Re: M26 Pershing
 

Is all this whoopla over the so-called "bad" steel of the King Tiger from that ONE source:
http://www.battlefield.ru/library/bo.../weapons7.html

or is there anything else to back it up? After reading through that article, I have decided that based on that ONE series of tests on two vehicles, concluding that all king tigers suffered from shitty armor is preposterous.

Especially from that particular source!

Re: M26 Pershing
 

The report of a king tiger being destroyed with a 57mm at gun was from Battlefield.ru

For some reason it seems every source on the net referrs to that damn site and it's questionable facts.

p.s. never trust reports taken from the field, how many pics have you seen labled "German Tiger Tank" when it's really a Panther or a Panzer IV.

So far the only reliable site on the net seems to be http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ .

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Re: M26 Pershing
 

How did you ever hapen upon that?

Usually whenever something *.pdf starts to load I hit Alt+F4 as soon as I can.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

In my opinion 90% of these war-time-stories are at least exagerated, try to remember some details after 50 or 60 years... .
It´s not only the russian stories, but also most of the german stories of a single Tiger tank killing 10 or more enemy tanks...

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Oh REALLY, now? Why the German troops advancing from Finland's soil eastwards didn't get anywhere, while Finnish troops pushed on far ;)

Well, obviously German troop quality was superior to the Russians, which were put into the army when they basically could point the rifle in the right direction :D

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Best tank in the world is only as good as its crew. In most cases the Germans had both good tanks and combat experienced crews who had faith in their vehicles.

As for the .pdf file I did a Yahoo search for Tiger II ausf B and metallurgy

This is from Actung Panzer's site:

"The Kingtiger No.102 was tested at Kubinka proving grounds. The results of tests made in 1944 were as follows:


1. Unsatisfactory reliability of the engine and transmission;
2. Complicated mechanical components; low range and average speed of 20 km/h;
3. Armor quality was lower than on Tiger I and Panther, after 3-4 direct hits there was significant damage and fragmentation but no penetration; welding was of poor quality;
4. The front armor plate cannot be penetrated, but heavily damaged by 152mm and 122mm armor piercing / high explosive shells fired by artillery pieces. The result is the damage of the tank’s mechanical components;
5. The armor-piercing shells of anti-tank guns BS-3 (100mm) and A-19 (122mm) can penetrate the front armor plate of the turret from 1000 to 1500m;
6. The sides armor plates can be penetrated by Soviet 85mm and American 76mm anti-tank guns from 800 to 2000m; it was reported that American ammunition was more effective;
7. Soviet 76mm Zis-3 and F-34 guns were unable to penetrate any of King Tiger's armor;
8. The Kingtiger’s KwK 43 gun performed very well and can be compare to Soviet 122mm gun of the IS-2 tank.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Giving the soviets a King Tiger to test and evaluate is like giving a 1 ton gorilla a crystal rocking chair. After they're done looking at all the shiny parts they're gonna sure as hell break it.

The T-34 required a hammer to change gears, it's no wonder most of the captured german tanks broke down on their way to russia for post war testing when untrained tankers are given 50-60+ ton monsters.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

A Tiger II from schwere Panzer Abteilung 503 was also the last German tank to be destroyed in the war. It was blown up by its crew in Austria on May 10, 1945.
and thats it ?

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Whether the Soviets captured the King Tiger or NOT, they still broke at a horrendous rate. Read that of 14 Tiger II's on a roadmarch to their position, 10 never made becasue of mechanical failures. It was NOT a reliable vehicle.