Who Loves the King Tiger...... -1 reply

Please wait...

FactionRecon

11PzG Grunt

50 XP

4th August 2003

0 Uploads

3,889 Posts

0 Threads

#81 14 years ago

...wow...that completly reversed what I thought I knew. Do I even exist?....




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#82 14 years ago
LoboBlasphemy...shame on you Beast of War :lol:

:naughty: But i still like the FH "King Tiger" ;)




Driver

Tomorrow Comes Today

50 XP

29th January 2004

0 Uploads

823 Posts

0 Threads

#83 14 years ago

Hey BoW, I dont know the exact name of those 57mm guns, but they were extremely powerfull. More powerfull than the 76mm guns they had during the beggening of the war. Now if its possible that a T34 with that 76mm gun can penetrate the side armor of a Tiger1, I have no dubts that the 57mm gun wouldnt ceate a soup bowl in the inside of a Tiger2.




[tR]Mad Mac

Aerospace Engineering FTW!

50 XP

19th May 2004

0 Uploads

1,242 Posts

0 Threads

#84 14 years ago

No Santa Claus? :Puppyeyes:




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#85 14 years ago
DriverHey BoW, I dont know the exact name of those 57mm guns, but they were extremely powerfull. More powerfull than the 76mm guns they had during the beggening of the war. Now if its possible that a T34 with that 76mm gun can penetrate the side armor of a Tiger1, I have no dubts that the 57mm gun wouldnt ceate a soup bowl in the inside of a Tiger2.

If the King Tiger would have had real armour....but it hadn't.....really......soft steel.......that was the best armour they still could give it when they already were loosing the war. Too bad for the King Tiger that is when they started producing that tank.

The armour was really incredibly weak, like i said only the thickness and the slope offered protection. The Russians found out in firing tests in 1944 a Tiger I with half the frontal armour ( 100 mm ) and almost no sloped angle armour ( 10 degrees at best ) was far better protected......because the Tiger I had top quality armour.

That 57 mm regimental infantry field gun was shooting poor quality ammo though.......but it was recognised as the best field gun of WWII.




the_unborn

I want to be like the Admins

50 XP

3rd November 2003

0 Uploads

219 Posts

0 Threads

#86 14 years ago

Beast, don't rely on that pictures too much, they are almost 100% fakes, well not fakes but russian test bunnies, not the actual battlefield victims. There were some serious debates going on on missing-linx about these pictures and the whole website. I also don't see any 57mm holes on that tank, only 76mm and larger




Driver

Tomorrow Comes Today

50 XP

29th January 2004

0 Uploads

823 Posts

0 Threads

#87 14 years ago

Lets just pretend that every inch of the armor was top quality except for the ammuntion which for some reason sucks. :p




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#88 14 years ago

Just sad that such powerfull new version 88 mm cannon was mounted on such a piece of crap tank.....

I will not deny that cannon could destroy enemy tanks at unbelievable ranges.......it still was very dangerous......but easier to take out then a Tiger I.




Driver

Tomorrow Comes Today

50 XP

29th January 2004

0 Uploads

823 Posts

0 Threads

#89 14 years ago

If it was up to you where would you draw the line than?

Tiger? Panther? Pz4?

Pz4 was seriously outclassed. Panther liked to spark up. Tiger was the only real choice, but it had its problems too, like being hard to produce.




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#90 14 years ago

DriverIf it was up to you where would you draw the line than?

Tiger? Panther? Pz4?

Pz4 was seriously outclassed. Panther liked to spark up. Tiger was the only real choice, but it had its problems too, like being hard to produce.

Tiger I was chosen by surviving tank crew veterans ( funny enough both allied aswell as german and they didn't lie....... ) in a Discovery Channel documentary as the safest tank to be in, despite all were all too aware of it's frequent breakdowns in the heat of battle.......they were of the opinion in a Tiger you had at least a chance.....

....do not forget Tigers shot Shermans ( and T34 ) with the dirty Panzergranate 39, that is a explosive armour piercing grenade that explodes after pentrating the tanks armour and ignites the onboard ammo of fuel ......there is no surviving an internal ammo/fuel explosion and therefore no surviving a Panzergranate 39......Tigers shot only expensive Panzergranate 40 ( kinetic solid core ) at problematic thick armoured tanks, wich only the Russians had at that time. Kinetic rounds kill crew too ( spalling armour on the inside of the tank into richochetting shards ) but usually some crew can escape. It is a luxury only some Russian tank crews had.....at least if they were not killed outside their tank......

Only the first model Panthers caught easily fire.......that was largely fixed in later models. Late model Panthers due to their well sloped and excellent quality armour were easily the best protected german tanks in WWII....despite the armour was actually thinner then the Tiger I......

Also the Maybach 230 engine was much better suited for the Panther then for the much too heavy Tiger I and Tiger II.