"The Tiger Tank That Wouldn't Die"

[Slater]

The Tiger had it's share of issues but it was apparently one tough cookie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raAx57MHH7k

[SteyrAUG]

Don't remember the specs on a Tiger, but Sherman's were very, very vulnerable.

[Diamondback]

Don't remember the specs on a Tiger, but Sherman's were very, very vulnerable.

The other problem was Sherman vs Tiger was like putting a Middleweight boxer against Foreman or Tyson, the brass were too slow getting Pershings out for a proper competitor.

[SteyrAUG]

The other problem was Sherman vs Tiger was like putting a Middleweight boxer against Foreman or Tyson, the brass were too slow getting Pershings out for a proper competitor.

It was easier to ship a boatload of Sherman's than a comparable tank. At least we weren't using jeeps with a turret like the Japanese. Ironically we could have used a lot more Sherman's in the Pacific.

[MAUSER202]

Actual Tiger vs Sherman battles on the western front were not as common as most people think. Allied air power was more likely to take on armor on the western front. Still the name Tiger struck fear sin allied tankers and many times other German tanks, tank hunters or assault guns were misidentified as Tigers. There are many after action photos that show a MKIV identified or other German AFV as a Tiger. My, dad a WW2 vet has a picture of him and his tank crew on a knocked out MK IV that he always called a Tiger.

Their legend and mystique was earned and rightfully so on the Eastern front.

[crusader377]

The Sherman was a much better tank than people give it credit for. I would go as far as argue it was one of the best tanks in WWII. It was reliable, mobile both tactically and operationally, reasonably well armed and armored, it was survivable if hit, especially the late model Shermans with the wet storage of its ammunition, had excellent crew ergonomics for the time, easy to mass produce, easy to deploy worldwide (Remember the standard crane at shipping ports was in the 35-40 ton class) a heavier tank like the Panther or Tiger could not be deployed Worldwide. Plus the Sherman was easily upgradable.

In contrast, although the Panther and Tiger were more powerful when they worked, the when they worked was often the issue.

For example, the 45 ton Panther had an operational readiness rate often below 50% in units. Furthermore, Panther although it had good tactical mobility, it had terrible operational mobility. Unlike the Sherman which you could easily drive hundreds of miles without issue, Panther could not do long distance movement for a host of reliability reasons.

The 56 ton Tiger was probably a better built tank than the Panther but it was extremely expensive and still difficult to maintain.


The 32 ton Sherman punched well above its weight especially the late model M4E8 with the 76mm gun.

[vicious_cb]

The Sherman was a much better tank than people give it credit for. I would go as far as argue it was one of the best tanks in WWII. It was reliable, mobile both tactically and operationally, reasonably well armed and armored, it was survivable if hit, especially the late model Shermans with the wet storage of its ammunition, had excellent crew ergonomics for the time, easy to mass produce, easy to deploy worldwide (Remember the standard crane at shipping ports was in the 35-40 ton class) a heavier tank like the Panther or Tiger could not be deployed Worldwide. Plus the Sherman was easily upgradable.

In contrast, although the Panther and Tiger were more powerful when they worked, the when they worked was often the issue.

For example, the 45 ton Panther had an operational readiness rate often below 50% in units. Furthermore, Panther although it had good tactical mobility, it had terrible operational mobility. Unlike the Sherman which you could easily drive hundreds of miles without issue, Panther could not do long distance movement for a host of reliability reasons.

The 56 ton Tiger was probably a better built tank than the Panther but it was extremely expensive and still difficult to maintain.


The 32 ton Sherman punched well above its weight especially the late model M4E8 with the 76mm gun.

Boom! Dropping truth bombs like its 1944. I wish more people would educate themselves rather than repeat false tropes and myths.

I like how people think Shermans were death traps but never talk about horrendous casualty rates in the B-17.

[titsonritz]

Shermans won the day because they were present and fueled, Tigers not so much.

[Diamondback]

Boom! Dropping truth bombs like its 1944. I wish more people would educate themselves rather than repeat false tropes and myths.

I like how people think Shermans were death traps but never talk about horrendous casualty rates in the B-17.

One in three never made it home... and IIRC B-24s weren't any better.

[Firefly]

I dunno squat about armor but I was told that if you look at the M4 for what it was (kind of a proto-Bradley) then it was exceptionally advanced for its day.

A lot of kraut armor gets fangirled over but the engines were weird, unreliable, and they weren’t all that.

Had this sucker come a bit earlier, that would have been their ass




Of course aesthetics wise I thought the Firefly was pretty cool