Why was the quality of German tank armour so bad in WW2?

Nov 2014
335
ph
#1
Why was the quality of German armour so bad in WW2, base on what I read from some sources? I mean this may have been a problem in 1945 due to the loss of sources of molybdenum, but apparently this was a problem all throughout the war.
 
Oct 2018
130
Sweden
#2
They didnt have enough of it and if i remember correctly some tanks would have more armour but of shittier quality covering it to compensate for the lack of quality but that obviously made them heavier.
 

Nemowork

Ad Honorem
Jan 2011
8,315
South of the barcodes
#3
We are talking about the same Germans?

Late in the war the quality of their armour suffered, first of all because the factories had been disrupted by bombing or being moved to secure location, second because they were making a lot of steel with untrained 'volunteers' and prisoners as well as the lack of rare metals.

Early in the war though, i dont think i have ever seen complaints about German armour, in fact the main problem they had was slow production from maintaining too high standards.

The Germans did use applique armour as a temporary measure, for example bolting 30mm armour plates to the front of Panzer 3 and 4s but that was due to the increased quality of allied AT guns until they could change manufacturing to produce a vehicle with a homogenous 80mm plate.

Its the Russians and Japanese who had the consistent quality problem.
 
Apr 2018
432
India
#4
Well the Russians had pretty good armour in 1941 on T-34s and KV-1s. Especially for a medium tank T-34's sloped glacis plate provided excellent protection against anything Germans could throw at them. The problem was that they had too few of those things and a huge number of worthless outdated BTs and tankettes.
 
Mar 2014
1,877
Lithuania
#5
Well the Russians had pretty good armour in 1941 on T-34s and KV-1s. Especially for a medium tank T-34's sloped glacis plate provided excellent protection against anything Germans could throw at them. The problem was that they had too few of those things and a huge number of worthless outdated BTs and tankettes.
BT was not outdated, it simply was made for offensive war in Western Europe and not suitable for defensive war in Russia.
 

Nemowork

Ad Honorem
Jan 2011
8,315
South of the barcodes
#7
Well the Russians had pretty good armour in 1941 on T-34s and KV-1s. Especially for a medium tank T-34's sloped glacis plate provided excellent protection against anything Germans could throw at them. The problem was that they had too few of those things and a huge number of worthless outdated BTs and tankettes.
In theory butt the problems of moving the factories east of the urals, effectively making tnks out in the open until they could build factories round the production line in some cases, rushed work and all the problems the German had after 44 meant their armour quality in 43 was iffy.

As in, why has a 37mm gone thrrough the front plate of my T-34 iffy.

they got it fixed but it was a factor.
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,090
Sydney
#8
The armor of the Tiger was outstanding , made of maranging steel , it could take hits without being penetrated
until the allied up-gunned
however it was very expensive to make and quite laborious to work , leading to very small production number
Germany had face hardening early in the war but this became not so beneficial with the very large guns late in the conflict
the IS-2 gun was a 122mm howitzer , penetration wasn't much of an issue , a hit would simply ripoff everything

the armor caliber race led to heavier and heavier tanks ,
reaching close to the practical limits of what could be moved around the battlefield
 
Jul 2016
8,661
USA
#10
Are you referring
The armor of the Tiger was outstanding , made of maranging steel , it could take hits without being penetrated
until the allied up-gunned
however it was very expensive to make and quite laborious to work , leading to very small production number
Germany had face hardening early in the war but this became not so beneficial with the very large guns late in the conflict
the IS-2 gun was a 122mm howitzer , penetration wasn't much of an issue , a hit would simply ripoff everything

the armor caliber race led to heavier and heavier tanks ,
reaching close to the practical limits of what could be moved around the battlefield
An interesting read about Tigers getting taken out at long ranges with weapons and ammo thought to be insufficient:

The Chieftain's Hatch: The 645th TDB Defends Anzio
 
Likes: sparky