Uncharacteristic for Nazi tank designs. Usually they went for overdesigned, expensive, and unreliable.
One reason the Ferdinands were unreliable was because the Jewish slave laborers conscripted to manufacture them were sabotaging the internals.
US tank destroyers were equally poor.
Far better to have up-gunned the Sherman; and to have up-armored it. Far too many of men were lost in that medium tank because of Washington’s decisions.
Yes, it was better than nothing. Better than the early light tanks it replaced. But not much better.
Load of crap. The T-34 was a piece of junk. The only redeeming features were the Christy suspension and the fact that the crew and motor could be swapped out quickly after they were dead. Russia had lots of them and Germany could not compete with the numbers, same with the Sherman. Sherman crews were known to abandon their tanks when they sighted a Tiger without a shot being fired. German armor was far superior but far too few to stem the tide against the Reich.
“German tanks during World War II were often outmatched by superior Red Army designs beginning with the T-34. Armor, reliability and firepower were all—at various times—serious shortcomings.”
This statement is false.
German tanks like the Tiger, Panther, King Tiger, and the Mark IV with the high velocity 75mm gun were the superior tanks. The T-34 was a good tank that could be manufactured quickly. Quantity was the true strength of the T-34. NOT the quality. The use of sloped armor was an innovation. This ONE innovation does not make the T-34 a superior tank. The Josef Stalin class tanks were developed near the end of the war. They were not in enough data to say they they were a match for the Tiger and King Tiger. The same is true for the Sherman. It was sheer numbers that defeated German tanks. If the Germans could have produced the same number of tanks as Russia and the US the tank matchup would have favored the Germans.
Check out any number of books on Kursk. The Russians knew the attack was coming because the Allies had broken the Enigma code. Despite the preparation the Germans mauled the Russians in a tank on tank comparison.
Production data does not lie. Although quite underrated by Allied intelligence during WW2 and still somewhat underestimated today, the StuG III was, nonetheless, the most produced tracked German AFV during the conflict. Its evolution mirrored that of the more famous Panzer IV. At first, the StuG was a simple derivative of the Panzer III for infantry support only, but ended as one of the most important German vehicles of the war. With its low-profile and low-cost, it was the real battlehorse of the Wehrmacht, shifting from a close support vehicle to a tank-hunter of first magnitude, soldiering without interruption anywhere from North Africa to Europe and Russia. The crews loved it because of its low profile and good armor, and the infantry it was supporting was grateful for its firepower and availability.
When I was little, around 8 years old, my father introduced me to Hans who worked with him as an engineer. Hans was a Germany infantryman and in the Winter of 43 he spied two Russian Tanks. He went back to the platoon and got authorization for two rounds and the antitank weapon. Hans said he was so excited because if you knocked out a Russian tank you got a one week pass to Berlin, from where he was born... and he knew he was looking at two weeks home! Hans fired one round into the first tank and it exploded. He said he knew he had to hurry because they had soldiers around the tanks now returning fire. He loaded the antitank (Panzerfaust) with the second round and fired it,,, and just as it should have hit the tank a Russian soldier stood up and took the round in the chest. Hans only got one tank and lost the Panzerfaust in his retreat as he was alone and under small arms fire. Once his Battalion confirmed the tank kill Hans got his week in Berlin (that was the last time he saw his family ever again). Old Hans was a funny guy but he only told me that story to get the small kid (me) from liking war due to TV! I remember Hans retired long before my dad and at some point they drew down the department where all the engineers worked - Dad and “PHD” remained as the only staff for about 15 years after that. I never forget Hans telling the story to me, and that he would not tell me a single thing else except war is a terrible thing, and worst when you are doing the shooting and have no family when it ends.
Wow, a lot of really not-so-correct replies:
Post 1) One could say that about any advanced design. I remember how folks bitched about the M1 in the late 1980s, shut up when the Gulf war showed it was a hard tank to defeat. Same was true of the Tigers and 1943 Panthers.
Post 2) Your source on Jewish slave labor is factually lacking. You obviously know nothing about the Vienna works where they were built or the design fault that lead to them burning up when just friving, the fixed version and the incredibly high kill ratios put in by the 653rd and 654th heavy Tank destroyer battalions from Kursk to late 1944.
In general: The German designs were good for their time, much of the reliability problems they had with summer 1944 and later production is this:
1) In February of 1944 they lost their main supply of Manganese.
2) In August 1944 they lost their supply of Chromium and tungsten.
3) in September 1944 they lost their supply of nickel.
To keep production going there was a drastic reduction in the use of alloys in production, which adversely affected reliability. Try producing modern tanks without these elements with only heat treated carbon steel. Heat treatment becomes critical and it is impossible to match some of the characteristics you can with alloys. Transmissions last a lot less time and break a lot easier just to start. Had the allies stopped on the border in late 1944, the German military machine would have collapsed around late June of 1945 due to lack of alloys. Had the allies stopped after Russia overran the upper Silesian industrial zone in mid February of 1945, the German economy would have collapsed around May 15th at the latest.
A lot of the military history writers are completely ignorant when it comes to the material side of things.
Example, as regards the ME262: the Jumo Jet engines would not last 10 hours in 1943. It was not until the late summer of 1944 they got the life to around 25 hours at which time mass production began.
Now once you know this little fact the decision to use the ME262 as a fighter bomber makes a lot more sense. There was no possibility of mass production when the engines would not last more than 5~10 fights, you could not even train the fighter pilots when they need at least 20 hours to make the translation. But a few of these jets as fighter bombers flying through at high speed could cause all sort of expensive defensive measures that would divert more Allied resources by (by several magnitudes) then it cost the Germans, like the U-boat campaign and the V1 buzz bombs).
Not praising the Germans, just pointing out folks here really have a distorted view from popular history, which is pretty shallow and inane.
We rebuild a King-Tiger in Full (Switzerland) in the Moment. The Link: http://www.koenigstiger.ch/2016—2017-winterersaison.html
P.S. German tanks are by far the best you can or you could get.
bumpmark