Also, turret traverse speed was linked to engine RPM, taking anywhere from 60 to 15 seconds to complete a full rotation.The plain fact is that the T-34/85 was a winner…overall it was better than the German tanks it faced even though the kill ratio was very much in favor of German armor. An early-war Panzer IV would stand no chance against a T-34 in any situation, due to it’s lack of a weapon which can penetrate the T-34’s armour. Iv’e talked to ww2 vets. so it was important to have a gun able to destroy enemy tanks. What is remarkable is that even a mediocre tabk like the Sherman could best the T-34.Veritas – I think the points you have made are a little outdated and in some cases represent beliefs with no basis. Er wurde von 1940 bis 1958 gebaut und von der Roten Armee hauptsächlich im Deutsch-Sowjetischen Krieg eingesetzt. But we can go back and forth, but the kill numbers of the Germans over the Sherman (and T-34 for that matter) speak louder than all the theory you read about. This never happened to the allies in North Africa r Normandy, right?Panther engine maintence was not difficult compared to other tanks and the Germans made a fetish about this aspect of tank design. Whether they could have made a better final drive in a different reality is not what I care to discuss. “we are comparing 2 tanks, not how they were used in the desperate situation germany was in in 44-45.” I don’t even understand this. H vs. T-34 The G variant of the Pz. Hitler was a dangerous leader but he was a poor general and the day he took full control of the military is the day he started to lose the war. cos at 1km range and beyond the panther would have destroyed it easily.yes i understand that the role of tanks is not always to fight other tanks, but youre like saying my honda civic can do more thing than my ferrari on a daily use for my family, i dont care if the ferrari can go 3 times faster. But we’re done. A tanks primary duty in WWII was to blow stuff up and the M4 did it well Many think Tigers and Panthers represent the best tank you could want in a war but they represented a logistic nightmare and in many ways plain did not work well (Panther.) if you want to compare a tank vs another tank, which this article is about, then you gotta admit that the t3485 alone vs a lone panther would get destroyed even if the t3485 had the first shot, unless ambushing and attacking to flank it. The general consensus was this tank was not a good one.You keep bringing up the issue of American this, American that. Good to see your reply here, I like a good discussion on this topic. ….Excellent article except for the author’s not too subtle argument that the T-34 was more reliable than the Panther. why do you think the russian put a 85mm gun on their t34?

The mechanics were so bad that the T-34 often could not be driven at even half of its rated speed for fear of overheating. One criticism that might be made of the Germans was this constant upgrading slowed production and made the same model less than uniform.Your final comment defies reason. The sherman tank was a relatively good tank and it was on par with the PzIV or the t-34s, they all had their strengths and weaknesses.GBE – The notion that tanks were using primarily HE comes from Zaloga who researched the point with the various forces of the war. You do point out the issue of frequent repairs for the Panther but you make it sound somewhat easier then it was. The gun was good at shooting HE, the main work of a tank in WWII. I think you have come to believe many of the myths about armored warfare without researching it yourself. The gunner, who had only a monocular site (depending on model) had little awareness of the battlefield and little ability to acquire a target when ordered by his commander. Given Soviet numerical superiority, this tended to nullify the advantages that the Panther had as a tank to fight in. This situation was made worse by the lack of an effective heating system, which forced crews to wear padded overcoats inside the tank. The Germans had a kill rate varying from 4 to 1 to 12 and 13 to 1, (depending on what year of the war and whether or not they were regular German units or SS units) so you can say all you want in criticizing German armor. its hard to flank an enemy when we are outnumbered on all fronts.if you do not want to compare tank vs tank, it is pointless to compare anything because, wars are won with logistics, men and industrial outputs and to a certain extent the allies we have.the tank you would want is irrelevant because, if you have only rookies to drive them they wont perform. Loaders were equally under-trained, often having had no more than a day’s basic instruction in how to handle ammunition and operate the breech.