The 5 Deadliest Tanks In World War II

During World War I, the first tanks were manufactured. It was believed that they were unbeatable land ships that had the potential to break the impasse in trench warfare and ultimately to triumph. Tanks were unable to fulfil their promise during World War I due to technological issues. This was a significant loss for the military. By the time of World War II, however, they had become the most important weapon on land and the primary means by which countries might be taken over or freed. Here are the five tanks that were considered to be the most effective and lethal during World War II.
All Tank Model Credits goes to Tank Encyclopedia
tanks-encyclopedia.com/
FAIR-USE COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
* Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, commenting, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.
The Buzz does not own the rights to these videos and pictures. They have, in accordance with fair use, been repurposed with the intent of educating and inspiring others. However, if any content owners would like their images removed, please contact us by email [e-mail].

[@manwithnoplan89]

Hold on a minute the hell is that thumbnail?!

[@hhalik392]

They did it in purpose so people can enter the video to see and comment for the miss information in the thumbnail

[@christosbekas7446]

Girl ithis is ww2 you can put the correct flags in your video

[@timmycook8291]

I truly didn't wanna like this because of the kindergarten grammar. Facts are facts.😂

[@imnayanger4877]

​@@timmycook8291that's true 😂👍🏻

[@tidepoolclipper8657]

Did you not double-check the video icon?! You applied the wrong flags!

[@boombl443]

Stug isnt a Tank. So why IT IS in a video about Tanks????

[@jeremycox571]

Stugs were assault and anti tank

[@Yourlocalrubygillmanenjoyer]

The thumbnail💀

[@fredsalfa]

Was waiting for the Tiger to come up? Maybe it wasn’t very deadly

[@chrism2027]

The M4 is already one of those things, but reliably it has already been, did not necessarily meet the German Tiger 1 and 2 too good battle tanks. Even if they were running. I would have relied more on the Jagt tanks, they usually ran quite well and did their job. Verri NIce Video.

[@hhalik392]

For people asking about the thumbnail They did it in purpose so people can enter the video to see and comment for the miss information in the thumbnail

[@treybone3263]

Haven’t you done this already?

[@RiderRohan09]

5:51 It was definitely not compared to tanks like the Centurian that was put into service in 1946 which had a better gun mobility and I think better armor and other tanks after WW2 and late WW2

[@ales811507]

yes, and no match agaist t54

[@totala6658]

Before making any video like this better read some real statistics / raports / history of the vehicles you choose as "Best". I won't even comment on that misleading thumbnail. A) You praise T-34 (It's very important what version - Early and mid 76 versions with old turret were abyssmal tanks - The only thing that saved them was their quantity. For example I don't exactly remember the number, but T-34/76 should have been under mainetance after driving around 200-300km. Not to mention horrible crew conditions as in every soviet tank. There is much to say about how terrible it was. At best it was a mid tank...). It's sloped armor also wasn't as good due to how bad materials soviets use to build it - Even if german shell didn't penetrate the armor, it often caused shrapnel burst on it's crew from inside.... B1) Panzer 4 wasn't "next" tank from panzer 1 / 2 / 3. Even if we compare it to 3 it had completly other asignments to complete - It was meant as a support tank for infantry. It's high caliber short 75mm gun proves the point. It also depends what version we talk about - Later version had a good enough armament, but were introduced when enemy already had similiar cannons - Not to mention that even more armored late war H / J were not armored enough. So yeah, also the "Good armor" myth you've showed in the video is complete bullshit. B2) You also say that it was german main tank which is straight up false - At best it was around 20% (mostly below) of panzertruppe used tanks. To put it into perspective - Shermans were I believe more than 60% of USA tank units composistion - There is a difference huh? C) M4 was not good armed? Please read about african campaigns. Also read about it's goal - It wasn't meant to fight enemy tanks. It was a general purpose tank, so having it in mind - It WAS well armed. Even the short 75mm gun could easily penetrate german Panzer 1-4 in front from high distance. D) Panther? Really? Ofc it was deadly... If it didn't broke before entering combat. Now please read about battle of kursk. If we even forget that - Panthers introduction into panzertruppe was a true horror. Germans never achieved even in 20% changing panzer 4 for panzer 5. German reports say how low quantity of those tanks was a crucial problem in terms of unit combat readiness. D2) More powerful armament? I think you forgot about Tiger 1 88mm legendary cannon - I know it's named Panzer "6" but the number doesn't really reflect the order of panzerkampfwagen introduction. D3) Sloped armor WAS NOT coppied from T-34. Germans knew damn well about it's existence, but didn't apply it from different mechanical issues which sloped armor would cause in their tanks. D4) More powerful than any allied tank? Let me introduce you 90mm Pershing or M36 Jackson cannons... E) I'm glad that you didn't forget about STUG III. It is not a tank as you said, so why is it on this list? It was definitely top 1 or 2 most effective german vehicles, but not a tank... It would be much better to put it into top 5 deadliest tank destroyers honestly

[@gerardwalsh6082]

The Panzerkampfwagon VEE 😏

[@kidkique]

I think there's some errors in the thumbnail and I'm never watching a video on your channel again

[@PETERODZZ]

I thought the Sherman was American

[@romankovalev7894]

Where is Tiger, game changer? STUG - not tank 😉

[@gfsfyfy426]

🥳🥳🥳🥳

[@alfredjr2k556]

I support M4 Sherman.

[@paulmauer9405]

..in der Küche brennt das Essen an ...

[@tonyfield2360]

Ye gods! Thumbnail flags all over the shop, voice-over sounded like a Radio Shack project build . . . credibility for future videos, not good.

[@user-qb6uq2fn4r]

забыли зверобоя су 152 , ису 152

[@Wyomingchief]

The Su152 was not even an actual tanks, it was an assault gun. And didn't make a significant difference on the battlefield

[@RiderRohan09]

@@Wyomingchief but they put the STUG III in which is also an assault gun/ TD so he is right

[@nickm9123]

I'm fairly certain that the Sherman was American, the stug was German, and the t34 was russian. Double check your shit before you post

[@klardfarkus3891]

T34 was a Soviet Union tank. There was Russia till the Bolsheviks came and it became the Soviet Union. When the govt of the Soviet Union collapsed in the 1990’s it became Russia again.

[@sangdopalri349]

WTF

[@brucegoose2808]

This video has to get in the craw of the Sherman fan bois! 😆😆🤣 ay Dave Zollo

[@RK_BDR_TIMP]

I think the best WW2 tanks are ISU-152, IS-3, Pershing, Panther, T-34-85

[@Kubus0083]

is-3 had terrible reliability problems

[@MyJjbob]

Is3 want even in ww2 it was at the parade when ww2 was over but had 0 combat in ww2

[@totala6658]

Panther was one of the worse tanks of ww2 due to it's horrible reliability problems in terms of both driving and mainetance. IS-3 didn't see battle in ww2. ISU-152 is not a tank. Only pershing (Tho it was far fetched project, americans didn't really need it at all) and T-34-85 could be somewhat called "the best". Personally I think shermans both with short 75mm and long 76mm cannons were closest to perfection, even tho something like "best tank" doesn't exist. Best for what?

[@RK_BDR_TIMP]

@@totala6658 In the video was Stug 3, which is AT, so ISU-152 can be counted

[@totala6658]

@@RK_BDR_TIMP It doesn't mean that it should be there, both STUG and ISU-152. Btw. ISU-152 is not a AT nor TD which you probably meant. It's a self-propelled gun designed as a support weapon...You really don't need a 152mm cannon just for the sake of destroying enemy tanks - It's for destroying fortifications

[@lipedojimwoffical1201]

You forgot about tiger 1,2 tank

[@Wyomingchief]

Well they actually would have been deadly if they had been produced in any significant quantities. But let's face it they were too much too late to make a difference

[@totala6658]

@@Wyomingchief Tiger I was indeed a deadly beast - But 2? Nah man, that's utter shit. Even if mass produced - From where germans would take oil to even drive it? What about it's ennormous weight thus extremly limited mobility? Also it was introduced when germany already lacked experienced crews so like okay - In direct battle it might have been a scary tank, but when you think of it in a strategic / operational way it was completly failed project in many aspects. Too many

[@user-hs1qq1rs9d]

Popierwsze Stug III to nie był czołg tylko działo samobieżne po drugie T 34 to to miałbym czołg ale wyszło kupa złomu po trzecie Sherman bardziej przypominał zapalniczkę niż czołg kto buduje takie wysokie czołgi żeby było je łatwiej trafić hehehe