Sherman vs Panther

Curly1 · 11-29-2016, 04:27 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-cFP4S7bc4

rolandtg · 11-29-2016, 11:37 PM

Imho, the Panther was possibly the best medium tank of the war.
(Setting aside the T34, which was certainly superior in numbers.)
Fortunately Germany didn't have the time or resources to work out the bugs or produce that many.
The Sherman was always mediocre at best however it was easier to repair and we cranked 'em out by the thousands.

spacecoast · 11-30-2016, 09:48 AM

The Panther definitely appears to have had a superior tread design better adapted to climbing obstacles.

kurusu · 11-30-2016, 03:36 PM

What the Panther had was:

Very experienced crews (while they lasted).
An excellent main gun.
Superlative sighting system
Well designed armour (copied from the Soviet T34).
Underpowered (for it's weight) and fuel guzzling engine.
Fragile gears.
A finicky in extreme conditions (think Russian winter) suspension system.
Low production and poor logistic for the task they had ahead.
Was rushed into action before perfectioned.

Curly1 · 12-04-2016, 01:27 PM

Here is the full Swedish vid of the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmXEly5_u38

conehammer · 12-11-2016, 07:07 PM

The Panther is acknowledged as overly complex. The Germans didn't have the time or the
metallurgy at the time to make the transmission and final drive more robust. Analysis has
shown that the Panther's final drive would fail after 1/2 hour at full power.

The Panther's Maybach engine ( as was some of the Shermans with radial engine) started life
as an aircraft engine and really wasn't appropriate for the task but they made it work.

Details like 2 speed cooling fans for the engine weren't really necessary. But consider the differences between American and German supply lines. When a German tank was damaged they could always ship it to a rear area or even the factory for rebuilding, the Allies, especially the Americans didn't have those sort of facilities available so we needed to field tanks that required no much more than common mechanical skills to maintain.

On top of everything else tanks weren't a priority for American during the inter-war period as they were for Germany. We are lucky that the Germans didn't focus on on their most effective designs to the exclusion of everything else; with the later more efficient designs sporting improved infra red night sights we could have had a tough time.

The Panther for me makes for a great modelling subject; I have 8 variants my 1/10 scale collection.

Jerry

11-29-2016, 04:27 PM	#1
Curly1 User Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Upstate New York Posts: 1,228 Thanks: 111 Thanked 702 Times in 364 Posts	Sherman vs Panther https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-cFP4S7bc4 __________________ Laugh hard and often. Gary

11-30-2016, 09:48 AM	#3
spacecoast User Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: FL and PA Posts: 332 Thanks: 276 Thanked 243 Times in 109 Posts	The Panther definitely appears to have had a superior tread design better adapted to climbing obstacles. __________________ My avatars are the Bulgarian word for "Fire", as seen on my 1900, 1906 and 1908 Bulgarian Contract DWM Lugers. Looking for a DWM Commercial side plate #95

12-04-2016, 01:27 PM	#5
Curly1 User Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Upstate New York Posts: 1,228 Thanks: 111 Thanked 702 Times in 364 Posts	Here is the full Swedish vid of the test. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmXEly5_u38 __________________ Laugh hard and often. Gary

11-29-2016, 11:37 PM	#2
rolandtg User Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Texas Hill Country Posts: 471 Thanks: 361 Thanked 255 Times in 111 Posts	Imho, the Panther was possibly the best medium tank of the war. (Setting aside the T34, which was certainly superior in numbers.) Fortunately Germany didn't have the time or resources to work out the bugs or produce that many. The Sherman was always mediocre at best however it was easier to repair and we cranked 'em out by the thousands.

11-30-2016, 03:36 PM	#4
kurusu User Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 1,225 Thanks: 2,679 Thanked 929 Times in 509 Posts	What the Panther had was: Very experienced crews (while they lasted). An excellent main gun. Superlative sighting system Well designed armour (copied from the Soviet T34). Underpowered (for it's weight) and fuel guzzling engine. Fragile gears. A finicky in extreme conditions (think Russian winter) suspension system. Low production and poor logistic for the task they had ahead. Was rushed into action before perfectioned.

12-11-2016, 07:07 PM	#6
conehammer User Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 114 Thanks: 1 Thanked 55 Times in 21 Posts	The Panther is acknowledged as overly complex. The Germans didn't have the time or the metallurgy at the time to make the transmission and final drive more robust. Analysis has shown that the Panther's final drive would fail after 1/2 hour at full power. The Panther's Maybach engine ( as was some of the Shermans with radial engine) started life as an aircraft engine and really wasn't appropriate for the task but they made it work. Details like 2 speed cooling fans for the engine weren't really necessary. But consider the differences between American and German supply lines. When a German tank was damaged they could always ship it to a rear area or even the factory for rebuilding, the Allies, especially the Americans didn't have those sort of facilities available so we needed to field tanks that required no much more than common mechanical skills to maintain. On top of everything else tanks weren't a priority for American during the inter-war period as they were for Germany. We are lucky that the Germans didn't focus on on their most effective designs to the exclusion of everything else; with the later more efficient designs sporting improved infra red night sights we could have had a tough time. The Panther for me makes for a great modelling subject; I have 8 variants my 1/10 scale collection. Jerry