Well I voted for Axis even though it is not a country. German made the best anti tank guns and my vote goes for the 88. Just look at what it did at Kesserine.
Best Tank/Anti-tank gun
- Thread starter schwarzpanzer
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Dac
Airman 1st Class
The 88mm Flak was the most versitile gun of the war and in the early years of WW II could easily deal with any tank with the exception of the KV-1c.
It could cut through Shermans like they were Butter.
Dac
Airman 1st Class
The Shermans were way too vulnerable. I knew a WW II Sherman crewman and he was still angry about the quality of the tank 30 years after the war. When his tank was hit, he was the only one of the crew who escaped.
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
The 88 was definitley the best alround fieldpiece of WW2 Adler I agree with you 100% the best anti tank weapon field piece the allies had was the 17 pounder as an anti tank gun it was nice and low so concealment was much easier than the 88 yet it had good hitting power.
Attachments
- Thread starter
- #26
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
Yes, DerAdler, but I doubt anyone will vote for anything Italian/Japanese? sorry.
I'd have to put the 17pdr ahead of the 88.
The 88 was eventually devoloped to make the Pak43 anti-tank gun:
http://www.german-soldiers.com/Bilder2/Normandie/pak43.jpg
This was hovever not too popular, the 75mm/L70 would have been better?
Also there was an L100 model 88mm.
Also the Pak44/L61 128mm proved it's woth in Berlin against T34's.
I think one was fitted to a Maus turret along with a 75mm/L70 co-axial!
- That would have made it worthwhile huh PlanD?
The best gun for pure penetration is probably the 32 pounder from the TOG Tortoise heavy tank, only 2 were made though IIRC (it was another AA gun conversion).
I'd have to put the 17pdr ahead of the 88.
The 88 was eventually devoloped to make the Pak43 anti-tank gun:
http://www.german-soldiers.com/Bilder2/Normandie/pak43.jpg
This was hovever not too popular, the 75mm/L70 would have been better?
Also there was an L100 model 88mm.
Also the Pak44/L61 128mm proved it's woth in Berlin against T34's.
I think one was fitted to a Maus turret along with a 75mm/L70 co-axial!
- That would have made it worthwhile huh PlanD?
The best gun for pure penetration is probably the 32 pounder from the TOG Tortoise heavy tank, only 2 were made though IIRC (it was another AA gun conversion).
Well if the Japs had had decent anti tank guns then maybe someone would vote for them.
The Maus was too heavy to be effective. I know all the technical details of the Maus and I know what Hitler hoped for the Maus but the fact is, it was too heavy and clumsy to work. Hitler would have liked you schwarz, you're a fantasist like he was.
It's a dream, the thing would not work!
It's a dream, the thing would not work!
Dac
Airman 1st Class
Even the Tiger tanks were too heavy to be effective. The engines at the time didn't provide enough power and both tanks were prone to breakdown. Even modern tanks like the M1A2 have problems due to weight. When they get stuck, they truly get stuck, and that isn't a good thing in the middle of a battle.
Dac said:
There we go smoking crack again!
The Tiger was one of the most effective tanks of WW2 and was proven again and again in battle.- Thread starter
- #32
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
Decent (75mm) but not great or in numbers.
Like he was??
No mate, I'd have a million ton Gerbil tank made! It would be useful for Berlin etc, that's if it didn't fall into sewers!
The engines were faily decent on the Maus and I'm pretty sure the tracks had the highest % of the hulls width of any tank, ever!
The Tiger was a great tank, but flawed and usurped by the Panther/IS2.
I'm a fan of the KonigsTiger under certain situations though and given the choice, would probably take the KT.
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
Agreed Adler D I have spoken to a few guys who where in amoured units and they always said the Tiger was their most feared opponant by a mile.
The best they could hope to do with a 75mm shooter was too remove a track.
The best they could hope to do with a 75mm shooter was too remove a track.
And with a destroyed track any tank is lost and with that they could take out a Tiger.
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
Not the biggest of targets is it Adler and I dont suppose the Jerry is going to sit there for too long letting you take careful aim
Speaking of aiming I have seen some real naff propergander clips showing tanks firing on the run WW2 tanks couldnt hit the side of a barn on the move but they look good on film firing as they advance.
Speaking of aiming I have seen some real naff propergander clips showing tanks firing on the run WW2 tanks couldnt hit the side of a barn on the move but they look good on film firing as they advance.
- Thread starter
- #36
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
Yeah, same here, not much said about the Panther though, seems odd that Tigers seemed more common??
Then again, the Panther was more vulnerable than the Tiger flank-wise.
The Tiger was probably at it's deadliest when stationary!
Have you heard the 'command post 506(?) story DerAdler?
Yes, actually, it is!
The Tiger was bigger than a barn door!
schwarzpanzer said:
The Tiger was probably at it's deadliest when stationary!
Yeah but not when it is dead in its tracks and cant go anywhere. Then you just pick it off. If a Tiger's Tracks were destroyed I dont care how good of a tank crew you were, you were dead, you had to get out of there.
- Thread starter
- #38
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
A good point to remember is the Henschel suspension froze together, sticking the roadwheels together.
The Russians often attacked at dawn (the coldest time) so that the Panthers and Tigers would be sure to be immobile - very clever!
Also if the engine was gone on the Tiger, the turret was even harder to turn! (had to be done manually)
Some people say the Tiger was not suited for the purpose it was designed (breakthrough tank) but more as a mobile pill-box, firing from cover/camouflaged position.
I've tried finding 'command post 506' (what the Russians called it) on the 'net DerAdler, but no joy.
Anyway, it was an abandoned Tiger that was found by some Panzergrenadiers who hid in it as the Ruskies swept by.
Then they decided to attack infantry, tanks etc with it even though it was immobile!
It was hard to destroy, the Russians tried everything (incl swarms of tanks) until eventually flamethrowering it.
The Russians often attacked at dawn (the coldest time) so that the Panthers and Tigers would be sure to be immobile - very clever!
Also if the engine was gone on the Tiger, the turret was even harder to turn! (had to be done manually)
Some people say the Tiger was not suited for the purpose it was designed (breakthrough tank) but more as a mobile pill-box, firing from cover/camouflaged position.
I've tried finding 'command post 506' (what the Russians called it) on the 'net DerAdler, but no joy.
Anyway, it was an abandoned Tiger that was found by some Panzergrenadiers who hid in it as the Ruskies swept by.
Then they decided to attack infantry, tanks etc with it even though it was immobile!
It was hard to destroy, the Russians tried everything (incl swarms of tanks) until eventually flamethrowering it.
Then they were just dumb because a staionary tank (atleast one that is imobalized for good because its tacks or engine is gone) is just a big target.
- Thread starter
- #40
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
Yeah, they did end up getting burnt, but they took a hell of a lot with them!
Its knowing when to scarper really?
Its knowing when to scarper really?
