The flaw in Nazi Armor

[rhodesbe]

In Sept/Oct issue of World War II magazine, there is an excellent article contrasting armor used by major belligerents in the War.

Anecdotally, everyone assumes that German armor was vastly superior to anything fighting against it. And this is mostly true. The Germans produced armor in 1943 that rivaled the combat effectiveness of many models produced elsewhere in 1960. However, having great designs does not guarantee you the best force. Key stats from the article:

Total Tank Production, 1940 - 1945
USA: 91,197
Russia: 98,600
Germany: 46,403

Cost per Tank (1943)
USA: $33,500
Russia: $50,000
Germany: $320,000

Steel Production (1943)
USA: 755 Million tons
Russia: 9.5 Million tons
Germany: 29.5 Million tons
(We fed the Russians several hundred million tons in Lend-Lease.)

Here's a snapshot diagnosis of the difference between a Kraut and Soviet Armor Factory:

 

[Junior Bonner]

Gee whiz! That steel production was way down there for the Germans. Considering all that territory they overran.

 

[Grindstone]

A lot of the problems with German tanks, production issues aside, were also reliability. The popular opinion was how great the Tiger was (not to mention the King Tiger) but often forgot was how unreliable they were to operate. Breakdowns were extremely common.

But the Panther was probably the most superior tank in the world at the end of the war.

 

[rhodesbe]

I was shocked that an M4 Sherman cost 1/10th of a Tiger 1 or Panzer III.

 

[dennishoddy]

The king tiger was an impressive tank for its day, but it was limited in its use because it was too wide and too heavy to cross most bridges or travel down residential areas.

 

[Grindstone]

I was shocked that an M4 Sherman cost 1/10th of a Tiger 1 or Panzer III.

The American manufacturing process was the greatest in the world. You may recall we built Liberty ships in under a week at a time. Automobile manufacturers were quickly converted to building tanks and churned them out like new sedans. Nearly all of the raw materials were obtained and processed internally. Our manufacturing centers were in no threat of bombing. Civilian goods manufacturing was severely curtailed to shift over to the war effort.

 

[Junior Bonner]

A lot of the problems with German tanks, production issues aside, were also reliability. The popular opinion was how great the Tiger was (not to mention the King Tiger) but often forgot was how unreliable they were to operate. Breakdowns were extremely common.

But the Panther was probably the most superior tank in the world at the end of the war.

Tiger crews had to break track for RR transport, had special tracks for that. When they arrived the crews had to put the wide tracks back on.

 

[tntrex]

Of course America was a manufacturing mofo. We were untouched by the previous war just a few yrs before. I still recall my grandfathers brother telling the stories of his time being chased all over Africa by the Germans. They just kept running away from the nazi. He said the German lost because of fuel and only fuel. And there tank were superior.

 

[TerryMiller]

While I'm far from an expert on these things, I've watched enough History Channel and Military Channel stuff to hear that the Nazi tanks were superior in weaponry, armor, and in precision of the mechanism. However, it was that precision that led to problems. It might be hard to find a proper maintenance facility in the middle of a war, thus harder to keep things running.

 

[Billybob]

I'd always heard Shermans were called coffins because of their thin armor and that their guns were ineffective but that they were more reliable. And the fuel issue combined with the fact that we had more of them and men to lose than the Germans did allowed us to overcome them.