m4a3 sherman and some others

[BigPlay]

See Rule #4

[Angus]

See Rule #4

[BigPlay]

See RUle #2

[dirt911]

sure the tracks would be throne off at high speeds but in ww2 really tanks wouldnt have run that fast probably yet a governed and restricted speed level which was used on panther would fix its highest flaw

[Angus]

See Rule #2

[Die Hard]

Seems like I inadvertently hit a nerve. Sorry Angus, not my intention. I don't know who this "Izzy" person is, but you just keep ranting if you want to; won't make a bit of difference. I just hope I've brought a few tidbits of good valid information to counteract this thread's copious amount of rubbish.

Everyone should just read the previous M4 Sherman thread that I linked to. Everything was pretty much dealt with there.

[BigPlay]

See Rule #2

[Angus]

See Rule #2

[Charge]

Angus getting out of the closet... 

"As for the weak point (Charge) its just side armour basically."

Hmm, side armour of the Panther? Bad? Could you rather say that compared to front armour it IS bad and at the same time being almost as good as the side armour of any other late war tank?

If you have maximum permissible weight for a design where would you put most of it? Top, back, bottom, sides or .... maybe front?

If, say, in the late years of war it is seen that penetration of enemy tanks and AT weapons gets better and better, would it be more beneficial to scatter the weight of the armour all around the chassis or put more in front so that the side that is mostly towards enemy (or should be) would provide even some protection rather than practically none at all for all sides? As later in the war with those penetrations available the tanks could not afford the weight of the armour that would make them immune to latest AT rounds. Of course there were such designs but their field value was practically nil. So it is actually a design choice and I'm sure that were quite many German tank crews that were very thankful that there was that much steel between them and the enemy when all the schxxxxe hit the fan.

Look the brighter side of it Angus. If the Panther had a thick skin in all sides you could not kill it with your Cromwell/Comet (or what ever) no matter how high corner velocities you could develop by driving 40mph circles around and shooting such lumbering beast. 

I'm not sure where they put the weight in Cromwell but I would't feel too confident in it: http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm 

-C+

[Angus]

I am not pitting the Cromwell against the Panther, just pointing out how both would be nice in AH.
The Panther would be a fast killer. The Cromwell would be a very fast Town killer. Depends on the gun used though.
And their problems would not show in AH. Panther would be like a Tiger on steroids. And a Cromwell like a Firefly on steroids.
Anyway, getting to the subject of side armour, it was a common practice of the Allied tanks (being weaker in most occations) to flank and go for the sides. If you lob a good AP into the side of the Panther, it's a lot better than hitting the nasty sloped front. You may disable it's mobility, or penetrate. Didn't they incorporate extra hanging armour later on, or am I confusing it with another tank. Now it's not necessarily weak, it's just WEAKER than the very strong front. The heel of Achilles was every bit as strong as any other heel if you get my point.
The problem with the German armour seems to be of a totally different nature. It has nerves. Touch them and you get questioned with "trolling", or even having a thing about "the ever so perfect minded Germans". I had a lot of those straws thrown at me in the past from people that have ever so much less to do with Germans than I have. So DieHard, I touched your nerve by allowing myself to give some "idiotic" wiki points on the Panther, and the very civilized reply of course includes my inability to learn.  Things such as this:
"I’m always amazed that people are so willing to believe some of these outlandish criticisms and actually believe that the German army would not have demanded a redesign of the suspension if it was that problematic. To think that the ever so perfection-minded Germans would have accepted a deficient suspension system on some of their most important weapons of war from 1942 to the end of the war is simply silly. This myth is as silly as the “one third of the 109’s were lost in landing accidents” myth."
This is a bit off...the real world. Enough for a whole thread. And reminds me of Izzy, which BTW was a 109 hot-head who could not bear a word of criticism of that fine fighter. I was frequently named a German hater back then, as well as inable to learn, or see the light. That's all.

Anyway, regarding the Panther and the Cromwell, I think both would be really great for AH. And a normal Shermie to add, would be a piece of cake for HTC.

[Die Hard]

What part of that quote is "off...the real world"? And what exactly do you mean by "off...the real world"?

Angus, seeing how English is not your first language, what do you think "perfection-minded" means?  I see you misquoted me with "the ever so perfect minded Germans".

[Angus]

The real world of WW2 would now always allow you to put up perfect production. And the real world of Nazi Germany also would not necessarily take the perfect measures in many cases. It is a perfectly real thing. Rather perfection-minded.  OOoops, perfect minded. Getting that mixed up would have gotten me shot had I been in the wrong place at the wrong time. And my German is even worse than my English. That's why it's bearable for me to read Wiki, because I cannot understand half of what's there anyway 

[Die Hard]

Angus, what do you mean by "this is a bit off...the real world"?

What part of this quote that you singled out from my post is "a bit off...the real world" ?

"I’m always amazed that people are so willing to believe some of these outlandish criticisms and actually believe that the German army would not have demanded a redesign of the suspension if it was that problematic. To think that the ever so perfection-minded Germans would have accepted a deficient suspension system on some of their most important weapons of war from 1942 to the end of the war is simply silly. This myth is as silly as the “one third of the 109’s were lost in landing accidents” myth."

What do you think "perfection-minded" means? Don't you think the Germans were perfection-minded?

Please answer my questions.

[BigPlay]

I am not pitting the Cromwell against the Panther, just pointing out how both would be nice in AH.
The Panther would be a fast killer. The Cromwell would be a very fast Town killer. Depends on the gun used though.
And their problems would not show in AH. Panther would be like a Tiger on steroids. And a Cromwell like a Firefly on steroids.
Anyway, getting to the subject of side armour, it was a common practice of the Allied tanks (being weaker in most occations) to flank and go for the sides. If you lob a good AP into the side of the Panther, it's a lot better than hitting the nasty sloped front. You may disable it's mobility, or penetrate. Didn't they incorporate extra hanging armour later on, or am I confusing it with another tank. Now it's not necessarily weak, it's just WEAKER than the very strong front. The heel of Achilles was every bit as strong as any other heel if you get my point.
The problem with the German armour seems to be of a totally different nature. It has nerves. Touch them and you get questioned with "trolling", or even having a thing about "the ever so perfect minded Germans". I had a lot of those straws thrown at me in the past from people that have ever so much less to do with Germans than I have. So DieHard, I touched your nerve by allowing myself to give some "idiotic" wiki points on the Panther, and the very civilized reply of course includes my inability to learn.  Things such as this:
"I’m always amazed that people are so willing to believe some of these outlandish criticisms and actually believe that the German army would not have demanded a redesign of the suspension if it was that problematic. To think that the ever so perfection-minded Germans would have accepted a deficient suspension system on some of their most important weapons of war from 1942 to the end of the war is simply silly. This myth is as silly as the “one third of the 109’s were lost in landing accidents” myth."
This is a bit off...the real world. Enough for a whole thread. And reminds me of Izzy, which BTW was a 109 hot-head who could not bear a word of criticism of that fine fighter. I was frequently named a German hater back then, as well as inable to learn, or see the light. That's all.

Anyway, regarding the Panther and the Cromwell, I think both would be really great for AH. And a normal Shermie to add, would be a piece of cake for HTC.

If your referring to me as having less to do with Germans than you then you  made another mistake...... I am first generation American, both my parents were from Europe, my mother from Germany and father from Holland. My father saw the German army first hand since his country was occupied for most of WW2 and my Mother lived through the bombing and the raping Russian hordes. I am not defending the Nazi regime and it's henchmen. However ALL of my relatives are still in Europe and I haveinsite from the common German and Dutch viewpoints about the war  .This topic is on tanks so I will stick to the topic. Angus DieHard has provided some very comprehensive data that you seem to ignore. He shed light on both armor thickness and how German armor was stronger then allied armor, so the the thickness of German armor actually equates into thicker armor. All that I have read about the Panthers suspension was that it was on the cutting edge of tank design. It offered the smoothest ride for it's crew and offered them a super stable shooting platform while moving something that no allied tank had. It also had overlapping wheels offering layered protection in that area. Side skirt armor was there for hand held projectiles not for tank on tank battles. It was meant to detonate the projectile before reaching the tanks main armor. All late war German armor was designed with the Russian threat in mind. Standoff tank battles of the Russian steppes was what the Panther was designed for, side armor was not as important. Besides the Germans used their panzer grenadiers for flank protection for both enemy armor and infantry attacks. From a maintenance standpoint German tanks were not designed for field repair but field repair stations that were always placed just behind enemy lines. Maintenance was designed  more on  remove and replace then fix while their. No argument that the suspension was complex but like stated was not intended to be fixed in short order.

[E25280]

What do you think "perfection-minded" means? Don't you think the Germans were perfection-minded?

That depends.  Do you mean to say that no other country is "perfection-minded?"  Are you further saying that such "perfection-minded" people are above making any mistakes?

I think what Angus is trying to politely say is that you often come off as a Geman fanboi with comments such as this.

"Zee Germans vere too "perfektionminden" to haf any flawz in zeir dezeins."

The mechanical reliability of German armor under battlefield conditions was not up to par with the allied nations, and when they did break down, they were not as easy to repair in the field.  I believe this is the gist of the commentary.  There is no claim it makes them "failures" or "bad tanks."  Not sure why all the defensiveness over the subject.