Sign in to follow this  
RedFoxFour

Cost of German tanks vs other nations

Recommended Posts

RedFoxFour    1,798

image.jpg

 

Makes you speculate how much better off would Germany have been if they just kept up (and stepped up) Pz IV production rather than route efforts into Tigers and Panthers.

 

Pz IV later models with improved armament, armor and engines were more than capable of engaging Allied and Soviet tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gameguru09    136

Germany was honestly loved in 1939 when they got the allies involved in a war. I despise the millions of forum threads on the internet about how Nazi Germany coulda woulda shoulda won but I think this does generate an interesting discussion. Germany's largest problem is a totally backwards industrial base. They had the manpower and resources to rival America's industrial base but due to the fact that their production was only a few steps up from feudal this isn't likely to change before Germany suffers a massive economic failure due to mass spending from Hitler.

 

I digress though.

 

The simple fact is that Germany is never going to be able to meet the Allies tank for tank. BUT, building an expensive as love tank like the tiger 1 and 2 that only works if its in the mood too and you have spare parts that HAVEN'T been bombed by some miracle is counter intuitive to the problem at hand.

 

So let's talk about the Pz IV. Arguable a contender for best German tank (right there with the stug) it was a direct replacement in theory for the pz III (Which was horribly, hilariously, useless against the M4) but in actuality served to partially replace it as Germany didn't have the industry to totally upgrade. Early models of the Pz IV were reliable in comparison to other German tanks. Due to Germany's fetish for complications it had about a billion and one different models that each served a different role. It was armed with a 7.5 cm gun that was able to pen an M4's frontal armor within 800 meters (on the flip side, the M4 was able to pen the Pz 4 from father away, but as most tank combat took place within 500 meters its sort of a moot point.) Later variants increased the weight of the tank and the added stress on the engine and final drive, compounded that the poor chassis of the pz 4 was really being pushed farther than it should have been sunk its reliability to just being a little bit better than that of the panther.

 

In conclusion, I don't think increasing pz 4 production would have helped, it didn't preform as well as American armor at infantry support and anti tank operations and needed to be replaced far sooner than it actually was.

 

The panther is not the tank to increase production of, well, sort of. The original design of the panther was about 30 tons and was really similar to the t-34. If Germany had stayed in that realm of design philosophy and didn't try to make it a glorified Heavy tank they would have done a lot better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedFoxFour    1,798

Point about the Pz IV is that it was capable of being upgraded without significant changes to it's original design since the engine was capable of running the tank smoothly despite upgrading the armor thickness to 80mm and upgunning it to a reliable gun like the 7.5cm KwK 40 L48 (same one used in the StuG III). The chassis was also the basis for the JgPz IV.

 

Staying with a proven design and streamlining the industry to mass produce it rather than taking significant parts of the industry and shifting it towards newer and more complex designs would have allowed them to produce much larger numbers.

 

The americans pretty much went assembly-line style on their tank production much in the same manner as the mass production of automobiles. This allowed them to roll out huge numbers of tanks compared to Germans. Same with the Soviets and their mass production of a core design in the T-34/76,

 

Also if you look at the cost.

 

Tiger I = 1347 units * 120 000 = 161 640 000 in cost.

Tiger II = 492 units * 320 000 = 157 440 000 in cost.

 

If you convert that cost into how many StuG, Pz IV or Panther you could produce instead you get:

 

Tiger I = 4898 StuGs // 3514 Pz IV // 2694 Panther

Tiger II = 4771 StuGs // 3423 Pz IV // 2624 Panther

 

Which means if they focused on Pz IV they could have had 3514 + 3423 = 6937 extra Pz IV ontop of the 8800 they actually did produce.

 

And that is just looking at the cost. What isn't mentioned is the production time, which most likely is much shorter per tank than the Tiger I and Tiger II. Which means they could most likely have produced even greater numbers in the same amount of time (granted that would increase the cost, but still).

 

After all, towards the end of the War it was all about numbers, and the Germans had too few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
killer553    500
On 16. 3. 2017 at 9:07 AM, RedFoxFour said:

Point about the Pz IV is that it was capable of being upgraded without significant changes to it's original design since the engine was capable of running the tank smoothly despite upgrading the armor thickness to 80mm and upgunning it to a reliable gun like the 7.5cm KwK 40 L48 (same one used in the StuG III). The chassis was also the basis for the JgPz IV.

 

Staying with a proven design and streamlining the industry to mass produce it rather than taking significant parts of the industry and shifting it towards newer and more complex designs would have allowed them to produce much larger numbers.

 

The americans pretty much went assembly-line style on their tank production much in the same manner as the mass production of automobiles. This allowed them to roll out huge numbers of tanks compared to Germans. Same with the Soviets and their mass production of a core design in the T-34/76,

 

Also if you look at the cost.

 

Tiger I = 1347 units * 120 000 = 161 640 000 in cost.

Tiger II = 492 units * 320 000 = 157 440 000 in cost.

 

If you convert that cost into how many StuG, Pz IV or Panther you could produce instead you get:

 

Tiger I = 4898 StuGs // 3514 Pz IV // 2694 Panther

Tiger II = 4771 StuGs // 3423 Pz IV // 2624 Panther

 

Which means if they focused on Pz IV they could have had 3514 + 3423 = 6937 extra Pz IV ontop of the 8800 they actually did produce.

 

And that is just looking at the cost. What isn't mentioned is the production time, which most likely is much shorter per tank than the Tiger I and Tiger II. Which means they could most likely have produced even greater numbers in the same amount of time (granted that would increase the cost, but still).

 

After all, towards the end of the War it was all about numbers, and the Germans had too few.

 

There was a one problem for the nazis called US Air force.Destroying factories and refineries resulted in that materials whitch were nazi vehicles and weapons made of were less quality since 1942 and soon nazi germany started running out of the fuel,whitch resulted in huge attacks on Soviet union because they needed to get to their reserves.

 

Actually US could still build monster tanks too.Project Pershing began in 1942,but was cancelled and revived in 1944 because of Tiger IIs and Panthers.If it wouldnt stop.Who knows what a tanks would come out of the factories.

Edited

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BrandonSolo10    3,555
8 hours ago, killer553 said:

 

There was a one problem for the nazis called US Air force.Destroying factories and refineries resulted in that materials whitch were nazi vehicles and weapons made of were less quality since 1942 and soon nazi germany started running out of the fuel,whitch resulted in huge attacks on Soviet union because they needed to get to their reserves.

 

Actually US could still build monster tanks too.Project Pershing began in 1942,but was cancelled and revived in 1944 because of Tiger IIs and Panthers.If it wouldnt stop.Who knows what a tanks would come out of the factories.

 

The US delayed the Pershing's production due to their doctrine, which called for fast tank destroyers (and the classic dual-purpose Sherman) instead of slow, heavily armored heavy tanks...and even then, the Pershing was literally a glorified medium tank.

 

The American boner for light, fast, but potent vehicles was also partly the cause why they still believed in the light tank concept until the Korean War when other nations had already given up on light tanks midway through war.

 

Also, "Nazi vehicles"...it's German vehicles you peanut.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RZ2000    1,025
On 2017-03-16 at 4:07 AM, RedFoxFour said:

Point about the Pz IV is that it was capable of being upgraded without significant changes to it's original design since the engine was capable of running the tank smoothly despite upgrading the armor thickness to 80mm and upgunning it to a reliable gun like the 7.5cm KwK 40 L48 (same one used in the StuG III). The chassis was also the basis for the JgPz IV.

 

Staying with a proven design and streamlining the industry to mass produce it rather than taking significant parts of the industry and shifting it towards newer and more complex designs would have allowed them to produce much larger numbers.

 

The americans pretty much went assembly-line style on their tank production much in the same manner as the mass production of automobiles. This allowed them to roll out huge numbers of tanks compared to Germans. Same with the Soviets and their mass production of a core design in the T-34/76,

 

Also if you look at the cost.

 

Tiger I = 1347 units * 120 000 = 161 640 000 in cost.

Tiger II = 492 units * 320 000 = 157 440 000 in cost.

 

If you convert that cost into how many StuG, Pz IV or Panther you could produce instead you get:

 

Tiger I = 4898 StuGs // 3514 Pz IV // 2694 Panther

Tiger II = 4771 StuGs // 3423 Pz IV // 2624 Panther

 

Which means if they focused on Pz IV they could have had 3514 + 3423 = 6937 extra Pz IV ontop of the 8800 they actually did produce.

 

And that is just looking at the cost. What isn't mentioned is the production time, which most likely is much shorter per tank than the Tiger I and Tiger II. Which means they could most likely have produced even greater numbers in the same amount of time (granted that would increase the cost, but still).

 

After all, towards the end of the War it was all about numbers, and the Germans had too few.

A panzer 4 with an L/70 gun and sloped armor would be a match for any tank realistically. Maybe also a TD using tiger hull that used a 105mm gun for killing bigger tanks. Also E25 TD for fast scouting and mobile firepower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eXtraodrinary    340

Panzer 4 is heavily in dissadvantage against other tanks. Tiger is definitely best tank of ww2. Mechanical problems are just myths, because every tank had to breakdown. Its just that problems on German tanks were more complex to repair than problems on sherman. 

So for example even if germany had 10000000 tanks, they would not have manpower to have most of them in use. They had to rely on stronger tanks, that can fight 1 vs 5. Which they did create. 

Im not gonna go deeper like those people "GERMANY COULD HAVE WON WAR IF THEY DID THIS, DID NOT DO THIS ETC" but germany winning war is very realistic scenario. Victory was in their grasp until some dude got crazy and start making strategic errors thinking that everything german is invunerable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cinko    78

What use of those extra tanks if they didnt have fuel to run them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilroy115    192
29 minutes ago, cinko said:

What use of those extra tanks if they didnt have fuel to run them?

 

The point wouldn't so much be having the fuel to do advances and such. Well, maybe at the first of the war they could have. But later on it was more all about defending the Reich. It's the possibility that if Germany had more tanks to put out on the field, to better disperse along their fronts. Maybe then they could've bloodied the Allies enough, either through defending and causing massive casualties, or by a sudden assault like the Ardennes offensive, that they could've either convinced the allies to make peace and or could have gotten a better peace settlement that would allow them to keep some of the territory they captured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QuarX    312

 

2 hours ago, Kilroy115 said:

 

Maybe then they could've bloodied the Allies enough, either through defending and causing massive casualties, or by a sudden assault like the Ardennes offensive, that they could've either convinced the allies to make peace and or could have gotten a better peace settlement that would allow them to keep some of the territory they captured.

 

What do some people do not understand on Unconditional surrender?! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconditional_surrender

Another 3 month of War in Europe and the German city of Frankfurt would have been the first city destroyed by a Atomic bomb.

The Germans were pretty lucky to quit that madness just in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilroy115    192
7 minutes ago, QuarX said:

 

 

What do some people do not understand on Unconditional surrender?! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconditional_surrender

Another 3 month of War in Europe and the German city of Frankfurt would have been the first city destroyed by a Atomic bomb.

The Germans were pretty lucky to quit that madness just in time.

 

I do understand unconditional surrender. I know the Allies would not and did not stop until Germany completely surrendered. Don't take me for someone who does all of this wild nonsense.

 

I am looking at it from a possible perspective of the people at the time, not speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QuarX    312

Those Germans had no perspective at that time:/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RZ2000    1,025
7 minutes ago, Nick3862 said:

Irrc, the tiger 2 took 300+ days to make.

And ran for 2 minutes with 100 liters of fuel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AfonsoQQ    3,003

They might have been expensive and unreliable, but one thing is sure, in terms of rough stats theyr damn good.

 

rZMmqEH.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RZ2000    1,025
24 minutes ago, AfonsoQQ said:

They might have been expensive and unreliable, but one thing is sure, in terms of rough stats theyr damn good.

 

rZMmqEH.jpg

Unfortunately raw stats don't matter. That's why Jagdtiger didn't rule the world :( It made king tigers look weak! And no American tank could say the same!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AfonsoQQ    3,003
Just now, RZ2000 said:

Unfortunately raw stats don't matter. That's why Jagdtiger didn't rule the world :( It made king tigers look weak! And no American tank could say the same!

Raw stats do matter in videogames hehe

200_s.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[5150]Rasputin    297

The Allied bombing campaign of the Ruhr and all of Germany's other industrial/factory centers ensured Germany was doomed the minute the U.S. entered the war.  Add to that, the Allied High Command's change in doctrine which allowed Allied bombers to indiscriminately bomb all things within Germany to include its population centers.

 

There simply is no way in Hades Germany would have ever won a war against the combined efforts of England, Canada, France, United States, Russia and every other Allied nation to boot.

 

World versus One = One losing.

 

Post-war thoughts, theories, and opinions are nothing more than conjecture at this point.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BrandonSolo10    3,555
2 minutes ago, [5150]Rasputin said:

The Allied bombing campaign of the Ruhr and all of Germany's other industrial/factory centers ensured Germany was doomed the minute the U.S. entered the war.  Add to that, the Allied High Command's change in doctrine which allowed Allied bombers to indiscriminately bomb all things within Germany to include its population centers.

 

There simply is no way in Hades Germany would have ever won a war against the combined efforts of England, Canada, France, United States, Russia and every other Allied nation to boot.

 

World versus One = One losing.

 

Post-war thoughts, theories, and opinions are nothing more than conjecture at this point.

 

 

 

I personally think the death warrant was signed when Germany decided to act tough and declare war on the US even though it had no reason to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a free game account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this