and firepower meant nothing.

Tiger_23 #14 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:41

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 8631 battles
  • 10,109
  • [1_BCB] 1_BCB
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010
StuG. PzIV.

Edited by Tiger_23, Apr 16 2013 - 23:42.


dawgfangs #15 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:42

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22399 battles
  • 184
  • [1RAD] 1RAD
  • Member since:
    07-14-2012
M26 Pershing with the 90mm saw service towards the end of the war.  That would get my vote.  Otherwise, the Tiger II.

Wyvern2 #16 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:42

    Captain

  • Players
  • 20505 battles
  • 1,784
  • [_D_] _D_
  • Member since:
    06-08-2011
For pure combat power and utility vs weight and maintainability, I say IS-2, it had great armor, decent maneuverability, awesome gun for fighting infantry, while capable of gutting tanks, even with HE. German tanks pretty much have nothing on most of their allied counterparts, being extremely one-dimensional machines with very little variety in their function as well as being overpriced, over weight and underarmored for what they were worth. In a straight up fight across a flat field, the KT might be nice, assuming not one single thing goes wrong and assuming the people shooting back dont have APDS ammo or a 100mm or ISu152 nearby to blow u back to hell

Tears_of_Endo #17 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:44

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 24421 battles
  • 440
  • [REL_3] REL_3
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostPelicanGuy, on Apr 16 2013 - 23:41, said:

The Tiger II had some huge issues:
1. Extremely hard to mass produce.
2. Slow and heavy.
3. Unreliable.
4. An easy target for aircraft.

If the allies could produce 10 Shermans or T-34s for every Tiger II the Germans could, the Tiger II's armor and firepower meant nothing.
Exactly. When everyone thinks of German tanks they think of all that armor and the big guns, but a lot of people don't think about how costly they were. They also broke down  A LOT. In fact a huge percentage of German tanks broke down and were left on the battlefield.

cupAsoup #18 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:44

    Captain

  • Players
  • 16397 battles
  • 1,527
  • [ACES] ACES
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011
M4 hands down.

Mechanically reliable, durable, and maneuverable. Available in numerous forms (mine clearing, hedge cutter, support vehicle, UK firefly, Israeli super sherman, flame throwing, etc....) Easy to produce, easy to train on, and the american maintenance battalions made them easy to repair and get back into the fight.

Yes, your tigers/panthers/IS in a one on one fight will win. How often did that happen? Remember, the M4 brought with it the best artillery and air support of the entire war.

Not to mention we could turn them out faster, with highly trained crews, and an excellent logistical system better than anyone.

The best tank is the one than won the war.

Edited by cupAsoup, Apr 16 2013 - 23:46.


Grumpy_Turtle #19 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:45

    Suggestions Volunteer

  • Community Contributor
  • 12708 battles
  • 3,913
  • Member since:
    03-01-2011
Overall I'd say the T-34 because, though it couldn't necessarily take a Tiger/Tiger II/Panther head to head, it was a big reason the war was won. With 84000 of them made that makes about 10-11 of them for every Panther, Tiger or Tiger II (of which there was about 7800). On top of that, the T-34 was not exactly a bad tank on the battlefield itself. It did not excel in any certain category (mobility, gun, speed, armor) but it has a perfect blend of all aspects. The angled armor was also extremely effective at the time as it was a new concept that hadn't really been tried to that extent before before. On top of all of that, as I said in my above post, these things cost almost nothing to make in comparison to a Tiger I/II or a Panther, and took far less time and resources.

unlawfulsoup #20 Posted Apr 16 2013 - 23:53

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 15777 battles
  • 1,154
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    07-17-2010
It is either the T-34 or M4 Sherman, with honorable mention to Panzer III/IV. The big cats are vastly overrated unless we adjust the criteria to one vs one or some other silliness.