T-34/85 vs Panther

[T-34s_Are_Cool]

Well i dont know too much about the Panther but i know T-34s. I think that the T-34/85 is a great tank but the Panther is good to. It's A fairly even match. What do you think?

[DOGolden]

I think the T-34 was awesome. Cheaply made. Cheap to maintain. And they could go where the German tanks couldn't go because of their Christie suspension.

If everything were equal in a single T-34 vs. Panther, I would rather be in the Panther (because of better training & offensive armament). But the Russian front was never on equal footing, especially after early 1943. The Germans were on the retreat the whole time getting weaker. And the Russians were turning out T-34's like there was no tomorrow.

the DOG

[zerkalli]

In order to respond to T-34/76 in 1942, Germans developed their own Panzerkampfwagen V Panther, which incorporated many features of the Soviet T-34/76 and eventually proved to be a superb tank.

Captured T-34/76 was designated by the Germans as Panzerkampfwagen T-34 747(r). Large number of T-34/76 tanks was captured and pressed into service contrary to few T-34/85 tanks. T-34/76 was more often captured since from 1941 until mid 1943, Germans were still firmly established on the Eastern Front, while T-34/85 appeared on the battlefield in the winter of 1943, when Germans were already retreating westwards after successful Soviet offensives. Germans were always more than happy to employ as many captured examples as they could and many served with various units. T-34/76 employment by German formations was not always temporary but sometimes permanent until the end of the war. First examples of T-34/76 were in service with 1st, 8th and 11th Panzer Division during the summer of 1941. Although it was considered to utilize captured T-34/76 tanks dangerous because many gunners fired on silhouette instead of markings. In order to prevent such mistakes to take place, crews painted large-dimension crosses or even swastikas. It was very common to paint a cross or swastika on top of the turret in order to prevent the Luftwaffe from attacking. Another way to overcome this problem was to use captured T-34/76 in an infantry support role where recognition problems were not that common. T-34/76D (model 1943) tanks with round twin turret hatches were often nicknamed by the Germans as "Mickey Mouse", because of their appearance when both hatches were open.

The Panther and the Soviet T-34 are considered to be the best tanks of World War II. When in June of 1941, Germany invaded Russia, Panzertruppe encountered KV series and T-34/76 tanks, which were far superior in firepower and armor protection to any Panzer at the time. It was then decided, because of the constant reports from the Eastern Front to design a new more powerful medium tank, which could be quickly put into production. On November 25th of 1941, Adolf Hitler ordered Wa Pruef start work on the new tank. In December of 1941, Wa Pruef ordered Daimler-Benz and MAN (Maschinenfabrik Augsburg Nuernberg) to design new 30-ton tank armed with 75mm KwK L/70 gun as a response to the Soviet T-34/76 tank. Rheinmetall-Borsig was in charge of the development of the turret for this new tank. In March of 1942, Daimler-Benz was the first to produce their version of VK3002's design based on previously rejected VK3001 (direct copy of T-34/76) design from January of 1942. Two versions of VK 3001 with different suspensions were designed by Daimler-Benz - one with spring suspension and other with torsion bar suspension. Daimler-Benz VK3002 design was largely based on T-34/76 and was more like a modified German version of it. MAN finished their design of VK3002 in early Spring of 1942.

Panther's technical design incorporated many features of the T-34/76, such as wide tracks for better traction and improved cross-country performance, a powerful engine, a hard-hitting long-barrelled 75mm gun, and sloping armor for extra protection. It is important to note that the Panther was the first German-made tank with sloping armor. Although its design was in some ways similar to the T-34/76, the Panther was larger, heavier, and different in many technical aspects. The Panther had large overlapping road wheels and a state-of-the-art suspension system that enabled it to traverse rough terrain at high speed.

i get this information from http://www.achtungpanzer.com/t34.htm

[temujin77]

Both are great tanks, but I'm going to veer off topic slightly and say that it's the tank commander that makes the difference, not the tank itself...

[T-34s_Are_Cool]

Both are great tanks, but I'm going to veer off topic slightly and say that it's the tank commander that makes the difference, not the tank itself...
Good point if a t-34 had a shit commander and a panzer 4 had a experienced commander the panzer could verry well win the fight.

[StalingradK]

Too bad Panthers mostly got their asses kicked and were sent to Northern Frances to repel the flaming coffins (you know what tank I mean :D )

[Hanz Lutz]

Panther are good tank.

The Panther was a direct response to the Soviet T-34. First encountered on 23 June 1941, the T-34 decisively outclassed the existing Panzer IV and Panzer III. At the insistence of General Heinz Guderian a team was dispatched to Russia to assess the T-34. Among the features of the Russian tank were considered most significant: the sloping armour, which gave much improved shot deflection and also increased the apparent armour thickness against penetration, the wide track and large road wheels which improved stability, and the long, over-hanging gun.

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/2/28/250px-PantherTankColor.jpg

http://www.answers.com/topic/panther-tank

[StalingradK]

Yes, but they still got their asses kicked :P

[Hanz Lutz]

Why their asses was kicked . :lol: :lol:

[Firefly]

Both are great tanks, but I'm going to veer off topic slightly and say that it's the tank commander that makes the difference, not the tank itself...

Another influential point is the command and communications, even at the end of the war, most russian tanks still didnt have individual radios. That make a big diffrence when your platoon is buttoned down.

[StalingradK]

Um outnumbered AND outgunned

[mike M.]

If you like T-34's, check out my posting on the website board. It shows them pulling out a T-34 from a lake. very cool. 8)

[Hanz Lutz]

I see ,very cool and thers a good pictures. :wink:

[T-34s_Are_Cool]

Too bad Panthers mostly got their asses kicked and were sent to Northern Frances to repel the flaming coffins (you know what tank I mean :D )
i assume your talking about the sherman (overrated peice of crap) :D :twisted:

[Panzerknacker]

I honestly think that the Tiger I was much better fighting machine than Panther when engaging russian tanks was the business.

The Panther had a very unreliable transmition and very weak side armor.

[Firefly]

I honestly think that the Tiger I was much better fighting machine than Panther when engaging russian tanks was the business.

The Panther had a very unreliable transmition and very weak side armor.

While I agree that the Panther had weaker side armour, the Panther was much better than the Tiger 1 from the front, had a much better gun too. I would take the Panther any day.

[Panzerknacker]

I would take the Panther any day.

You wont get too far away. :)

http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/7178/panzer726mr.jpg

Altough a very good tank the armor of the Panther is clearly disbalanced, 110 mm front turret and only 45 in the side...crazy.

And also even the several troubles with the early series that participate in "Zitadelle" was solved, some of them continue until the end like the easy overheating of the engine and transmition .

The percentage of available Panthers for combat was always inferior to the Tigers I or Panzer IVs.

[Gavin-Phillips]

Speaking with numerics alone, the Germans were far outnumbered when Barbarossa began in 1941. However, poor tactics, inexperienced tank crews and unit commanders, poor quality ammunition and steel armour all contributed to the high losses of the Russian army of the time.

T-34/85 is more of a match against the Panther. Tank vrs Tank tells you nothing about how experienced the crew is. However, the 85mm gun of the T-34 still has trouble against the Panther front because of the sloped armour but can penetrate the sides and rear from all practical combat ranges. The Panther's vision devices are far superior (Soviet's were full of air bubbles so are hard to see through) plus fire control is more advanced. Panther had reliability troubles, not too much dis-similar from early model T-34's.

T-34 was built with simplicity in mind to aid max production while Panther was far more of a sophisticated and almost "professional" you could say, attempt at a world leading tank.

Panther had really thin armour in an attempt to save weight.

[IronFist]

The T34 Vs a Panther. The T34 was a better tank in numbers which was generally the case. The Panther however had better armament and better trained crews, making it the better killer. However not enough panthers were made to overwhelme the soviets. Therefor the T34 would just attacked all german units in massive numbers with so many mor ein production. Soviet tank production was so high the germans could not keep up and were just overwhelmed by T34's.

[ss-standartanfuhrer]

i fink the tiger is gud cos it has lots of machineguns and a flame thrower but, but i'd have the T-34 cos it seriously outclassed the krauts tanks!!

[Gavin-Phillips]

Since when did the Tiger have a flame thrower? :o

Having 3 MG's was common for most tanks by late war standards (coaxial and bow) and with not much of a threat left from the German air force, AA MG's were mostly used as a ground supression weapon anyway. Tiger only had 2, but considerably more ammunition for them than the Soviet tanks at the time (JS-2), same is true with main gun rounds.

[Firefly]

i fink the tiger is gud cos it has lots of machineguns and a flame thrower but, but i'd have the T-34 cos it seriously outclassed the krauts tanks!! :roll:

[Hosenfield]

i think someone needs to do some reading about tanks....

[Gavin-Phillips]

As a side note, Hitler wanted the Jagdtiger to be armed with a flame thrower :shock: but as far as I've read, it was never done.

Not that I can see the point of arming such a vehicle with a weapon like that.

[Twitch1]

It would be interesting to compare a T-34/85 and a Panther one-on-one both with seasoned crews in a duel in the most clinical sense that doesn't reflect the T-34's superor numbers or the mechanical teething troubles of the Panther. :shock:

[Gavin-Phillips]

It would be interesting to compare a T-34/85 and a Panther one-on-one both with seasoned crews in a duel in the most clinical sense that doesn't reflect the T-34's superor numbers or the mechanical teething troubles of the Panther. :shock:

One on one, and if both tanks are facing each other, the Panther has the edge because of its thick & heavily sloped front hull & turret armour. This sloped armour is one of the reasons why the T-34/85 is more capably armed against the slab-like armoured Tiger rather than the Panther. There are some stories about tankers (especially American and some British) using the Panther's shot trap (lower part of the mantlet) to deflect shells through the realatively thin armour coving the driver & hull gunner. Make of that what you will :roll:

The 75mm high velocity gun of the Panther should have no trouble knocking out a T-34 of any kind at any practical combat range (discounting any obstructions like trees or camoflague).

[Firefly]

In fact the 75mm gun on the Panther could penetrate any Allied tank of ww2. Remember the Panther wasnt a Tiger replacement, it was a PzIV replacement.

The question should be then, which is better the Panther ot the PzIV?

[Gavin-Phillips]

Good point!

I'm not quite sure which tank you could say is "the best". The Panzer IV was upgraded to having a longer gun with improved AT performance (although weather it was the same as the Panther's penetration figures is something that escapes me), plus the IV had been in production for some time. Indeed it remained in production through-out the war. It doesnt have the frontal armour thickness of the Panther however (Panther A has 100mm on the mantlet vrs 50mm for the IV F2).

So again it may come down to numbers! Both tanks were capable fighting vehicles, the Panther design incorporated some advanced features. The long barrel IV's were a match for Allied tanks, but far more numerous. That numerical thing must be considered when you are talking about facing the T-34, weather you class the T-34 as a poor tank or not.

[T-34s_Are_Cool]

I know this has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand, but, i recently saw Saving Private Ryan and is it just me or do the 2 tiger tanks at the end have T-34/85 road wheels drive sprocket and tracks? I suspect trickery

[Gavin-Phillips]

That would be because the "Tigers" in Saving Private Ryan are T-34/85's. Same with Kelly's Heros. To understand why, just ask yourself how many Tiger I's are left in the world, eveen more importantly how many of these can run at all? Very few indeed. Even simulated war like what Hollywood does would be very hard on these priceless artifacts.

The small vehicle which looks like a crawler motorbike is indeed a real vehicle, and probably an original although I would love to confirm that. It was used as a prime mover for recon and airborne units, pulling light anti-tank guns and associated equipment.

[Panzerknacker]

That would be because the "Tigers" in Saving Private Ryan are T-34/85'

Actually those "Tigers" are converted russian T-44s, the T-44 was a russian response to the Panther with but a more well balanced armor distribution.


http://armoured.vif2.ru/T44-120_PzV_e_1.jpg

[Cuts]

I've only seen the film once and can't remember the details of the 'Tigers', but this site reckons they were 34's.

http://www.sproe.com/t/tiger-tank.html

The two Tiger tanks featured in Saving Private Ryan are reproductions built on the chassis of Russian T-34 tanks. Operational Tiger I's are extremely rare, and could not have been used for rigorous film production, let alone a movie in which the plot requires one of them to be destroyed.

The T-34 was chosen because of its overall size and barrel height. The reproductions were based on measurements taken of a Tiger I at the Tank Museum in Bovington, England, and were constructed by Plus Film Services. The upper hull and turret were sized to proportionally match the chassis of the T-34. Band of Brothers, the HBO mini-series produced by Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks, used a similar construction process to recreate Tiger I tanks out of readily available T-34s.

The most obvious visual difference between a real Tiger I and the reproductions are the tracks, which do not feature the Tiger I's overlapping wheel design. Although the front of the tank features the appropriate machine gun and driver's viewport, these two features are a source of great controversy.

The small machine gun of a Tiger I was normally manned by the tank's radio operator, but the gun is fired only briefly during the Battle of Ramelle—blink and you'll miss it (screen capture 1 | screen capture 2). The machine gun on the second Tiger can be seen to move slightly just before it is destroyed. It is possible that both tanks had limited ammo for their machine guns, or that one was out of ammo and the other damaged, or that both tanks had injured radio operators. An operational machine gun on just one of the tanks could have made for some dramatic moments. As it is, the limited machine gun fire in the film is so brief as to be non-existant (and one wonders if it was a post-production CGI effect).

The driver's viewport on a Tiger I featured 6 layers of armored glass, as well as another sheet just behind them. These systems would have prevented Captain Miller from simply sticking his submachine gun up to the port and spraying the inside of the driver's compartment with bullets. Curiously, just a fraction of a second before the second Tiger is destroyed by a P-51, the driver's viewport is shown as having been replaced with a flat, unconvincing piece of material with what looks to be the driver's port painted on! This can only be seen for a few frames (see screenshot number 8,) and is more than likely the result of whatever work was done to rig the tank for an explosion.

Another inaccuracy is the fact that the paratroopers easily open the tank commander's hatch, which would have been locked from the inside in order to prevent the enemy from using such an easy way to kill a tank crew. There is some criticism that the tank commanders are seen with their hatches open, thus exposing themselves to enemy fire, but this is actually a common way in which a tank commander would operate his vehicle, as it afforded him the best view of the battlefield. Obviously a tank commander had to use caution as to when and where he could safely open the hatch.

Both Tiger tanks feature the insignia of the I SS Panzer Corps, a unit that would not have been near the Merderet River on June 13th, 1944.

Because of the limited number that had been constructed, and the disposition of German forces on June 13, 1944, the date of the Battle of Ramelle, it is highly unlikely that any Tiger I tanks would have been in or around Ramelle at that time. The use of the Tiger I in Saving Private Ryan has much more to do with its reputation and popularity than historical accuracy.

The two Tiger I replicas from Saving Private Ryan were stored at The Tank Museum in Bovington, England for a time, but they have apparently been sold and removed from the museum. It looks like one of the tanks may have found its way to the United States, as one was reportedly used for a reenactment of the Battle of Carentan in Monterey, California by the World War II Research and Preservation Society. An article on the reenactment indicates that the Tiger tank is owned by Joe Fazio of San Francisco.




http://www.geocities.com/plusfilm/images/construction.jpg
Building 'Tigers' for Saving Private Ryan at Plus Film Services.

[Panzerknacker]

Well, that is funny because I was pretty much convinced that it a T-44.

[HG]

I thought that they used other tank bodys to convert them into Tigers.

Henk

[Panzerknacker]

One of the T-44 rebuild as "tigers".

http://www.battlefield.ru/tanks/t44/t44_4.jpg

Very ugly looking, for more go in there.

http://www.battlefield.ru

[HG]

That does not look like a Tiger to me, gees those guys did not have a clue to how one look. :D

Henk

[Chevan]

ftp://clon.mediazona.ru/pub/VIDEO/%C4%C6%CE%CD%C8/%CA%C0%D0%D2%C8%CD%CA%C8/Tiger.jpg

ftp://clon.mediazona.ru/pub/VIDEO/%C4%C6%CE%CD%C8/%CA%C0%D0%D2%C8%CD%CA%C8/Tiger_2.jpg
more "bad" Tigers on the chassi T-44.
This vehicle was made in MosFilm in 1975.

[Panzerknacker]

Yes they are bad Tigers, the large differences between the real Tiger and the crapy Hollywood and Soviet Films fakes are quickly visible for the trained eye...like the mines... :D ...better used a stug or Hetzer wich are more common and available, like in "Band of Brothers"

Aniway like a I said the T-44 was a more balanced design than the Pz V Panther, the only advantage of the german MBT was in the AP capabilities.