Jump to content


was the tiger a reliable tank?


  • Please log in to reply
199 replies to this topic

panzershreck65 #1 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:26

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12710 battles
  • 603
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

Ive always said that if i had to pick any tank to drive into a war from ww2 it would be either the T34-85 or the Tiger 1.

however, german tanks were plagued with issues that usually involved something to do with them being overwieght (because hitler was an idiot and always wanted more armor on the tanks, even when they had more than enough) 

 

ive heard a lot about the interleaved suspension, while it was great for a nice dry area like kursk, it was horrible if you got into mud with it, especially if it was winter, mud would freeze in the wheels and then you gotta remove a whole big bunch of heavy wheels to get it unstuck.

 

however i never heard much about the tiger having and very notable automotive problems like its sister tank the panther had. there were probably some, but how bad were they?



Rena_Dyne #2 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 9332 battles
  • 4,337
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011
They also had rather bad transmissions {Slightly less bad in the Tiger 2} and IIRC, due to the way they were built, the Turret and Hull could not traverse independently of one another at the same time.

BlackForestPike #3 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:32

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9736 battles
  • 964
  • [UFP] UFP
  • Member since:
    09-01-2011
Drive, or crew? Because there's a big difference in real life.

LegoTornado #4 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:35

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3768 battles
  • 147
  • Member since:
    01-17-2014
The Tiger was infamous for its reliability and mechanical issues.  It was so bad, that the maintenance log of any given Tiger would be several pages long per day!  If I could drive one tank from WWII, I would choose the M4 Sherman.  It was very reliable and rarely broke down, unlike the Tiger.

Edited by LegoTornado, Aug 25 2014 - 22:37.


ysoignorant #5 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 20872 battles
  • 6,054
  • [SPIDY] SPIDY
  • Member since:
    04-11-2012

They were about as reliable as their fuel supply.

 



SeanutBrittled #6 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7360 battles
  • 964
  • Member since:
    10-29-2013
I would bring the M1A2 Abrams into battle in WW2.

Rena_Dyne #7 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 9332 battles
  • 4,337
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011
More aptly, the biggest failure of the German Tiger's were the final drives of the transmissions, as they used a weaker transmission socket to hold the final drive in place, to increase production and reduce cost IIRC, so trying to drive it at its top speed often resulted in rapid failure of the transmission.

SeanutBrittled #8 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:42

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7360 battles
  • 964
  • Member since:
    10-29-2013
I don't get why people neg me, with my fantastic sense of humor and imagination.

Dominatus #9 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:44

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,790
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

View Postcaramel, on Aug 25 2014 - 17:39, said:

More aptly, the biggest failure of the German Tiger's were the final drives of the transmissions, as they used a weaker transmission socket to hold the final drive in place, to increase production and reduce cost IIRC, so trying to drive it at its top speed often resulted in rapid failure of the transmission.

I've never heard anything particularly wrong with the Tiger's final drives. That's Panther. Tiger had its own serious set of problems



Rena_Dyne #10 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 9332 battles
  • 4,337
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View PostSeanutBrittled, on Aug 25 2014 - 14:42, said:

I don't get why people neg me, with my fantastic sense of humor and imagination.

 



AdmiralTheisman #11 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:47

    Captain

  • Players
  • 30786 battles
  • 1,821
  • Member since:
    07-01-2013

View PostSeanutBrittled, on Aug 25 2014 - 22:37, said:

I would bring the M1A2 Abrams into battle in WW2.

 

Does not the Abrams consume a large amount of fuel for its engine? Would not a simpler tank be a better option? It is hardly like you have to worry about flak 88 penetrating your armor. A conventional diesel engine equipped Western MBT seems like the best bet if you get to be time traveler in WW2. 

G0lfSierra1 #12 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 19224 battles
  • 2,330
  • Member since:
    05-27-2013
The Tiger had great armor and a good gun that could pretty much hit a Sherman anywhere and take it out but had transmission and engine troubles that caused a lot of breakdowns while enroute to battle. I would take a Hellcat over the Sherman anyday just because it could pen a Panther while a Sherman could not.

BattlecryGWJ #13 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 35687 battles
  • 7,394
  • [RSRDD] RSRDD
  • Member since:
    12-20-2011
To a certain extent its somewhat difficult to separate the mechanical reliability issues due to poor design from mechanical reliability issues due to poor crews.

LegoTornado #14 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:48

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3768 battles
  • 147
  • Member since:
    01-17-2014

SeanutBrittled, on Aug 25 2014-17:42, said:

 I would bring the M1A2 Abrams into battle in WW2.

 

Please don't start this again...  Just don't...

Edited by LegoTornado, Aug 25 2014 - 22:49.


RingYourBell #15 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 11687 battles
  • 2,740
  • Member since:
    08-16-2013
http://www.youtube.c...ery=Tiger tank  ...............................

Rena_Dyne #16 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 9332 battles
  • 4,337
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View Postnapalm43, on Aug 25 2014 - 14:47, said:

The Tiger had great armor and a good gun that could pretty much hit a Sherman anywhere and take it out but had transmission and engine troubles that caused a lot of breakdowns while enroute to battle. I would take a Hellcat over the Sherman anyday just because it could pen a Panther while a Sherman could not.

 

Hellcat had the same gun {76MM M1A2} as the later model shermans. The difference was the Hellcat got priority requisition on HVAP, and could flank a tiger/panthers sides to pen them.

ysoignorant #17 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 20872 battles
  • 6,054
  • [SPIDY] SPIDY
  • Member since:
    04-11-2012

View Postnapalm43, on Aug 25 2014 - 17:47, said:

The Tiger had great armor and a good gun that could pretty much hit a Sherman anywhere and take it out but had transmission and engine troubles that caused a lot of breakdowns while enroute to battle. I would take a Hellcat over the Sherman anyday just because it could pen a Panther while a Sherman could not.

 

Hellcat? Pffsh, say hello to the anti-88 machine.

Spoiler


22nd_Shock_Division #18 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:53

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 14379 battles
  • 765
  • Member since:
    09-30-2011

View Postnapalm43, on Aug 25 2014 - 21:47, said:

The Tiger had great armor and a good gun that could pretty much hit a Sherman anywhere and take it out but had transmission and engine troubles that caused a lot of breakdowns while enroute to battle. I would take a Hellcat over the Sherman anyday just because it could pen a Panther while a Sherman could not.

Tigers were vulnerable to even Shermans armed with 75 mm guns. The longer 76 mm gun (superior in AP performance to the Soviet 85 mm gun, which could handle Tigers just fine) had no problem with Tigers or Panthers.

 

EDIT: just throwing that tidbit out there  :blinky:


Edited by 22nd_Shock_Division, Aug 25 2014 - 22:55.


SeanutBrittled #19 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 22:54

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7360 battles
  • 964
  • Member since:
    10-29-2013

View PostLegoTornado, on Aug 25 2014 - 17:48, said:

 

Please don't start this again...  Just don't...

 

Start what? :D

G0lfSierra1 #20 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 23:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 19224 battles
  • 2,330
  • Member since:
    05-27-2013
I just finished watching a documentary about when the 3rd army went up against Panthers and had to wait on the Hellcats to save the day since their 75mm guns were just bouncing left and right while the Panthers were chipping away at the Shermans for a loss of 3 tanks at the outset of the battle. Most of Patton's tanks had the 75mm at the time.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users