Historum - History Forums

Historum - History Forums (http://historum.com/)
-   War and Military History (http://historum.com/war-military-history/)
-   -   Is the Tiger tank overrated? (http://historum.com/war-military-history/94562-tiger-tank-overrated.html)

Belloc August 31st, 2015 08:24 AM

Is the Tiger tank overrated?
 
Interesting analysis of this issue:
http://www.warhistoryonline.com/mili...rewrite.html/2

Tiger and Panther tanks constantly had mechanical problems, and I remember about the early Panthers they had to be shipped back to Germany to be repaired then sent back to the front. By contrast, many Allied tanks could be repaired and serviced closer to the front.

Shtajerc August 31st, 2015 08:27 AM

The Tiger certainly is. In almost every way. Never took much interest in the Panther, so I can't say.

Bish August 31st, 2015 08:29 AM

Depends who you talk to I guess. Anyone worth there salt knows the short comings of the Tiger.

Bob100 August 31st, 2015 08:32 AM

I believe that the Tiger 2 was overrated and un-necessary, as was the Panther. The MKIV and Tiger 1 were fully capable of answering all of Germany's armor needs, and had most of the bugs worked out of them. In combination with the Assault guns, all of which could be built or altered with existing technology, cheaper and more efficiently. The Tiger 2 and Panther were unpardonable wastes of money and dwindling resources.

Belloc August 31st, 2015 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shtajerc (Post 2289709)
The Tiger certainly is. In almost every way. Never took much interest in the Panther, so I can't say.

From what I understand, the Panther was probably the more effective tanks as opposed to the Tiger. Plus the Panther was the most produced German tank of the war, whereas the Tiger was impossible to mass-produce to any significant number.

Bob100 August 31st, 2015 08:33 AM

The problems with the drive train of the Panther were never fully solved. It doesn't matter how many you produce, it matters how many you can keep in the field.

Shtajerc August 31st, 2015 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Belloc (Post 2289715)
From what I understand, the Panther was probably the more effective tanks as opposed to the Tiger. Plus the Panther was the most produced German tank of the war, whereas the Tiger was impossible to mass-produce to any significant number.

I wouldn't be surprised. The Tiger was too heavy, not all that fast and awful to maintain. And while they did well against tanks like the Sherman (you needed some 5 of those cooperating to bring one down) or pretty much any British tin can, it wasn't all that a big deal in the East. But I like how the (Tiger) II looked, both the regular and Porsche turrett version. Considering performance I don't know which one did better, I wouldn't be surprised it was the Panther? Probably more agile aswell?

Bish August 31st, 2015 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Belloc (Post 2289715)
From what I understand, the Panther was probably the more effective tanks as opposed to the Tiger. Plus the Panther was the most produced German tank of the war, whereas the Tiger was impossible to mass-produce to any significant number.

Are you sure about that. I would have said the Pz IV was the most produced.

Isoroku295 August 31st, 2015 08:53 AM

I think the tiger was a break from German strategy. Perhaps necessary. But i feel it was just too much. The panther i think Is vastly superior.

Shtajerc August 31st, 2015 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoroku295 (Post 2289750)
I think the tiger was a break from German strategy. Perhaps necessary. But i feel it was just too much. The panther i think Is vastly superior.

Thank god they didn't really bring out the Maus.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:44 AM.


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.