Did the T-34 Tank Win WW2?

[@Minute_Sniper]

A small bonus: between the t-34 models, there was a few t-34-57 equipped with a 57 mm high-velocity gun. Also, another obscure t-34 is the t34-100 with the 100mm gun

[@MarekUtd]

T-34-57 was a beast!!!

[@mikaneous1140]

War Thunder player i presume.

[@1nkyarts]

funniest part of the prototype t-34-100 was that the gun was way to powerful for the turret, and the original had its turret ring break and the whole turret itself break off from the hull just by firing it once.

[@FLJBeliever1776]

I had heard the T-34-57 predated the T-34-76 and was seen early on. But there were only so many built and their losses were so severe that the T-34-76 quickly became the sole T-34 in production (aside from variants and special models). Then came the T-34-85. The Soviets also built the T-44. A successor to the T-34, I believe it also had a 100mm gun due to being larger.

[@heiwanushimakazawa3574]

I wonder how fast a kammunist runs from a German tank

[@HybridPhage]

The t 34 also used a wedge to beat pins back into the tank treads, was an easier way to mass produce them quickly, especially since they didn't use lock pins.

[@HybridPhage]

@orange and lemon 🅥 no body cares bot

[@WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot3267]

And they still got stuck in mud a lot,

[@HybridPhage]

​​​@@WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot3267 true, during the battles of kursk, i heard they would burry the t 34s under ground, you would only see the turrent sticking out, this was a way to reduce the chances of getting the engine hit (over all, artillery would hit the turrent, but it wouldn't always disable the t 34.)

[@Church449]

@@HybridPhage I wouldn't say buried but had deep enough trenches or bunkers. This allows for a "Hull Down" cover protecting the lower fighting compartment and an overall smaller profile if concealed enough.

[@c.9900]

I didn't know that.

[@BucketandOnly]

It's pretty cool that you drew the tanks in 3d often and realistically. I really appreciate the hard work. Keep it up

[@boom350ph]

i mean they have world of tanks for a reference to make it more realistic

[@replynotificationsdisabled]

It's a program bro

[@sam8404]

@@replynotificationsdisabled oh yeah they just hit a key and the program draws and animates an entire video for them lol

[@shadow-monger5189]

Jeez, imagine how scary that would be, riding on a tank with four to eight other guys after the sun had gone down, watching bullets and missiles fly around you, and it only takes one good shot to end your life. It must have been terrifying.

[@thecommunistdoggo1008]

That kind of missile wasn't a thing back then

[@johnjimmy8385]

@@thecommunistdoggo1008 by missiles he meant the ones from the katyusha launchers

[@thecommunistdoggo1008]

@@johnjimmy8385 Those are not missiles, those are unguided rockets

[@lakritz1987]

@The Communist does not matter how it’s called. He has a point either way

[@ufoslattt9582]

@@thecommunistdoggo1008 what about v1 rocket?

[@TheBudgetGunCollector]

I think most tanks were outdated by the halfway point, even the Sherman required many updates

[@generalfluffyproto]

The final sherman update resulted in the M50 Super Sherman

[@drvonschwartz]

@@generalfluffyproto A beautiful tank to be sure.

[@slavicemperor8279]

Funny how T-34 and Sherman served all the way up until late 50s and 60s while Panther got scrapped and phased out of service. It served 1 or 2 years in French army, but that's it. T-34 and Sherman were both great designs for their specific roles.

[@lasskinn474]

well it and some other tanks weren't great - but having them could be great in many encounters never the less. a lot of tank engagements were not against other tanks back then, but against machine gun posts, support for infantry and such. (edit: especially post war. tanks are great if your opposition is some riffraff rebels or smaller countries who have absolutely none and didn't have any anti tank weaponry either)

[@kkrummelrhs]

@@slavicemperor8279 The Panther would've been a nightmare to try to continue post 1945. Interestingly enough, a few dozen STUG III assault guns were still being used by the Syrians in 1967 until they broke down or were knocked out.

[@BringMoisture]

To me the T-34 was one of those tanks that kept Russia in the War, same story with the M4 Sherman there were that many produced

[@tavernburner3066]

Nope. Citation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fn2xgHR4pKp_eJI

[@grievetan]

Yep. Allied strategy for winning in WW2 was to outproduce the enemy

[@warbrain1053]

@@grievetan it was a total war

[@lokisg3]

At least the Soviet complain about the Sherman give to them, most T-34 crew did not complain because they end up dead.

[@Shenaniganator101]

@@grievetan no it wasnt think about what you just said

[@Naramsit]

I think The Chieftain said it best "The enemy of perfect is good enough, and good enough is already perfect'

[@Mortablunt]

Somebody tell laser pig.

[@V-S7909]

Fun fact: Overall, T-34 tanks usually had malfunction but most of tanks were already destroyed before being broken down

[@allangibson2408]

70% of T-34’s broke down within the first 200km driven from the factory in 1943. That dropped to 10% by late 1944…

[@jidk6565]

@@allangibson2408 ....ehhhh From what I've read they started bringing spare parts along with them And the logistics lines got better and longer So driving was done less, shipping was done more That decrees is less from in an increase in quality But an excess of spair parts (which they didn't have earlier on) And the lengthening of the supply lines, making trains the only way to move them, meaning extending the train lines to the factories It's pretty interesting Most of the surviving ww2 t-34s ended up in Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese service And thanks to the Korean and Vietnam wars we got to see how shoddily made even late war variants where

[@ashfox7498]

@@jidk6565 There was another video I saw that talked about a study done on a post war made tank from the late 40s; it was unreliable and the metallurgy in the armor was incredibly poor. The T34 was a piece of junk, but the Soviets couldn't really do better and it was good enough at least.

[@xfy123]

@@ashfox7498 the CIA reports state that the t34 armor was of a higher hardness then us armor. Main "defect" that the report state is about the welds not being up to us standard.

[@heiwanushimakazawa3574]

The Communists made terrible tanks to crush the German number Thanks to the USA and Ukraine, the Communists were able to win by throwing the corpses of the Germans

[@name_not_found2574]

Still one of the most iconic and most Russian tank ever in the entire history of War (IMO)

[@nickumstead]

I feel the t-72 is the most iconic Russian tank, but the t-34 is a close second

[@brennanleadbetter9708]

@Don't read profile photo I read your name

[@EldishRinger]

@@nickumstead He said in the war.

[@nickumstead]

@@EldishRinger He said “In the entire history of war”

[@АлександрМаврин-я5х]

Soviet tank

[@marseldagistani1989]

Personally I'd be scared of being a T34 Crewman, due to the low survival rate, horrendous spalling problem, the high chances that it might have came out of Factory 183. Along with the fact that the Soviet Tankers gave it the nickname of Crematorium. Don't inspire much confidence in me. (Also to the Tankies before they eat me up, the T34 was a high Quality tank produced cheaply)

[@joshuajoaquin5099]

quality is not needed due of the war, i recall some T-34 didn't have primer paints and just straight out to the front, some are not even managed to do finishing touches such as grinding for excess metal and other impurities in the metal

[@xahmadx6442]

It's better for you if you are in a Sherman Fun fact The Sherman Russian crews had to guard there tanks out of fear that the t-34 crews will steel the leather seats or anything else because the Sherman is a high quality tank

[@marseldagistani1989]

@@joshuajoaquin5099 and please what was the casualty rate of your run of the mill T34? Also let's not forget the amount spent on training the crew, the fuel needed to keep the thing going, the ammunition that it needs to fire for every cheap T34 spawned from factory 183 That is double the amount that would have been better spent while I can build a high quality tank, where I have a high chance of survival, and can go to train new tank crewmen.

[@TheBudgetGunCollector]

I’d be scared to be a tank crewman at any time period for Russia

[@kaboon3489]

@@marseldagistani1989 Well, your high quality tank can be destroyed just the same, with one well placed round. Keep in mind, Red Army tankers were facing a war of anihilation, so their casualty figures kinda make sense. Besides, tankers are not often taken as prisoners either. And with all of that, T-34s were made to break down. Soviet High Command analysed and noticed that the average tank did not live more than 6 months without being destroyed, and also understood Germany would not win a war of atrition, due to the Soviet Union's incredibly large industrial output capacity (thanks to Stalin), so it just seems logical that you'd create tanks that are easier and faster to produce, and easier and faster to maintain, so what if casualty rates are high? That's to be expected.

[@ogre7699]

An iconic tank, to be sure, but definitely not the greatest there was. I still adore the look of the turret though.

[@boerekable]

This tank was a death trap, but it didn't matter at the time. It often remained long enough in tact to kill something else.

[@charlesmcgill2974]

There is a reason you don’t hear about t-34 aces

[@boerekable]

@@charlesmcgill2974 Brutal, but true.

[@arkad6329]

@@charlesmcgill2974 (in drunk Russian accent) *What you mean comrade?” *slaps side of tank* “You see ‘dis tank; ‘any of ace’s made by T-34!” *slab of armor falls off* (Whispers)“What! What do you want Artyom?! Tank aces aren’t made by how many tanks you loose?!… Suka!”

[@comradekenobi6908]

@@arkad6329 ..

[@havanadog7987]

T-34 fans when their favorite tank is instantly disassembled by a surplus Czech tank destroyer crewed by a 15 year old Austrian conscript (its ok because sloped armor or something)

[@marseldagistani1989]

Who would survive? T 34 with 45mm of sloped armor. Or the Sherman with 51mm of sloped frontal armor?

[@u.h.forum.]

Found the cope comment

[@marseldagistani1989]

@@Vtv4567 good for him. And I am surprised enough that he came out of it alive considering the cramped conditions of it, and not get hit by the spalling

[@robertbalazslorincz8218]

@@marseldagistani1989 there were more T-34s manufactured than there were Shermans though.

[@marseldagistani1989]

@@robertbalazslorincz8218 those are post war production with higher quality. And last I checked the casualty rate of Russian tanks and German Panzers was 7:1. With 44,900 T-34s destroyed

[@farmergrowth4111]

Thank you for the lesson, Lazerpig did the same. Love your content too.

[@milbruh6671]

A fellow cultured lazarpig enjoyer

[@aidanpysher2764]

Next week - Simple History: The A-10 friendly fire incident

[@Shenaniganator101]

Lazerpig did the video way better

[@bigtimegamer7776]

@@Shenaniganator101 yah becouse he knows what he is talking about unlike this youtuber

[@theemuslayer5209]

@@bigtimegamer7776 also lazerpig demolishes all the arguments of cheap, as he did provide the stuff about 1 t 34 being the same cost as a sherman or something like that

[@RyanKing00]

Short answer: absolutely not, but it contributed. Most T34s were made below spec because of wartime emergency standards.

[@livingroomtheatre174]

"Absolutely not" is an answer that came out randomly. "absolutely Yes" it did help win the ww-2 what's the doubt in that? T-34 kept on improving and till the last date of the fight it was the main strike tank supported by IS-2, SU-76, SU-85, SU-100, SU-122 and ISU-152

[@jabaited]

Bruh what? T-34 was the backbone of Soviet armor, without it, and instead going with other models,the Soviet would had lost ,either dropping even more quality or making any models more expensive at the time.

[@RyanKing00]

@@jabaited long story short, German commanders liked to use the T34 as their excuse for sucking some off. Especially the ones that wanted a new job at NATO post war. The Soviets just never bothered correcting them. But I'm more pointing at the title implying the T34 was the only reason the Allies won the war. Not calling it a horrible tank, it was well designed. There was just a few thousand other factors that lead to the fall of the German Reich.

[@NokotanFanCentral]

@@livingroomtheatre174 uncanny doubtful, 1 theater doesn't win a war. allies were already in Italy and Africa

[@ch-53esuperstallion76]

Tankie

[@Man_0f_Trenches]

In 1941, it was a good tank with solid stats. 1942 onwards it became increasingly terrible.

[@wojszach4443]

how it was good in 1941?

[@bomboclatlawg]

bro there were like 2 t34s in 1941 😭😭😭

[@wojszach4443]

@@bomboclatlawg after their massive mechanical breakdowns XD

[@AJ-tr5ml]

@@bomboclatlawg there were either 1000 or 3000 operational t34s at the start of operation barbarossa. i forget which

[@Lehr-km5be]

@@AJ-tr5ml Around 900 actually. Out of 23-24k ish tanks the soviet Union fielded at the beginning of operation Barbarossa, around 550 of them were of the KV-series, more than 900 were the T-34s and the rest of them T-26s and various variants of BT tanks.

[@kaboon3489]

It seems like people just don't understand the doctrine of the Red Army, and the ultimate strategical genius of the T-34's design, and flaws with it. Mainly, it was a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none type of vehicle. It could do pretty much whatever, had average armour and at least untill 1944, had a average gun. When it shines is how it's role was thought of by the middle of the war with Germany, the Red Army Command prepared a study, that found the average life expectancy of their tanks was around six months. So, they decided, since whatever tank we make will most certainly be reduced to a wreck abandoned by the roadside in around six months, we might aswell not make it last long enough to get to this point in more than what it's expected to, this was mostly manifested in the ease of maintenance, since it was made to break down, so it was incredibly easy and fast to repair. Saving immensily on production costs, and using the USSR's amazing industrial output, they could field (good enough) tanks pretty much everywhere alongside their spare parts, which would go on to do wonders in offensives such as Bagration. Besides, no matter how well thought out the tank you made is, it can be made to go boom just the same as a (good enough) tank can.

[@dougwillis5069]

We just don't agree woth the doctrine anymore. It just very...unrespectful of your own soldiers welfare and motivation.

[@_me___]

The tank didn’t last 6 months. If you are the driver of one you’d rather commit suicide then drive it, and in 1941-42 more where destroyed then produced. And even the Red army couldn’t afford the high losses, and it wasn’t strategically genius, it was the only thing they had. It was lacking in hard and soft factors and unlike the Sherman was extremely unreliable with terrible sights and a useless radio, extremely cramped and a Topspeed of 20kph on road, due to the transmission being horribly overstressed. The armor was also heattreated way to high, so it was so brittle it would shatter if any HE shell hit it.

[@kaboon3489]

@@dougwillis5069 Well, warfare changes as time progresses. The soviets were very pragmatic, I like to compare their idea to Grant and Sherman (the Generals), to win a war is to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion as quickly as possible. And to do that, people gotta die, it's sad but it's true.

[@Spider_aaaahhh]

@@_me___ Soviets believed in mass mobilization doctrine and rather focused more on quantity than quality to attempt to overwhelm the enemy. It's often painful, but can be effective when pulled off correctly.

[@davidfans5852]

@@_me___ true they had high losses, but i wasnt because of that tank, but because of tactic soviets used

[@nikobellic5655]

Jesus bro I don’t know why it’s called simple history cause the animation ain’t so simple anymore! Looks so good!

[@Will_CH1]

The most destroyed tank in all of history. The Russians lost 44900 T34 tanks. The Germans didn't even build that many tanks during the war.

[@ЧингачгукБольшойЗмей-д6о]

Зато русский воин освободитель защищал Родину и Отечество, а немцы убивали мирных граждан.

[@visassess8607]

​@@ЧингачгукБольшойЗмей-д6оRussians killed civilians too and they definitely weren't kind to civilians, especially German and Eastern European civilians.

[@Ian-bb7vv]

Interesting

[@noahbarton9723]

That just means the Germans had a positive KDR.

[@420inmysystem69]

@@noahbarton9723no they actually didnt it was japan that did most the lifting same with italy or egypt whichever one mussilini was

[@1977Yakko]

The thing with the T-34 is that it's sometimes a tad overhyped but that aside, it probably was the perfect tank for Red Army doctrine/tactics... as brutal and costly as that could be for Red Army soldiers. There's a reason their loses were so high and it's not just because of the enormity and brutality of the German invasion.

[@warbrain1053]

A lot were due to the fact stalin killed most of the general staff before the war. A genius idea, i agree

[@The_last_prime]

honestly t-34/85 is a crudely produced tank and isnt a nice sight to see but it is fairly decent it could drive quite fast, had decent armor and a 85 mm gun that could go up against the tiger, panther, panzer 1,2,3,4 and sure its quality wasnt the best but it made up for that in numbers most german tanks at the later years were panzer 3, panzer 4 and stug 3 which made up for a big majority these were the tanks that the t-34/85 were usually facing and it could face them because it was betrer armored than these tanks and also had a bigger gun that could oenetrate these tanks with relative ease, the tiger 1, tiger 2, panther, jagdpanther and the jagdtiger were in minority of tanks that the t-34/85 face, about 1500 tiger, about 500 tiger 2s and 7000 panthers were produced over the course of the entire war so these tanks were rare and the t-34 could go up against a tiger and penetrate it from the front the only thing that it couldnt do is face a tiger 2 or panther from the front, what it couldnt do in quality it made up in quantity, the germans had a lot less tanks than the SU, or the western allies so they were usually outnumberd, ghere was german saying that a tiger could destroy 5 t34s but there were 6 the t 34 could just come in from the side and penetrate the tiger 2 and panther just by overwelming it in sheer number

[@belluh-1huey102]

@@The_last_prime 1 sherman can destroy a Tiger same for a single T34.

[@Spacedude-jq2dq]

A tad overhyped?

[@zgd1486]

The t-34 is definitely not overhyped all the trash German tanks that would break down after every 20km were very overhyped

[@Khornecussion]

Shermans definitely contributed a huge amount to WWII. It was just so dang versatile. Could even fight on the islands of Japan when models made to disperse weight, or clear out jungles for forming a base with a large plow, or blade rolled in. Shermans had far more useful variants, but T-34s definitely were one of the MAJOR factors for SOVIET victory. Their sappers and breachers were the other. Teams all armed with SMGs, one man carrying a DShK to provide squad support from a vantage point. Ton of grenades. They were all basically breaching teams and basically told to suicide charge as deep as they could into German cities while said cities were bombarded, armed with the PPS and usually 3 - 4 grenades per man. They would hit a room, throw a grenade in, then sweep it with their automatic weapons, then move on. Swift, brutal, efficient clearing. It was a much more reliable SMG than the MP40 too. Much less prone to jamming, so Germans were at a disadvantage. Oh, and these breaching teams also wore steel breastplates. Yeah, they had breastplates like a knight would, albeit shaped very crudely out of cut steel. It worked well to stop MP40 fire and even KAR fire from a distance where they could likewise pepper the enemy with small arms fire, which against Germans that have little more than a steel helmet? Much more lethal.

[@CurbyKai]

The animation quality has improved so much!

[@Thomas20Smith]

The Soviet just threw tanks at the situation, quality over quantity is great but at war if your quality tank is overrun by quantities of tanks with crewmen with barely any training then it’ll be destroyed. It sucked that the crewmen were essentially expendable pawns but that’s war

[@tavernburner3066]

Nope the t34 never arrived this Citation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fn2xgHR4pKp_eJI

[@tariqmubarak9233]

It could be true for Early T-34s or Kv-1s however later in the war the Soviets manufactured tanks that were good in quality.

[@dailypunch6249]

Are you saying the Soviets didn’t use tactics

[@tariqmubarak9233]

Another thing to add is that actually German Tanks started becoming worse in quality as the war progressed, at the later stages Germany didn't simply have resources, oil and steel were running low many factories got bombed.

[@residentelect]

Mass produced (quantity over quality) outdated tanks/IFVs operated by inexperienced, poorly trained and ultimately "expendable" crews... Thank goodness the contemporary Russian military doesn't... Oh... Erm... 😬

[@retonman7492]

For everyone discussing weather the T-34, Sherman or whatever tank you think is the best there must be a reminder that there is no “best tank” particularly because we are talking about nations with similar technological capabilities. Plus if Wes re going to chose a best tank the T-34 is FAR from even the top 3, while it might appear as if the T-34 is amazing if you look at the hard factors (armor, speed and weaponry) and production costs the truth is that while the tank is an ok design it had a lot of problems, mostly because of how hard it was to operate and simply surviving while using them due to the lack of radios, how succeptable it was for overheating and generally lack of reliability, but the biggest problem is that when people see these pristine, well produced and well crewed tanks they think that every tank is like that but in reality most if not all produced during the war were badly produced as there was little to no Standards given for the producers of the tanks as long as they could make many tanks even if that meant that half of the components were missing, so long story short: good on paper and well made, almost never well made during the war.

[@getimpaled3460]

I think that if you want to acurately compare tanks, you must look at both quality and production numbers. For example: Of course 1 King Tiger can destroy 1 T-34, there's no doubt about it. The problem is that, they wouldn't fight 1v1. For 1 King Tiger there was going to at least 3 or 4 T-34-85s, so that's why production cost should also be looked at. But let's take it a step further. Soviets, as we know, had more resources and were not fighting a two front war, so I think that a fair test would be the following: We should look at how much T-34-85s could the Germans produce(if they only produced them) vs how much King Tiger could they produce (if they produced only them). Then train all crews the same and let them all fight. Repeat the test a few times with King Tigers being the attacker 5 times, and T-34-85s being the attackers 5 times. Maybe do a few tests without any air support, some with King Tigers controling the skies, and some with T-34-85s. Airplanes should of course also all be the same and with equal numbers and equipment. I of course know that this test is impossible to do, expect maybe in hoi4 (maybe it's not even irl, I really hope it isn't and that some experts will do it), but with this kind of test I think we would finally find out which is superior. Of course you can do this with any kind of tank, not just T-34-85s and King Tigers

[@JohnSmith-kn5xx]

this comment needs to be pinned

[@KazeHorse]

@@getimpaled3460 this. It was not about out engineering the Germans for the soviets. It was about out producing them because they knew German production and fuel limitations. And they were right. It just needed to be good enough - not the best.

[@thenathan4490]

@@KazeHorse Correct, it is about the question of how much tanks you can realistically produce. The German industry back then was not large nor do they have much resources to use, but what they have is a high quality industry dating back to the 1850s. With that in mind, let us think of this premise. If the Germans were to build T-34s, how many do you think they could make in a month ? At best, a thousand or two because they just don't have the capacity to build more. Even if they were to cut off quality completely, where can they find the metal to build tens of thousands of these tanks to begin with ? Then, if either the Americans or Soviets were to build King Tigers or Panthers, they could build much more than the Germans could, but these machines requires a high quality industry to both build and maintain. Simply, the engineering challenge requires not a high quantity industry, but a high quality industry. Overall, if one were to argue about a tank being inferior, these were design choices that suits a nation's industrial state and capability, and of course their limitations. In real life, I once heard about a German engineer in the early stages of WW2 who proposed to the High Command to build T-34s themselves. They could build their own, with German specs, all plans laid out and a unit is ready for production, but the High Command rejected it. This is because they understood the above concept, about the limitations of their industry, and how this Soviet Beast is unsuitable for their small scale, high quality industry. They instead end up with the Panther and Tiger.

[@jacobnebel7282]

​@@getimpaled3460 A _Bengal_ tiger isn't even the same type of tank as the t-34. That's like comparing an artillery piece to a machine gun. The comparable German tank is a long barrel PzIV or Panther. Production numbers also have virtually nothing to do with the tank, that has to do with the industry producing them.

[@OldJDotjdotjdot]

30 minute video without any repeated animations and great narration. The quality is incredible, and I feel like it's christmas morning. Thank you guys!

[@tos1asolntsepek]

Old soviet joke: King Tiger can carry 82 shells. So in order to defeat him, we send 83 t-34s

[@QuackCrac]

Lmao

[@davidfans5852]

Yeah.. but what have western allies agains king tiger

[@PuellaMagiHomuraAkemi]

@@davidfans5852 Thats an easy answer - Air Force, Close air support with no opposition.

[@tavernburner3066]

Not to fight the tiger mind you. The engines are just that unreliable.

[@tatianadashkova2143]

It’s not a Soviet joke

[@iftiflo2039]

A old tanker told me in my country Romania was used until 1997 and was one of the most advanced versions with all modern ammaneties for crew,laser range finder and T55 A fire control systems.

[@Kokangalang]

What was used?

[@stevemc01]

The M4 Sherman and the T-34 Mediums… the frequent heroes of World War II. …sometimes too frequent lol.

[@ChrisZukowski88]

T-34 heroes? What did the Russians do after ww2?

[@derpynerdy6294]

i preferbthe sherman, safer and mobile. t34 has its problems but i will take those than any german tanks that either constantly break down or no fuel to function 😂

[@hellothere8229]

@@derpynerdy6294 i mean t34s didn't have fuel until later and it broke down sm that crews carried new transmissions

[@julianisbored9138]

got to say the animation quality has improved drastically, really impressive, keep up the good work

[@Thomas-rl9xd]

Please do a video on the battle of Delville wood. As a South African it would be truly amazing to see our troops remembered on this channel. Thank you..

[@MrStag-gy9yn]

ohhh Im so happy to see how much the animation has improved compared to some of the recent videos! I hope they can keep this level up

[@Angelfyre.]

In terms of tanks the M4 Sherman was much more of a modular tank capable of multiple roles from towing, to bulldozing, to mine clearing and anything in between. Plus the M4 Sherman didn’t try to kill its crew when firing. The T-34 didn’t have a gun block for the breach, whenever it fired if you were behind it you were gonna get smacked by the breach. The Soviets didn’t really care about their people and didn’t care for any level of minimum quality assurance. Later models of the T-34 would include a bigger gun and became slightly more safe, but it still was a roughly made tank meant to be thrown into the steel grinder.

[@Sawyer14]

Safe isn’t taken into consideration when it comes to tanks, the Sherman while regarded as one of the best tanks was almost on Parr with the T34, they still had habits of trying to kill its own crew,one main issue was with the breach, while loading a round into a Sherman the problem is the Breach closes as soon as it knows a round is inside,there have been multiple cases of men losing they’re fingers just trying to load the main gun,another problem was the Sherman wasn’t built with Survivability in mind, despite they’re numbers they had some of the biggest losses of the war, despite the Sherman having large numbers they were built with quantity over quality, and of course the Sherman was built to deal with Infantry and light armored vehicles,not tanks like the Germans had, even the panzer 4 couldn’t be attacked head on, then there’s the chance that a Sherman comes across a Tiger,despite what some will say, there’s a lot more to it then just shooting. So overall the Sherman was modular but that doesn’t make it much better than a T34

[@ЧингачгукБольшойЗмей-д6о]

Пепельницу нужно было в танк устанавливать? Русскому воину освободителю нужно было защищать Родину и Отечество, а не думать как его заду будет удобно.

[@ericradespiel7779]

LazerPig did a good video of this

[@MightyTiki]

Armor fighting vehicles are only as good as their crews. Regardless of various factors, such as: war/conflict, time period, location, etc. A lot of the interwar doctrine and equipment that was developed between the World Wars did not necessarily reflect real-world lessons learned. Unfortunately, Soviet troops lacked the ability to take the initiative on the battlefield and had to follow orders precisely, even though situations on the ground would develop and make it difficult to execute those orders without horrific casualties. The T-34 was only a tool that helped win the war but to make a bold claim that the T-34 was the “best” tank of the war is asinine and small minded.

[@bootlegfootballdisciple3253]

Idk if it’s so much the Soviet troops lacked the ability to take initiative, as much as it was that if they did, they would be shot by their own officers lol. Valid point tho

[@SoloRenegade]

the T-34 had plenty of flaws. it was cannon fodder that gave Russia a fighting chance. but it was inferior to other WW2 tanks. Even the Russians preferred the M4 Sherman.

[@alexadamson9959]

Good god the animation quality really has improved. The soldiers cycling their bolts, the various tanks. You even added the small details of the different T-34 types like the steel and rubber road wheels. If you guys keep improving like this I can’t wait to see what becomes of this channel in another 2-3 years.

[@titan_tanker]

You know what's better, has stabilizers, more spacious instead of cramped, and more reliable with many improvement implemented throughout the years? *The Sherman tank*

[@someguy7629]

The Germans loved the Tommy Cookers. Kept them warm at night.

[@canthi109]

@@someguy7629 Fun fact: the sherman crew have higher % of survive than anything other tank in ww2

[@titan_tanker]

@@canthi109 yep, and it’s still way more reliable than any of the over-engineered German tanks lol

[@canthi109]

@@titan_tanker X2

[@ToyotaCamry-xw2yp]

2 different tanks, from 2 different nations fighting 2 different types of war. USA wasn't being invaded and the Americans valued the lives of their tankers. Russian was desperate and motivated to defend their land to their last man so tanks were produced with only numbers in mind. There's nothing more scary than a nation that has nothing left to lose.

[@jagdpanther2224]

Many people mistook the heavy JS1/2 or the "Stalin tank" was the T34 , round turret and sloped armour. The Stalin tank has bigger cannon and heavier armour, it was the spearhead to break through German strongholds when T34s failed to do!

[@h0lynut]

A miraculous medium tank, however, my love goes to the great KV-1 heavy tank!

[@Uran_KH-98]

Kolobanov would be proud for you. 😂

[@kaisermosh4057]

Fun fact: t-34 pedals were made backwards so if the tank crew died and the drivers foot was off the pedal it would accelerate into the enemies at max speed

[@kaisermosh4057]

@@Agustin-jd9iq yeah but it depends on which time it was made.after the cold war they removed that feature as for my source just try to find a blueprint because the soviet achieves have been down ever sense Russia invaded Ukraine

[@kevinrahmatfathoni7896]

The fact that their animation evolution is great, makes me enjoys it even more, i love watching how your animation evolve every videos

[@jovicamateric7756]

Imagine holding a defensive line and all of a sudden you hear rumbling and see a mass of tanks slowly moving towards you.

[@bruhism173]

Im part of the Bt5 /7 gang here, if your best tanks are death sentences why not go into the same death sentence except you can go faster than your enemy's turret can turn.

[@Deaglan753]

Then get liquidiise by anti tank artillery guns or run out of ammo?

[@bruhism173]

@@Deaglan753 all of the above

[@bruhism173]

@@Deaglan753 like I said, it's a death trap either way, might as well be blasting some music while your going 45 km an hour and then see entire enemy team slowly aiming towards you but your just ats enough o outrun them all for just a few seconds.

[@kKingKazuma]

Me when people say T34 instead of T-34: >:( angry T34 is an American Heavy Tank T-34 is the Russian Medium Tank

[@burningtank160]

yeah

[@Deaglan753]

I just say which varient of the t34 im talk8ng about, example being, t34 76

[@bigtimegamer7776]

This it true

[@Joshua_N-A]

Is that why Americans using XM these days for prototype?

[@michaelhowell2326]

The T-34 being an amazing tank is one of the biggest myths of WWII. While the German tanks were over-engineered, the T-34 was under-built. If the Soviets had put a little more effort into their production then it would have been good.

[@joshuajoaquin5099]

it would be good if done in quality but since its war they have to be sacrificed

[@xahmadx6442]

In my opinion There's no best tank of WW2 but if we have something close it will be the Sherman

[@f-15TheFkingEagle]

@@xahmadx6442 Agreed

[@PuellaMagiHomuraAkemi]

@@xahmadx6442 If you ask me its the Panther, the Sherman was just another tank to explode immediately on the frontline.

[@PresidentEvilX]

@@PuellaMagiHomuraAkemi Another myth. Shermans had brilliant survivability statistics.

[@pop5678eye]

Technically Konigstiger is the name of the Bengal tiger in German. Yes, the word derives from 'konig' and 'tiger' which mean 'king' and 'tiger' respectively but their combination properly refers to the Bengal tiger.

[@kingfisherfishys9272]

this channel has improved a lot in terms of its animations compared to old times, great work!

[@GroundPanzers]

I love the tank animations Simple History, keep it up!

[@someguy7629]

A woman who wanted to fight in the war like her husband personally wrote to Stalin and asked his permission to go fight in the war. Stalin wrote a letter back that he gave her permission. She sold everything she had and actually bought a T-34 tank and called it : The fighting girlfriend. She sadly later on in the war died.

[@adammiller2606]

The t34 wasn't the best quality tank during WWII but it didn't have to be. Quantity takes on a quality all it's own.

[@MrLantean]

No tank is perfect. The T34 is proven to be very adaptable to war situations and is adequate enough to deal with any challenges. The Soviets continued to upgrade and improves its design and its chassis become the basis to many variants of new tanks and gun carriers. Although many T34s are destroyed or disabled, its simpler design allows many to be salvaged, rebuild and reenter military service. Quantity is as important as quality as military equipment are lost, captured and destroyed. Getting them replaced is essential.

[@rosaria8384]

I'd like to see a Sherman video series like this, from the origins until the late war with the 76mm and the Firefly

[@RobloxFunnyAnimations]

*Great high quality video. You make KZbin worth watching 🥰🥰🥰

[@generalfluffyproto]

I like how t34 fanboys keep saying the t34 was the first tank to use sloped armor.

[@joshuajoaquin5099]

agree, they won't look on other designs. For them T-34 matters

[@xahmadx6442]

There faces when I show them the FCM 36

[@TomasLeGamer]

Bro, the mf little willie had sloped plates

[@generalfluffyproto]

@@TomasLeGamer try telling that to the commieboos

[@brennanleadbetter9708]

The idea of sloped armor has been around for centuries. Even medieval castles used it

[@_MaZTeR_]

Would love to see a video on the King Tiger like this and the "Was the T-34 Really the Best Tank of WW2?" video

[@Uran_KH-98]

Bro, T-34 is medium ranked tank, when Tiger is Heavy lol.

[@rafaelnishizumi6330]

"YES"- *LazerPig Fan*

[@MrConorBrown]

Best video to date. I'm loving these new almost documentary style videos. Amazing stuff.

[@Minute_Sniper]

There was a mistake with the caliber. At one point in the video, he said 75mm but the soviet guns on t-34 were 76.2mm before the change to 85mm

[@enyaliosares4301]

Yes, because 1.6mm mistake is something to write home about

[@Minute_Sniper]

@@enyaliosares4301 75mm guns and 76.2 mm guns have major differences in ballistic performances. A 75mm american gun cannot pen a tiger armor while a 76.2mm american gun can

[@fighter4166]

@@Minute_Sniper you are missing the .2 now ITS 76.2mm or simply ten time 7.62 caliber

[@yellowcrayonkid]

@@Minute_Sniper not really to do with the diameter of the barrel but rather the increased velocity of the gun

[@allangibson2408]

@@Minute_Sniper And the shells in the 75mm and 76mm American tanks are exactly the same size - the cartridge cases on the 76mm are however twice as long and bigger in diameter…

[@yoboikamil525]

It was decent enough for the soviet strategy of "throw men at it until it stops"

[@willemventer3935]

No , objects cannot do anything by themselves. A better one would be "How well did the T-34 preform in battle".

[@mrpolsco6872]

Great production 1st Class…Thank you.

[@rollandsend45]

The videos are getting better each one you make. Keep up the good work

[@v.emiltheii-nd.8094]

Ioan Sion, a Romanian general, destroyed a T-34 with a bag of grenades... Sadly after doing that the Soviets shot him. He was the only Romanian general who died in battle during WW2.

[@boerekable]

Ahh those times when it used to be uncommon that generals die.

[@Joshua_N-A]

@@boerekable these days, they're all about high pay and a nice office with air conditioning.

[@meejinhuang]

It was one of the weapons that won WW2. The IL2 was just as important for the USSR.

[@ddurst1]

This was awesome! Any plans for making a video like this for the Sherman tank?

[@calcite.belemnite]

The animation in this video is fantastic. Well done Simple History.

[@sctm81]

wow, fantastic history of the T-34. Would be awesome to have this kind of coverage about the M4 Sherman which in some views might have been considered superior overall.

[@tapeesa2866]

The tiger first was deployed in 1942 but captured by Leningrad

[@malcolmshad]

In my opinion I think to this day even though it isn't tank, but based off the Panzer 3 tank, is still the stug 3. They were one of the reasons they had a lot of losses at the time estimated at 30000 knocked out by Stugs. However I'm not sure if that number is justified

[@chibidakis1]

Just like my Stellaris play throughs. I just mass produce corvettes instead of cruisers and battleships. They're cheap, fast to produce, and easy to mod to certain situations.

[@Deaglan753]

I made it to a point where i mass produced only battleships however i did mix and match different types of ship types and designs

[@chibidakis1]

@@Deaglan753 one good set up I did was 1 titan with the regen fleet ability + neutron launchers. Approx 24 battle ships with neutron launchers and lancers. Approx 66 Corvettes with disruptors. While your titan and battleships are at artillery range, the Corvettes would swarm the fleets confusing AI targeting. At the end, I just replace a couple of Corvettes.

[@Deaglan753]

@@chibidakis1 well the biggest ship i can build is the battleship because i dont have any DLCs but am a huge navy buff so i try to make space ships based of ww2 and cold war ships,

[@kristian2353]

Expected another "hurr durr t-34 best tank" video, was pleasantly surprised!

[@Disorder2312]

Such underrated video just because it contains 30 minutes of good animation, which was not easy to make.

[@ramal5708]

In Korea the T-34 was in some cases an equal match to the M4 Sherman Easy Eight, but the M26 and M46 tanks would overmatch the NK T34s

[@ryanweltz4076]

Depends who shoots first but the sherman crew even if hit, actually survives, gets on another one, then destroy the T-34s.

[@viceralman8450]

The T-34 sucked in Corea, overall, the Shermans destroyed 47 T-34's but loosing 25 of their own. The Pershing just eat them like nothing.

[@zeedrow5379]

Am I the only one that thinks the T 34 was one of the better looking tanks during ww2?

[@Emmanuel-ms8pr]

Same

[@SouthParkCows88]

Mehh but the T-34/85 I do think is very nice much more than the 34/76.

[@xahmadx6442]

Look at the Sherman Firefly

[@Deaglan753]

Only the t34 85 imo is a good looking t34 or the type t34 (chinese t34)

[@joemoe1739]

Make a video about il-2 sturmovik plane, it would be an amazing content similar to this video.

[@Snips75]

I love the great animation graphics in this video! I'd like to see these graphics more often, please! It would make it more enjoyable!

[@enzyblox]

The animation is the best yet for this video

[@unkn0wngames187]

I like how he mentioned that the soviet military welded metal meshes on tanks to prevent them from being destroyed by panzerfaust as similar or parallel to the Russian military using metal sheets and grates onto their tanks against loitering munition drones and/or javelins during the current conflict in Ukraine 25:39

[@nickdanger3802]

T34 "Armor steel had a special place in these shipments, especially in the production of tanks, self-propelled guns and other equipment. Mobilization reserve of armored steel in the Soviet Union before the war was small and did not cover even 6-month industry needs. According to some data, 525.4 thousand tons of rolled steel of all types was delivered to the USSR under Lend-Lease. Every month, the country received about half of average amount of Soviet production of armored steel. Special steel for gun barrel drifting was also delivered." page 118 Food and other strategic deliveries to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease Act, 1941-1945 pdf

[@tizi087]

small reminder: for a correct citation you sghould also name the lines

[@superspies32]

And the most important lend-lease for Soviets is US trucks, millions of them shipped to USSR to replace those be destroyed during first stage of Operation Barrabosa and another provide constant line of supply for T-34s.

[@nickdanger3802]

@@superspies32 433,967 trucks and jeeps, page 1 Hyperwar Lend lease Shipments Ordnance--Motor Transport Vehicles All trucks made in USSR before and during the war were licensed copy's of US trucks.

[@nickdanger3802]

Lend-Lease Vehicles in the Red Army in Russian, quantities in video, oil is in metric tons. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jYSYaHieepVpacU

[@billyyank2198]

A well researched 30-minute deep dive with awesome animation. Great job guys!

[@captaindookey]

This tank did more in video games than it ever could in warfare

[@v.emiltheii-nd.8094]

Nice title edit there, mate!

[@thelonelyghostN]

The T-34 was a good tank but not the best.

[@xahmadx6442]

The Sherman is better than it

[@rmsbismarck6975]

@@xahmadx6442 dingus you need to look at the situation soviet Union industry have to move to the ural infranstacture destroyed a lot of people died usa has none of the problem i listed at the top

[@Boss-bn4oi]

@@xahmadx6442 German Tanks are badass

[@xahmadx6442]

@@Boss-bn4oi Sherman Firefly's are badass

[@PuellaMagiHomuraAkemi]

@@xahmadx6442 Panthers are badass

[@jst7675]

Short summary: a good fast average tank with less burn when it get hit( depends which direction) because it's a diesel engine, it also cheap enough to counter a tiger tank

[@kimdaniel98]

It wasn't cheap. It was an expensive tank produced cheaply. If produced to American standards, it would cost roughly the same as a Sherman

[@jst7675]

@@kimdaniel98 well because of rushed mass production it's cheap because most of t-34 doesn't have radio, low quality metal and cheap labors on job working it. It's a tank that designed to be a expensive good tank but because of Germans are getting closer it ended like medium quality or low quality.

[@kimdaniel98]

@@jst7675 exactly! Ergo: not a good tank. The post war productions were better, but still not great

[@billytheshoebill5364]

Using diesel doesnt lower this tank chance of catching on fire because the fucking fuel tank are around the crew

[@jst7675]

@@billytheshoebill5364 what are you talking about did you see the other documentary how t-34 survive at direct hits? diesel is also less flammable bruh

[@ryanduffy5301]

as a WoT Blitz player, content like this is awesome and fun to watch. you guys have come a long way.

[@ThePapadox]

High quality production!

[@wolfrainexxx]

Fun fact, but the M4 Sherman had the same effective armor as the Tiger, was vastly more mobile, had vastly more utility, and its 75mm had little trouble killing anything in Europe. Its crew survivability was significantly higher than any other equivalent tank on the battlefield.

[@eoghancarpenter8546]

Everybody knows by now that the T-34 was a Bob Semple in disguise

[@NokotanFanCentral]

too true

[@mt1885]

Yes it was DIESEL and easily mass produced able to handle the COLD weather and super easy to maintain.

[@Joshua_N-A]

What the gasoline run Sherman though? They did fought during winter in Belgium, right?

[@mt1885]

@@Joshua_N-A They had diesel powered ones sent in lend/lease. But the T34 was the backbone, very easy to manufacture, maintain and able to handle the extreme weather conditions.

[@charlesmcgill2974]

It’s a shame the Russian tanks still have the problem of ya know the tank turret flying 100 feet in the air

[@NokotanFanCentral]

NEW SPACE FORCE!!!!!

[@comradekenobi6908]

isn't that every tank?

[@Tanker000]

@@comradekenobi6908 No, Western Tanks have blow out panels and Blast doors to protect the crew. Russian Tanks and Chinese Tanks don't

[@comradekenobi6908]

@@Tanker000 what period of Western tanks?

[@nickb2049]

@@comradekenobi6908 no, western tanks such as the Abrams and Challenger 2 store their ammo in the back of the turret with pop off panels and such to direct the blast away from the crew compartment if its hit. Soviet era tanks store their ammo under the crews feet, thats why their turrets always fly when they get hit.

[@ryathin_]

My lord the tanks are drawn beautifully keep up the great work :D

[@TheBeingX]

Pleased more Videos about Tanks in this Stile. It's awesome

[@Emmanuel-ms8pr]

This tank is still the best tank used by the ussr

[@joshuajoaquin5099]

more like its mediocre, after T-34 they even want to modernize it to T-44 but war is still happening. Though they managed to build IS-1 and IS-2 in large Quantities but was overshadowed by the hype of T-34

[@wojszach4443]

best tank of societ union was sherman 76, funny isnt it?

[@loyalpiper]

Literally any tank still in service and being produced post 1941 in soveit service was better than the T-34

[@patrick3426]

@@wojszach4443 no, he was the best... from the german perspective xD

[@wojszach4443]

@@patrick3426 tank that either falls apart or shrapnells on its crew without penetrations blind and with abysmal accuracy, i bet germans loved those Btw as trivia which people dont get is that germans called everything heavier than t26 an t34 to kv and t34 were called as t34

[@luisemoralesfalcon4716]

Russian tanks didn't need to worry about high casualties, their philosophy up to now has been to rush the enemy but, they forgot other nations adapted and just bough more anti tank weaponry.

[@Slycarlo]

Yup and fast forward to 2022 nothing change with russian tactic and it worst since the best soviet soldiers are the ukrainian and they're fighting against them.

[@kevinaguilar7541]

Watch Lazerpig video about the t-34. I think it's pretty interesting the points he brings up. I'm telling you now, thoigh, he is no professional.

[@slavicemperor8279]

Here comes the western ,,historian" learning about warfare from Hollywood movies and from MSM portrayal of Ukraine conflict

[@_me___]

@@kevinaguilar7541 he is. He’s a professor

[@kevinaguilar7541]

@@_me___ oh dang, then never mind.

[@user-leshiy99rus]

People won the war. People who fought to the last, protecting their loved ones, protecting their home. And the tank... The T-34 turned out to be a successful car. Not without flaws, of course, but successful. In wartime conditions, it was difficult to do anything better than him. The T-34 was cheap and relatively simple. It was produced in huge quantities and it helped. It is rightfully among the best tanks of that war.

[@KillerAngelPilot1]

The Sherman tank was better in almost every way

[@user-leshiy99rus]

@@KillerAngelPilot1 Dude, stay realistic. After all, everyone will still have their own opinion. I could compare dry numbers (by which, by the way, these bvli tanks are very similar), but that's not the point. These are different tanks produced in different countries for different tasks. The T-34 had poor visibility and a lack of crew comfort. But, excellent armor, maneuverability and a good weapon for the period of the beginning of the war. The T-34 was the emergency means by which a hole is plugged when there is no opportunity to do something better. And in this regard, he was perfect. The tank was designed on the personal initiative of the designer, contrary to the wishes of the authorities, for which the creator gave his life... It became the most massive tank, a tank that inspired respect for the best generals of the Wehrmacht. There are no perfect tanks, but there are those that have saved more than one million souls and this one is one of these.

[@dreadedTanker3173]

​@@user-leshiy99rus the factories cut alot of corners to get more T34s out, the sherman is quite literally the best tank of ww2. 1 pen would kill everyone in a cramped T-34, Shermans had 80% survivability. T-34s didn't have radios (except for if you were a commander) They heat the armor too hot and made it brittle (if u see downed T34s, you'll see that their chassis popped), some T34s didn't even have turret baskets. The T-34's design is pretty good design-wise. The problem was production. Lend lease kept the russians up. If only both sides didn't have complete disregard for human life, there probably wouldn't be such an insanely huge civilian casualty rate The tank with the most tank kills is the STUG with 20k.

[@Anlushac11]

I have to say I think this is one of the best T-34 videos I gave seen. Well done.

[@jayramos5103]

Fun fact:You learn a lot about history in this Channel😊.

[@hallaldude3478]

Simple history could you do a similar video but with the kv series or IS series

[@snuscaboose1942]

The T-34 needed Lend-Lease oil to run, Lend-Lease rubber, Lend-Lease metal, and Lend-Lease trucks/trains for logistics. Without US help, the Soviet Union would have been rolled up in 1942 by Germany.

[@johnpaul3099]

Not that simple mate

[@snuscaboose1942]

@@johnpaul3099 How so? Did I forget to mention the grain that the US-supplied which fed the T-34 crews?

[@lesdodoclips3915]

@@snuscaboose1942 no. But you did forget to mention the Soviet metal, Soviet trucks and trains, Soviet rubber and Soviet grain used to feed and equip the crew

[@tenk548]

No

[@johnpaul3099]

@@snuscaboose1942 the allies don't win without the Soviets let's not diminish their contributions to the war. D day doesn't happen without the Soviets engaging about 70% of the German divisions in the East . They sacrificed a lot in the effort show some respect

[@ramiroloria2185]

"T-34, M4 Sherman, or Panther?" Me: *BOB SEMPLE*

[@drs4983]

Stalin used the Zapp Brannigan offensive. Send in wave after wave until the enemy runs out of resources

[@shelbylover1359]

I'd like to see a full history of the M4 Sherman in this style

[@Dan-fu9uy]

I've been in the T-34, small, cramped and a deliberately made legend, it dominated by shear numbers not being a superior tank. Only war it dominated in is War Thunder the game.

[@thiccthighssavelives5866]

I swear to God they just appear out of thin air and destroy my tank usually from *behind*

[@slaykonTK-]

hahahaha so true