Top Ten Best Tanks from WW2These are the best tanks of WW2. Depending in how strong, versatile, and easy to produce the tank is.
The Panther was known for the terror it was capable of spreading as no other tank of the time could compete with the Panthers gun, armor, and pilots. The panther's only downfall was he fact that they were not cheap to run or fix.
Good tank. But only 6 000 were built. The number of T-34s and Shermans combined was at 90 000. So, although the Panther has quality, it lacks a whole lot of quantity. But, still, Panthers were damn good. Heil Hitler!
The tank one of the best all around table in World War Two. It could be produced fairly well and could take out most allied tanks.
Great gun, armor, and suspension, plagued with horrific reliability issues that made the Tiger look rugged.
Rather bad reliability, extremely cramped interior, poor build quality, multiple design simplifications, and appalling crew survivability (15% chance vs 85% chance on the Sherman), and a mediocre gun made the tank rather ineffective, one of the reasons why almost 50,000 were lost on the Eastern Front.
This tank was developed before the panther and for it's time it was great, sloped armor, mass production, and durability was awesome. The panther was great too but early varients had issues and the t34 had the/76 varient that was a match to it in the late war.
The best tank of World War II, (along with IS-2 and M4) "Fear of all german machines", penetrated all german tanks from a range of 2000 meters. Very fast and easy to produce and maintain.
The T-34 suffered from the unsatisfactory ergonomic layout of its crew compartment.
Tiger-1 was a great tank, it was a lot more expensive than the allied tanks but for a good reason. It had an 88 mm cannon which could penetrate almost any tank that had less than 60 degree sloped armor. This tank was a ranged tank, a few tigers would go out and snipe of a group of t-34s and they were successful. The only reason the tigers were outdated during the later part of the war because the allies had pushed the Germans back to more suburban areas and that is were the tigers are less effective (At close range). The Tiger tank is by far one of the best WW2 tanks, it only down fall was it's flat armor and the limited number.
It does NOT take 10 Shermans to take down a god damn Tiger! All of these opinions are absolutely terrible and the good tanks you chose are still bad mouthed by you. Absolutely terrible.
Best tank in ww2, with it's armor that could stand most infantry anti-tank weapons, and it's powerful 88mm cannon, as well as it's machine guns, downside is that it was too expensive, and cost too much material, it was also slow and usually broke down, as well as taking up too much fuel.
The deadliest tank in the war, you needed 10 shermans to even stand a chance against the tiger.
This tank was very good during WW2, it had a good enough gun in 1942, and since there were only Pz. III's and IV's around, making it very versatile and most likely the winner of a battle against them. It started to be a little obsolete when the Tigers and Panthers started to come of factory lines, but was upgraded to a 76 mm which could penetrate a Panther's and Tiger I's front plate, making the bigger tanks start to seem less frightening, but then many more started to get the 76 mm. The Sherman was also very mobile, reliable, cheap, and well armored in some variants. Many underestimate the Sherman due to it caught on fire, but so did the Tiger and Panther. The Sherman also has nearly the highest survivability rate of the war., and most of those deaths were from the crewmen being outside the tank. The Sherman also always were in a group of 5 with some infantry with, them, while Panthers, Tigers I's and II's were usually by themselves or in very small groups. The Sherman was also not ...more
Was one of the best tanks of WW2. good all arouund stats but bad armor late in war for most models, BUT the Sherman assult tank of which 250 were made in October 1944 could take a 88mm shot and keep rolling over the enemy.
A great, easy to mass produce tank. The only problems were its engine as it sometimes caught fire and the tank didn't stand a chance against later German tanks such as the Tiger 2
The Panther, Tiger, and all the TDs were designed to take out other tanks as one of their primary purposes. The Tiger was also designed to spearhead breakthroughs, the Sherman? It was designed to do all of that and more.
The Sherman was a capable tank killer at its introduction in ww2, and as the Tanks opponents developed, so did the Sherman. The 75mm gun had better penetrating power than the original T34, and the 76 eventually made standard had more power the the 85 used on the T-34/85. So the Sherman was capable of taking out Tanks on a one on one basis.
But that was not its main job, instead, the Sherman was primarily meant as an infantry support vehicle, and it excelled in this. You can see this in the best allied tank ace, Lafayette G. Pool, who had 258 armored vehicle kills (including TD's, Self Propelled Artillery, and Tanks), but he also killed 1000 German infantry and took 250 prisoners. This was over only 81 days. Compare this the German tank aces, which was ...more
Fought with success on every front from begining to end of the war, well balanced it often outclassed its opponents and with upgrades was not obsolete even in 1945.
Most effective medium tank until t-34 and it still outclassed us/uk tanks up until Normandy landings. Easily upgraded and less technical problems compared to its big brothers.
The panzer four was the best all around tank of World War Two. It could take on most of the allied tanks at at least equal terms and be mass produced with ease.
The underrated, semi-reliable, workhorse of the German army.
Do you guys know anything about ww2? The Maus was deemed too heavy to be used in any effective combat strategy. The Jagdtiger was good but not a tank. Nor are the Hetzer, jadgpanther, and Su-122! Tank destroyers and SPGs are not tanks. The Panther was good but could be destroyed but Sherman 76s or IS-2s or Sherman fireflies. It was versatile and strong but it also depends on what panther we are talking about. Panther D or A? Weaker than IS-2 or King Tiger. Panther F or II or strong but in the end the King Tigers' stronger gun and armor give it the edge over the Panther. T-34-85 was good but had puny armor compared to The King Tiger. The King Tiger had a powerful 88 MM gun impenetrable armor for its time, decent speed and mobility, and capable of taking out the IS-2 which was created as a counter to the TIger-1. Overall with TANKS, the King Tiger is the undisputed ruler of WW2.
It was the best tank of WWII because the allies were never able to build anything truly capable of destroying it One on One.
It was a large heavy tank, it has a 43 l 71 gun. It's strongest armour is 7.2 inches, and it's weakest is 1 inch. It's secondary is mg34s
The best tank but very slow!
Great td, unparalleled in its field, but restricted to it.
Impenetrable armour at the start of the war and very good gun.
Best tank at the beginning of the war, no German or polish AT weapons could destroy it
You're full of crap. By that logic was wasn't the same thing said about the Tiger II? It came out even later and you mention nothing. And, it's the IS-2, not the IS-1.
Named after Soviet Leader Joseph Stalin, was a great tank and could easily wipe out German tanks. The only reason it isn't higher is cause it was only used in the last year of WW2 and didn't see much battles.
One of the best infantry support tanks of the war, this tank was very versatile and adaptable. Had a weak gun but it's armor was hard to beat.
Wonderful tank, if a bit slow, upgraded versions were very well rounded, and th armor was amazing.
A smashing tank with good all round abilities.
What more has to be said its named after Winston Churchill
A good infantry tank amazing at its job.
The Crusader tends to get a bad rap. While it was famously unreliable, it was a decent tank overall, and was very agile, allowing it to respond quickly to situations, making it great at elastic defense. It was also an early war tank, so comparing it to late war tanks like the Tiger II or Pershing is unfair, as they were designed with superior technology available. The Crusader did a good job for what it had.
This is incorrect, the crusader 2 is not worthy of this list. Though it might have been decent for its time and easy to produce, The armor and the firepower lacked a little bit. Not to mention when compared to even Panzers and Shermans they were extremely weak. And if we compared it to the powerhouses the Centurion, IS-2, King Tiger, M26, and Panther, would have absolutely destroyed the crusader. And finally, the crusader did not have extremely sloped armor. It was a normal slope with lots of flat spots as well.
The British tanks that challenged Rommel in Africa.
It's angled armor was revolutionary for its time. This tank is probably the reason they were able to turn the tide in the east.
This should be higher up on the list. This tank is the reason why the Panther and Tiger tanks were made!
Both the Pershing and Super Pershing had superior fire power with the high velocity 90MM gun. Could take out a Panzer at 2600 yards!
Was the best US tank of WW2. crushed north korean T34s in korea and tigers in WW2. amazing gun able to take out tigers at a mile away! and good armor. multi role.
The pershing was an advanced heavy tank! why was this not on this list before!?!
This tank should be #1 or #2 on the list!
A Sherman but better. The Panther's equal. It is so awesome that Hollywood gave it its own movie. (Fury)
Was a amazing all round tank and helped set the ground for the MBT. good armor, gun, speed, and could be made easy.
The de facto most powerful tank of WWII. It's long-barrelled 122mm gun could penetrate any german tank in the front from any distance. It had 120mm front armor and was much lighter than the Tiger.
Set the ground for the MBT. could smash king tigers at thousands of yards and had good armor.
Nearly invicible in 1940 France and early desert war, remained in service against Japan to the wars end.
Amazing early war tank.
By far the best tank in weight class until the US M24 5 years later, it remained relevant with the long 50mm/70 cal to end, not to mention its TD stg 3 conversion.
The perfect example of bigger is not always better. While the 128mm was extremely effective, it was only mounted on a casemate tank destroyers (not counting the Maus of course) like the Jagdtiger of Sturer Emil because it was over 10 tons and extremely unwieldy. Plus, a tank that heavy (188 tons) would not be able to cross bridges, would constantly break down due to the laughably underpowered, with a horsepower to weight ratio worse than the Tiger I, and it had to use a special railcar to get around on the rails. While it could cross some rivers due to the snorkel system implemented, it would have been a nightmare to move around, and would most likely just get stuck in mud (horrible ground pressure, unlike the Tiger) or destroyed by allied aircraft. It would have decimated any tank it came across, but maintaining it and moving it around constantly due to Germany's constant retreats would have been impossible for the tank. Even Heinz Guderian thought it was too much, and had no ...more
It is the heaviest tank ever made in ww2 and weighting over 100 pounds. Only 2 were made out of 148 becuase Allied bombing destroyed factories. One of 2 Mauses did not had turret and ammo. Other were found by Russians and there os only 1 maus in world in Russian tank museum
Way to heavy and underpowered to ever be practical, would be destroyed by artillery and air power easily.
It's a German super tank
183 mm barrel and very thick armor is strong
Probably the closest thing to become a main battle tank at the time . It was part of the c line of tanks e.g. crusader II, III, IV. This line would later produce the first ever main battle tank, The Centurion. It has all round good stats but was introduced very late into the war so could not make a big impact. However it served all through the Korean war.
Was the best of the cruiser tanks and good all around stats.
Inspired by it's Romanian counterpart (the Maresal) this tank was very effective at close quarters ambushes, but the driver's periscope acted as a shot trap, a problem also seen on tanks like the Panther, but it was later fixed.
Very good to, bad part is that it couldn't turn its turret around, so could be shot from behind and easily blown up
Fast and powerful. Built on the dependable Sherman chasis. 17 pounder gun. Could take out the Tiger and Panther. We Americans should have built them too.
Relatively effective casemate tank destroyer, not enough were produced to have ever made an impact. Spare parts production was very limited, resulting in the tank being near useless once it broke down.