Top 10 Tanks of All Time

[BaneBlade]

The Nato tests use picked crews and picked vehicles so the results do not necessarily reflect the overall superiority of one army or tank over another one. You'll have to look at the entire record for that. As for Janes, they have their own agenda they pursue and they are not always unbiased in their reporting.

All in all, a pretty good list though. Keep in mind though that the "Best" tank in the world is just a piece of junk without a well trained crew and a tested doctrine of employment and that with the latter two a lesser vehicle may often best a better one.

AFAIK the LEO 2 has won every test and combat evaluation done by westerners, not only the "head on test" I mentioned but also in things like overall capability(downtime, repairtime, fuelconsumption and many other factors) etc. There is a reason why it's an export super seller.

 

[deo]

I belive the reason is that Germany dosnt want to sell those tanks...

 

[Zardnaar]

Leo 2 vs Abrams is a bit tricky as the Leo hasn't really seen any combat. The M1 is one of the safest tanks in the world and has seen action around the world. I think the yanks have lost around 11 in Iraq but 9-10 of them were recovered and repaired. The only Soviet tank that really belongs on that list is the T-34 and the list didn't even include the Panther- AKA the best tank of WW2. People are over critical of its mechanical problems as virtually every WW2 tank wasn't that reliable and that tank achieved a 5 to 1 kill ratio.

Leo 2 may be a good tank but it won't achieve alot with the Germans sitting around whining about politics and the economy. Go invade a country and see how it performs. I recommend France- they'll probably surrender quick enough so it may not be a fair test though.

 

[CruddyLeper]

now, imo, both the mk4 and a7v were bunk. each was prone to mechanical failure. and it wasn't until the Brits introduced the wheel cairrage on the rear that they were able to truly traverse the pock-marked battlefields. iirc, this wasn't part of the 1st mk4's but they were later installed.

Wrong way around. The rear carriage was part of the original mark 1 but later removed because it was found to make no difference at all to the cross country handling.

WW1 tanks, nothing to write home about.

 

[Ace]

Wrong way around. The rear carriage was part of the original mark 1 but later removed because it was found to make no difference at all to the cross country handling.

WW1 tanks, nothing to write home about.

Technically correct, but missing the point. At the point in time they were used, they were war winners. Historically, the real "value" of the WW1 tanks is that they "showed the way" for the ones that came after.

 

[Spartan117]

obviously the sherman tank

 

[CruddyLeper]

Technically correct, but missing the point. At the point in time they were used, they were war winners. Historically, the real "value" of the WW1 tanks is that they "showed the way" for the ones that came after.

Well, I disagree. A couple were used on the Somme, and although they had a big impact on morale, they had virtually no impact on the battle.

Cambrai, they helped achieve the first stage objectives, but the Germans recaptured 90% of the lost ground within days. Without tanks.

German use of infiltration squads, equipped with early SMGs, pistols and grenades had much more impact on the state of the front line.

The killer tech was air power. Once the Allies had air superiority, there was little the Germans could do to hold ground.

 

[Ace]

Well, I disagree. A couple were used on the Somme, and although they had a big impact on morale, they had virtually no impact on the battle.

Cambrai, they helped achieve the first stage objectives, but the Germans recaptured 90% of the lost ground within days. Without tanks.

German use of infiltration squads, equipped with early SMGs, pistols and grenades had much more impact on the state of the front line.

The killer tech was air power. Once the Allies had air superiority, there was little the Germans could do to hold ground.

The first tanks were used too early at the Somme, they were not available in sufficient numbers. Cambrai rocked the German Army to its core. They tried everything to protect the infrantry from tank attack. The use of Stosstruppen was very successful, but it ruined the German Army. To build the Stosstruppen units, they stripped the best men out of the line infrantry divisions, creating a few elite units and leaving the rest of the divisions much weaker. This led directly to the German Army collapse in Oct/Nov 1918.

The Allies never had air superiority over the lines in WWI. Air power did not become a "killer tech" until WWII. The machines available in the first war were not advanced enough to effect the ground war to any real extent.

 

[scipian]

Merkava is 9th? Guess I've heard overzealous reports of its ability.

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

I'm non-technical and can't debate the virtues of the various models. But what about the elephant? big and slow, but a hell of a kick

 

[Adler17]

The Elephant was a tank destroyer. In this task it was outstanding but it lacked a MG for self defense.

Adler

 

[CruddyLeper]

The Allies never had air superiority over the lines in WWI. Air power did not become a "killer tech" until WWII. The machines available in the first war were not advanced enough to effect the ground war to any real extent.

Disagree. Once the Western Allies had run out of planes to shoot down they were tasked to strafe enemy lines.

Hell, they even built a plane just for trench strafing - the Dolphin.

Try reading some pilot accounts for the time, should set you straight.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Spoiler :

Tiger

Can you replace that with a real picture? It now only shows the "fortune city" logo.

Spoiler :

T34

I know the т-34 was the best.

 

[Verbose]

I thought I'd post a pic of the Renault FT-17 — produced in greater numbers than any other WWI tank (and France produced more tanks than the other combatants put together).

At first I thought I'd post a nice triptych of French, US and German troops all using it.

But then I came across the pic below, which goes to the question how long the FT-17 saw service?

This photo was taken near Kabul in 1988 according to its source (which is the Brazilian army's tank corps, for some reason).

 

[privatehudson]

There's a picture in one of the Osprey books somewhere of an Afghan fighter proudly displaying his Martini Henry rifle. Yup that's right, the one best remembered om the film Zulu. Apparently the Afghans thought very highly of it because its large calibre (.451 inch) could stop anything... provided you hit it.

 

[jimbob27]

I think the Jagdpanzer 38t Hetzer deserves a place in the top 10. It was a tank destroyer, and supposedly the most desireable and popular vehicle amongst german tank crews in ww2.

The renault FT-17 should be there too, because it was by far the best tank of ww1.

 

[El Justo]

very nice pic there Verbose. a picture can surely say a thousands words!

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

King Tiger Tank? That huge tank was a monster, too bad only a few were made

The Konigstiger had too many mechanical issues to be considered a great. I grant your it was armed and armored to the gills, but the Germans choice of chassis to mount it on was stupid. They should have designed a whole new chassis to better sustain the rigors that the Konigstiger would have put on it. But I can see that there were time constraints involved.

Now my opinion, I think that the Panzer V (Panther) a better piece of armor than the T-34. Both the T-34/76 and the T-34/85.

El J: Which version of the T-34 were you referring to?

Also, I would replace the Sherman with, perhaps, the M-26 Pershing.

 

[El Justo]

El J: Which version of the T-34 were you referring to?

the program did not get into specifics but i assume that it was the first incarnations of the t34 w/ the size, prodcution rate, and the sloped armor.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

the program did not get into specifics but i assume that it was the first incarnations of the t34 w/ the size, prodcution rate, and the sloped armor.

That would be the T-34/76 (describing the 76mm main gun). The T-34/85 came out later (I think you can draw the conclusion as to the size of the main gun).

Could it have been this site: http://www.2worldwar2.com/t-34-tank.htm