come on now steve . here we choose which better , not which is more beautiful
I have answer…T-34…:shock:
just keeding man . i saw your answer . But i think Tiger was better
Congratulations for your correct ENGLISH!!!
Thanks !!
I must say that in many ocassion for a T-34 crew the Panther did not look pretty…it look deadly. :twisted:
Very accurate comment there PK . We talked about the beauty and forgot how much lethal was the Panther (Killing Beauty) .
the best there was and the best there will ever be The Tiger!
Hello,
I am looking for information regarding the colors used on the 2.Panzer-Division Panthers in Normandy 1944. Photos seem to be hard to come by and I’ve not found any color profiles or drawings either. Any ideas on camo patterns or books that would have this kind of info?
Thanks,
Mike
The tiger had mechanical problems. There were enough t34 to replace every broken/destroyed t34.
A Tiger from the 503 Feldherrnhalle (Army) number 121 with no less than 250 impacts from all guns and drove over a few mines made it back to its own lines under its own power and its crew a little groggy got out unscathed. No reports on panther taking this amount of damage and getting away with it. Still, the Panther was a out-standing tank in its own right and ya cant take it away from it.They were two differnt types of tank, tiger was a heavy brakethrough tank and the panther was a fast meduim tank to exploite the brakethrough which tiger had done.
If I am on the eastern front, give me the Tiger 1 over a Panther. All Around a better tank in regards to combination of Protection, firepower and mobility.
Protection: Tiger * Panther
Firepower: Tiger Panther*
Mobility: Tiger = Panther
All around protection was better in the tiger no doubt. In attack you want a tank that can withstand flanking hits, ie the Tiger. In Defense The Panther was virtually impenetrable in the hull front in most combat situations. Although the turret manlet was vulnerable to deflecting a shell downward into the roof of the hull. Panther, great in defense poor in attack, Tiger good at both.
The firepower of the '75 in the Panther was a flat shooting gun with outstanding accuracy and penetration even at great distances.
The kwk L56 -88 of the Tiger was slightly inferior to the 75, but was still capable of dealing with EVERY allied Tank till the end of the war, in other words it never became obsolete.
The Tiger and Panther were roughly equal in mobility, This is taking into account reliability. While the Tiger was not known for reliability, it had a better chance of being combat ready than the Panther. The Tiger is often thought of as a lumbering behemouth but in reality was a fairly agile for a 56 ton Tank. Wide tracks gave a lower ground pressure than the Sherman. The Panther is often regarded as being the more nimble of the 2 but neither is going to outrun a T-34 or Sherman. There are numerous tales of Panthers being bogged down (Peiper’s Panthers in the “Bulge”) Neither Tank had good range or a fast turning turret.
Bottom line. The Panther often touted as the best tank of WW2 really had 2 great attributes,
1- its gun, 2- frontal protection.
The Tiger also had these attributes as well as excellent protection from the side and rear. The tiger doesn’t lag too far behind in the mobility arena either and was probably more mechanically sound.
GIVE ME tHE TIGER
That’s your own conclusion?
The Tiger’s protection was good against ‘older’ vehicles, but the new vehicles like T-34/85 etc. had been able to penetrate its armor.
But it’s a question of the terrain and how the crew was trained - i am sure if the Tiger stood in the ‘Klee’ (~10-11, ~13-14 o’clock) it gave the allied tanks a hard fight.
But the Panthers frontal armor was able to even stop a 150mm artillery shell, when it impacted in a certain angle (however i wonder if the welding was still able to hold the tank together ^^)
Firepower? Well that has been discussed here quite often - personally i prefer the Panthers cannon, because i also like the PaK40 specifies 
Why has the Tiger a better mobility than a Panther?? Look at their stats. :rolleyes:
Splinter54
i guess the bottom line is, The Tiger really had no major weakness, the key word is [i]major. The Panther had a major weakness compared to the Tiger, - Protection.
Yes the Panther had a better gun as I stated, but it wasnt’ that much better, The Panther had better mobility BUT, it wasn’t that much better. The Tiger had the same mobility rating as the Panzer 4 as far as on road and off road speed. The panther could do 7 kph faster (if the transmission didn’t blow) on road but both were roughly equal on off road terrain. It comes down to protection, here the Tiger wins…
p.s. Neither was a war winning tank due to complexity of designs, ie. lack of numbers.
Yes that is right Mr. Sickles
The PaK43 L71 in Erdkampf role - i wonder why it has the Blende of the Jagdpanther and not a normal gunshield?
Note the umbrellas 
Panther TaktNr 115
Infront of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris (LSSAH)
Afterwar exibition? Note the paintjob and the stashbox which seems to be miss the “stabilisation lines”
Note the chicken wire around the main guns barrel
Somewhere in Netherland:
Wochenschau picture - note the hooks on the side of the Schürzens - i remember that those had been also at the turret but at the Schürzen :neutral:
“Dear Gentlemens - may we have the honor to shoot you with your own tanks?”
Note the Jerrycan on the side of the turret:
Man, i can imagine how pis*ed the tankers had been when they had not been able to pull their tanks out of the mud - worst case i would say.
Same scene, just a year later:
In the fabrics courtyard - not the provisory camouflage (parts of trees)!!
That hurts me - infront of the melting hall
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1-04.htm
A link showing how mobile The Tiger 1 actually was. Also shows stats that indicate a greater reliability over the Panther in battlefield readiness
feel free to add info/pictures
feel free to correct my post
The PaK43 L71 in Erdkampf role - i wonder why it has the Blende of the Jagdpanther and not a normal gunshield?
Weird, :shock: first time ever saw that improvisation, thank you very much Splinter
It seems to be a site of rather Tiger-happy bias…
The later Panther’s were much more reliable, although the fact that the German engineers were stuffing transmissions and engines in these tanks, components designed to power vehicles much lighter, is what made both machines as much queens of the garage as much queens of the battlefield…
Also, the numbers of tanks that they knocked out, often times exaggerated, also show that Germany was on the defensive and that these tanks were firing in a static ambush position or conducting local spoiling attacks. Hence, the main reason for these tanks’ success as anti-tank weapons was that German was losing the war.
Of course, you mean Bergepanther.
I wasn’t sure which was historical correct, thx
looking for more pictures