The Best Tank of WW2

2nd Channel: / @simplehistorylive
Become a Simple History member: kzbin.info...
Support us on Patreon: / simplehistory
Copyright: DO NOT translate and re-upload our content on KZbin or other social media.
SIMPLE HISTORY MERCHANDISE
Get the Simple History books on Amazon:
www.amazon.com/Daniel-Turner-...
T-Shirts
teespring.com/stores/simple-h...
Simple history gives you the facts, simple!
See the book collection here:
Amazon USA
www.amazon.com/Daniel-Turner/e...
Amazon UK
www.amazon.co.uk/Daniel-Turner...
/ simple-history-5494376...
/ simplehistoryyt
Credit:
Created by Daniel Turner (B.A. (Hons) in History, University College London)
Script:

[@T34-Tank-Commander-Volkov]

As a Warthunder player I can confirm that the best tank is whatever the enemy is using but when I use the same tank it sucks

[@Fergusius]

So true 🤣

[@bradsanders407]

It's that ai we have been warned about since y2k.

[@poigrestr]

Play enlisted it's better

[@justawendigowithinternet8224]

@@poigrestrfalse

[@T34-Tank-Commander-Volkov]

@@poigrestr Nuh uh

[@MurraytheCat]

Can we just take a moment to appreciate the improvement in animation?

[@hilmust6278]

The Bob Semple Tank is quite obviously the best tank

[@thecactus1161]

Not debetable at all

[@pabcu2507]

It’s the reason aliens avoid conflict with earth

[@dvulpis29]

Nah I think the Inflatable tanks used by the Ghost Army were better.

[@seanmessick9330]

I immediately thought the same thing and went to comment it only to see you had beaten me to it.

[@BaeNana6583]

Too strong it couldn't be deployed

[@zesterfrost8218]

That one scene from the Russian movie 'T34' where a panther round bounce of the frontal armour of a T34-85 at point blank range with no angle and from getting gaijined with stalinium armour were the moments I realise the T34 had an inflated reputation.

[@klxnone1014]

Witch Scene because I watched that movie and the only panther shells that hit it are on the tracks and on angle armor

[@Endermann111]

@@klxnone1014the panther could destroy ANY t34 at any point (except tracks or VEERRY unlucky shots) from that range on the bridge where the scene played out

[@klxnone1014]

@@Endermann111 it barley glance off the side in the movie and I could say the same about the T-34 to the panther especially that turret

[@Scrippy1]

Unless you mean panzer in the first battle scene the panther never got a good clean hit on the T-34-85

[@klxnone1014]

@@Endermann111 not it it hit at a angle and also not if it hit the turret angle also if the T-34 just shot at the turret (the cheeks and sides) especially from that range the panther would be knocked out

[@TanKail]

Obviously, the Bob Semple could crush even the mightiest of Panzers. The New Zealand government didnt field it as it was the most destructive weapon of the war.

[@Chillforev-dd9wr]

Made even us the Americans want to obey the Geneva Conventions

[@andyfriederichsen]

@@Chillforev-dd9wr We do already.

[@Chillforev-dd9wr]

@@andyfriederichsen I am referring to American war crimes committed some justly others not

[@andyfriederichsen]

@@Chillforev-dd9wr Fun Fact: Many other countries have committed war crimes, sometimes even more war crimes than the USA and often on purpose (like North Vietnam or the Soviet Union (or Imperial Japan)).

[@andyfriederichsen]

​@@Chillforev-dd9wr I'm not saying the US hasn't committed war crimes (obviously it has, such as Operation Keelhaul (alongside the British and Soviets), but just remember that other nations have been and are currently worse (because non-Western nations don't care if something's a war crime). There are some things in the Geneva Convention that would count as war crimes but really shouldn't (usually relating to ammo types).

[@corymorimacori1059]

"We have lost many brave men, but their sacrifice is not in vain. Our tanks now form a line of steel so powerful that all German resistance will be crushed beneath its mighty treads. Today - we will watch as Seelow falls. Along with all those foolish enough to stand in our way." Viktor Reznov

[@ismarwinkelman5648]

Chills. Literally chills.

[@theofficialken1755]

Dmitri?

[@outofturn331]

88mmL71: 😂

[@user-co3uc8vt7e]

@@outofturn331 German flakkanone (or how it's called) crews indeed laughed, but not for long.

[@Taldaris]

Can agree, that no matter if it's War Thunder or World of Tanks, T-34's and variants are a joy to play with, and a pain to face against.

[@garretts6992]

Wait till the Pig hears about this!

[@bastionofdeus6612]

Poor lad's gonna br cracking open another wine bottle.

[@justjoking5841]

T34s were functional and good enough to cause some damage to the Panzers, which had smaller guns and weaker armor, but generally better crews and superior combat necessities. The fact of the matter is, the T34 gave the Germans pause. The Soviets decided on a design that worked for them just as the Americans decided on the M4.

[@commandandconquer6303]

The Americans didn't have much of a choice since they needed light tanks to cross the Atlantic. The USSR on the other hand wasn't limited by that and chose a simple design they could mass produce.

[@mrman5666]

T34s did not work all the time thay borke down do to being rushed even after world war 2 it was still a porblem .

[@Maxim89Il]

Awesome video! My grandfather fought in the Soviet Army on a T-34 in WWII. By the way, there's actually a cool motorsport called tank biathlon.

[@gogrape9716]

The Pershing arrived too late to have developed a reputation. The Tigers were mostly extinct by 1945...

[@321cool]

15:33 love how they camouflage the bush so well with another bush that the bush disappears😂

[@ryleeculla5570]

Their is no such thing of a “best tank” all these tanks proved their worth and each had tactics to fight each other

[@Dr.Sandwich2]

true, I actually didn't expected anyone to point this out

[@doggydude2668]

lmfao.... that's not what defines a good tank. the features of the tank define that. whether they proved their worth or had better tactics used for them don't matter when you're looking at the tank.

[@andyfriederichsen]

@@doggydude2668 Then the T-34/85 and M4 Sherman are the best tanks of the war.

[@niclink1030]

​@@andyfriederichsenits tje m4

[@condormk2]

The story about the Pak 36 is a bit ridiculous, while it is true the Germans were stunned that their gun wasn’t breaching the tanks armour, it is a 37 mm gun which has around 50 mm of penetration power compared to the soviets 100 mm of armour so why it is glorified that such a gun couldn’t penetrate the t34 I don’t know, another fact is that the t34 crew couldn’t see the pak gun despite it being directly in the open demonstrating the lack of visibility the crew had whilst in the tank. Also, it is sad that you are basically parroting Russian propaganda. T34s in stalingrad were not participating in the fighting because the factory was captured within days by the Germans.

[@diddlethepoodle4812]

I commend your whole team and the work you do. This is quality content that is well researched and laid out. The animations alone is the work of a genius. Well done.

[@michaelhowell2326]

Man, you're gonna catch more flak for the title than early Allied bombers. I will die on the hill of the T-34 wasn't the best tank of the war.

[@AceIndiana]

Let us die together. Brother- 😂

[@jacobcatterall6070]

Yeah I'm gonna join you on that hill. Imo sherman was the best tank of the war. Its pros are the same as the t34 but without the cons

[@airraid1266]

This Comments Section is gonna become an Imperial Guard Regiment with how many shall die on this hill, count me in.

[@GarioTheRock]

(Pardon the wall of text, I'm just a history fanatic and want to discuss this as fairly as possible) The Sherman was the best tank for the Americans, fighting in every theatre of the world. Their utility is ubiquitous and their reliability is legendary, their adaptability and ease of maintenance was second to none. However, the bulk of the primary opponent to world peace, if we can call it that, was Germany, and even with 44,000+ Shermans being produced by the end of the war, many of those did not make it to fight the Germans. 2/3rds of the German army was fighting the Soviet Union even at the peak of power distribution regarding German military strength, that means what the Western Allies faced was, at PEAK, 1/3rd of the German army and even less of the Luftwaffe. If it were not for the 60,000+ T-34 tanks that participated in fighting the brunt of the primary foe of World War II, odds are we would all be speaking German, if our predecessors had qualified to be allowed to live anyhow. Greatest tank of WWII = T-34? In 1-on-1 vehicle combat, nothing has more credited kills, no single land-borne vehicle has more kills on infantry, nothing had more strategic value to holding off German offensives in the USSR, and without its implementation in critical sectors during critical struggles all along the Eastern Front, nothing caused more turn-arounds in the success of operations than the T-34. Individually, the T-34 was not the best tank of WWII, it had issues with part interchangeability which the Sherman did not, it had massive issues with transmissions in 1941 which the developers of the Sherman ironed out prior to the war (though it still did have them as well, but they were resolved before it mattered), the crew comfort was bare minimum (from a nation who implemented the bare minimum in as much as possible), the armour was impressive for all of 1 - 2 years and then it became a death trap when facing off against the 75 mm long kampfwagonkanon, and it was only in late 1943 when most T-34s would have a radio (and only in summer of 1944 did they get radios that wouldn't break the first time you used the damn thing or rode over one too many bumps in the road). However, the T-34 was the most important tank of WWII bar-none. Even a cursory glance at the statistics and movements during battle actions, action reports from the Germans during battles, post-battles, and post-offensives, from even German field marshals, say that the T-34 was the item of war that changed the course of history. One German oberstgeneral is famous for stating something along the lines: "The T-34 is the finest machine of war to ever be fielded." He said that because his sector was held in-line for months by several Soviet army groups and more importantly, several Soviet tank battalions that would counter-attack their lines and cause utter devastation week after week after week. Most Western Allies died fighting the Germans. Roughly 650,000 fatalities. That was to 1/3rd of the depleted German army using their depleted resources, everything from food, ammunition, weapons, armour, artillery, air force, and so on. If the Western Allies showed up 1.5 million strong as they did, facing the full might of the Germans when they landed, there is little doubt that the Germans, who would have outnumbered them 2.3 to 1, the Western Allies wouldn't have made it further that 50 km into mainland Europe. Just look at TIKHistory's Battlestorm Stalingrad series or WWII Day by Day's maps or any of Mark Felton's work on either front, compare the numbers and compare the distances covered, and then compare the casualties AFTER you keep an eye on the amount of equipment used in each battle of each offensive. The Chieftain is right, and so are you fellows, the Sherman is the superior tank mechanically and in terms of human comforts and as a machine to operate. With all this said: it is doubtless that as a machine of war, the Sherman was the best tank of WWII, but if we speak of importance, nothing comes even a tenth of the way to matching the changes in history paved by the crews of, and the machine itself, the T-34. We should all be thankful for its existence, for it is without doubt, that without it, the world would be devoid of most of us. For that alone, we should give it more respect than any other tank of WWII, even if nowadays it's former producers are primarily in a state which the West calls a hostile foreign dictatorship. If I, a Ukrainian educated in the West can admit to this, than you should be able to do the same.

[@pp3k3jamail]

T34 tank is the goat, deal with it

[@dvulpis29]

Best tanks were the inflatable tanks used by the Ghost Army

[@libertycowboy2495]

I read a book by a soviet tanker that started in t34 then moved to lend lease shermans. He FAR prefered the shermans. T34 was the most destroyed tank of the war.

[@daltonroller2998]

45,000 out of the 100,000 lost soviet vehicles.

[@MasterMind75427]

Majority of German forces were in the eastern front so no wonder T34 is most destroyed tank, but it won the war

[@Arkasha-Z]

I'm curious what book that is if you'd supply the name, I grew up in Russia and had an interest in tanks so my grandfather took me with him to see some of his friends from the war and I talked to two of them who served in Shermans and said the T-34 was a much more beloved tank in the USSR.

[@Shotout424]

@@MasterMind75427no, it didn’t. It was made very poorly and quality only improved near the very end of the war. Post war tanks still had the same issues as their ww2 brethren

[@MasterMind75427]

@@Shotout424 Many historians claim it was most important Soviet weapon of the war, but I guess they are all stupid

[@flavius5722]

The Sherman was superior in armour , equal in firepower, has radio unlike t34 , better firing rate , better suspension ,better survivability ,could be modified to be use in more roles , and was the second most produce What advantage T34 has except for pop culture movie made by non historians ? And no I am not a american

[@schizou]

Sherman, actually, had better firepower because gun was stabilised. But shermans armor was worse, except for M4A3E2. T-34's modifications included mine rollers, tractors, support vehicles, flamethrowers, anti air, and variety of tank destroyers using its chassis. Not to mention, it was made in a country, that was invaded at the same moment it was in production

[@Truerussiantigershark]

@@schizou The American and British Shermans had the same thing about modifications you do realize that

[@schizou]

@@Truerussiantigershark never said there wasnt

[@Some_Guy987]

W comment

[@user-st2eh3gz6k]

Um, maybe because the Red Army reached Berlin in 1945 and destroyed 80% of the German armed forces on the eastern front while the Western Allies moved like turtles in France, Italy, Belgium and Holland, and so on?

[@Madduckk]

Gonna have to argue that the Sherman was the best tank of the war

[@jeffa8683]

It was a great cannon fodder for the war but the is2 was vastly superior then replaced by the is3

[@andyfriederichsen]

Heavy tanks suffer from MANY problems.

[@Thefrogeboi]

When I play war thunder I get obliterated by these 😂

[@solalee4693]

57:59 smoothest rifle draw

[@blagojpejov4155]

Nice work on this video 😊

[@Demon-sh2wc]

War-time production model T-34’s might be some of the worst tanks ever produced.

[@nathanlp9917]

When Russians conducted random tests on their T 34. they found out that their tanks could only run for 200-300 Km until they encountered their first Problem/Breakdown, nontheless there is a reason why the T 34 is the most destroyed tank in WW2. The Soviets didnt care about Quality, they cared about Numbers, while on tank brokedown the new one wich just got off Production line delivered via Train passed it. And dont even get started on the armor, when welding they hardend their armor so much instead of ricocheting a Shell or just eating it, the glacia plate for example would break in two like ceramic tiles. L Tank.

[@o_gpotterhead]

It’s good when the engine doesn’t break down after 100s when the transmission works properly when the crews have properly training when the amour isn’t heat treated to much when all the parts are put in the tanks

[@Sprite7778iron]

Like the tiger 1?

[@schlirf]

Well made, Thanks!

[@awesomehpt8938]

I’d take a Sherman firefly over a Russian T-34 any day. Or a Sherman easy 8.

[@anhondacivic6541]

Or just any sherman at that

[@svon1]

no no its Barbarossa ...that means have fun in your M3Lee

[@keithallver2450]

My grandfather drove an M4A2 during WW2 and had a chance to meet with some Soviet tankers in Berlin at the end of the war. From what he told me a lot of them preferred the M4s they received through Lend Lease over the T-34., The thing they liked about it was its reliability, it wasn't as cramped, and much more user-friendly all while having comparable firepower and armor protection.

[@flavius5722]

​@@svon1M3 can penetrate T34 from any distance and have radio unlike T34 In Barbarossa many panzer 3 killed T34 by shooting them in the sides

[@Alex-pj8nz]

@@flavius5722The 75mm is only at the front of the tank or are you actually saying the 37mm gun can actually pen the armour. OK now I know you are talking trash.

[@carlosjarabo8653]

Excellent video. From the animation to the narration and soundtrack. Sound effects too.

[@VIPER-oh3br]

The T-34 had heavier armour than any medium tank produced to date, and there were problems with defective armour plates. Only company commanders' tanks could be fitted with radios (originally the 71-TK-3 radio set), due to their expense and short supply - the rest of the tank crews in each company signalled with flags. The T-34 only had a four-man crew, which required the commander to serve as gunner as well. Combined with a deficiency in optics when compared to their German opponents, these hampered the T-34 in long-range engagements. It had a two-man, manually traversed turret. This meant that the commander was also the gunner, and perhaps also a platoon leader. This placed an unrealistically high workload on the commander and was made worse by the fact that the turret lacked a basket, a floor which moves as the turret traverses. Without this, it was all too easy to trip over spent shells or other items as the turret moved. Gunnery problems was just plain poor. The degree of the Soviets' lack of appreciation of the Soviets' problems can be understood only when it is realized that the T-34s (like the T-26's and BT's before them) were supposed to attack at maximum speed consistent with terrain-and meanwhile take targets under fire without halting! Visibility from inside the T-34/76 was so dreadful that commanders often entered battle with the main turret hatch open, sheltering behind it as they tried to see what was happening. It wasn’t until the Model 1943 that the T-34 was finally provided with a cupola which incorporated periscopes similar to those seen on German tanks. Improvements in German tank and anti-tank guns meant that the T-34 rapidly became vulnerable even to frontal hits. The armor used on the T-34 was very hard, which meant that even a round which did not penetrate could cause lethal steel splinters to spall off the inside. The steeply sloped frontal armor also meant that the interior of the T-34 was very cramped indeed. When a T-34 was tested by US Army engineers in 1942, they were amazed that it was possible to fit four men wearing winter gear inside. The lack of interior space meant that the sides of the hull incorporated fuel cells which could be breached if hit by armor piercing rounds. Most early T-34s were not provided with radios. Only the platoon leader’s tank had a radio (approximately one tank in five). Communication during combat was intended to be by flag. In the ferocity and speed of an armored engagement, T-34 crews were supposed to wave flags at each other to communicate, though the lack of visibility meant that the chances of any other tank seeing those flags were slim indeed. As a result, attacks by T-34s usually lacked cohesion. Even by 1943, many T-34s did not have radios. The transmission was so crude that it self-destructed regularly and the loader often kept a sledgehammer handy with which to whack the transmission if the driver was unable to change gear. The main problem with the T-34 was the unreliability of its engine, drive gear, and suspension. According to the Armored Directorate of the Red Army, the average T-34 in World War Two lasted less than 200 kilometers (125 miles) before requiring major repair or overhaul. This means that a T-34 generally needed significant repairs before it had even used its first full tank of diesel. After the fall of the Soviet Union, we now know that these T-34s performed very badly indeed. In just six days of fighting, the Russian tank brigades lost 326 out of their 400 T-34s. But just 66 of these were combat losses - the rest were due to breakdowns. The Soviets considered its leaf spring suspension and 85 millimeter gun to be out-of-date. Yes, best tank of the war.

[@yung_doood]

i watched 2 minutes of the video and i went straight for the comments. 🫣

[@VIPER-oh3br]

@@yung_doood so much for the best tank in history 😅

[@yung_doood]

@@VIPER-oh3br people like these are the ones roasting the tiger and the panther. obviously the tiger and the königstiger werent the most reliable tanks. and honestly in germanys position it wasnt the smartest decision to go for rather advanced and complicated tanks. due to their limited ressources and because of time pressure it was kinda obvious that a few of the tigers would have certain problems. yet the tiger, königstiger or panther V were THE best tanks of the war imo. the only problem (for germany) was, they were not capable of producing 10s of thousands of them. but in a 1vs1 they were deadly and they showed it often enough.

[@yung_doood]

@@VIPER-oh3br and i aint a wehraboo, i just hate the fact that everybody still points the finger at the wehrmacht, while literally every nation in this damn war commited warcrimes and gruel things. yet nobody else got called out for it. kinda off topic though.

[@VIPER-oh3br]

@@yung_doood yeah I find it funny when people glorify Russian tanks, mainly the T34. Most German tanks were unmatched on the battlefield, even the Panzer IIs where ferocious early war. The only problem Germany had was numbers not enough supplies for veteran soldiers to push back millions of newly conscripted farmers that’ll soon die to hunger :(

[@Hakkapell]

T34 is the most overrated tank of WW2, far from the best. T34s produced during WW2 were built to terrible quality standards, to the point that it actually effected their ability to do their jobs. Just a few fun quirks of the T-34... Drivers had to use a sledgehammer to shift gears due to the terrible transmission, and the vehicle's actual top speed was very slow. The tranmissions were so unreliable, in fact, that tankers actually brought extra transmissions into battle with them strapped to the back of the tanks. Due to poor manufacturing and an attempt to rush vehicles out the door, many T-34s hit the front line without critical components or with manufacturing defects that led to the components being useless. My personal favorite is the models that left with unpolished steel lenses for the periscopes and sights instead of mirror glass, leading to tanks that were basically blind once they buttoned up, and whose weapons couldn't be aimed. The "Legendary sloped armor" of the T-34 also suffered in reality, due to the poor quality of Russian metallurgy and the poor welding quality... Many T-34s never actually suffered a penetrating hit, but defective armor plates and welds resulted in the crew dying anyway. And continuing on with survivability, survival rates for T-34 crewmen were TERRIBLE. Ergonomics were not a concern, and this led to huge casualties among crews. Perhaps the worst flaw of T-34s was their lack of radios... Many german accounts mention the poor coordination between T-34s, even so far as to say that if they shot at a convoy, the tank they hit would stop and respond while their buddies would simply drive on...

[@twink276]

Didn't the Soviets also lied about it's specifications, so they could sell more to other nations after WW2?

[@Demon-sh2wc]

@@twink276yeah, also they sold mostly to their puppets so it’s not like they can reject

[@Hakkapell]

@@twink276 Not only that, but they would demo their properly built, well-broken-in post-war production vehicles to prospective buyers, then actually deliver the junky wartime production models that were far, far lower in quality than what was advertised.

[@redcat4189]

during the Second World War, there were many tanks better than the T34, only it was the best in the conditions of the Second World War, in terms of price and efficiency. A tank with good armor, a good gun, with very good maneuverability and at a satisfactory price, you can hardly name a tank better)

[@W4lt3r89]

@@redcat4189 T-34 was an expensive tank, built badly. If built to standards, the cost would be more or less akin to an M4 Sherman. Which was a better tank in all aspects to the T-34.

[@briankirk5617]

The best tank or the most abundant tank of WW2?

[@Sprite7778iron]

The best tank is the one that is always available

[@niclink1030]

​@@Sprite7778ironso the sherman

[@subramanians5984]

@@niclink1030t34 was more available than Sherman

[@niclink1030]

@@subramanians5984 not really and it was still worse

[@subramanians5984]

@@niclink1030 t34 production numbers:57000 Sherman production numbers:50000 also t34 is the most infuential tank design of ww2

[@xj3714]

I would say the M4 Sherman was better just because of its versatility

[@MasterMind75427]

T-34 had better armour and top speed

[@mikemiller1263]

@@MasterMind75427 had better armor but worse survivalibity

[@MasterMind75427]

@@mikemiller1263 That's because many of T-34 were rushed and poorly made for obvious reasons, but if we compare tanks we compare best versions possible. Also, Soviets had harder fight because they faced 80% of German army which contributed to high losses of T-34

[@mikemiller1263]

@@MasterMind75427 no i mean invidual tanks, Shermans protected the crew extremly well, the wet ammo stowage just was effective

[@MasterMind75427]

@@mikemiller1263 Sherman had better crew survival rate because of it's design. It was bulkier, crew had more space and better chance to survive when being hit, but disadvantage was tank itself was easier to hit. That was especially important when fighting tiger tanks. Early versions of both tanks couldn't penetrate tiger from long range and T-34 was more succesful in this engagement because of it's smaller design and better mobility. Overall, both tanks had advantages depending on combat situation

[@gllmatu9599]

Great video!

[@zane2272]

Here come the Sherman fans

[@franzenders344]

Quantity has a quality all of its own. A quote from someone I do not recall at the moment.

[@mikee2198]

The T-34 had two big upgrades. The first was the Soviet T-34-85. The second was the German Panther.

[@inductivegrunt94]

Best tank? That is subjective, but also dependent on the nation in question as well. Japan wouldn't be able to use Tigers and Panthers because of the environments the tanks fought in, the Western Allies couldn't use the T-34 because of the poor crew conditions, and the Germans couldn't use the Shermans(besides the ones they captured) because they just couldn't manufacture and supply such tanks because of the country's industry capabilities as the war dragged on. These aren't the sole reason for each tank and country, but they are good examples of why the question of "Best Tank of WW2" is subjective.

[@doggydude2668]

the best tank is the tank that had the best stats it really just ends at that

[@Thatguyrom]

I love these videos

[@damjan847]

A lot of mad and malding americans in the comments defending shermans lmao

[@irrusitikaani7205]

For a tank enthusiast… i can say this was entertaining.😊

[@badtoro5738]

No it’s clearly any Italian tank

[@xDynamiteDogx]

I'll take my Romanian tanks tyvm

[@Kar98_Karl]

The T34 was a formidable tank, and I agree, but the best? Are you fucking high?! 😂

[@noble9864]

Keep it Cheeki Breeki, comrades.

[@hellgato777]

How many Tiger tanks does it take to sink a Yamato?

[@doggydude2668]

none because their engines would die first

[@toddrobbins4608]

The T34 was junk. Absolute crap. The problem wasn't the design as much as the terrible quality control during manufacturing. They were constantly breaking down and the armour was absolute crap because of the temps they used to heat treat. Sure, a lot of times a round wouldn't penetrate but it would still kill some of not all of the crew thanks to spawling.

[@davidcartwright3097]

Shermans achieved a 2 to 1 kill ratio against the T-34-85 in Korea. I rest my case. :) Great video!

[@mredvin7367]

Title

[@clydepatrick27]

Those were Pershing tanks. Not shermans. 😅

[@xDynamiteDogx]

@@clydepatrick27 And if not Pershings, then Pattons.

[@subramanians5984]

Then why were they called ‘invincible’ by m24 tankers which used the same 75 as the Sherman?

[@davidfans5852]

Is this different document them the one you released a year Ago?

[@Nuke_Israel.2025]

Simple as Simle History: T-34 wasn't best tank, it was in fact one of the worst tanks. Soviets first and foremost wanted it to be cheap cannon fodder, and only its high numbers made it somewhat "good", it had soo much mechanical issues and overall reliability was low, and this gave it no chance of being the best tank. It can be said, that title of best tank depends on its greatest strengths: for example, the M4 Sherman is best tank in terms of being very cheap, easy to mass manufacture, higly reliable and mobile. In terms of best raw firepower for a tank was Pzkpfw. VIB Tiger II (King Tiger), but if we count prototypes, then the big Pzkpfw. VIII Maus would have that place. In terms of raw speed, the BT-7 was best. So it depends how we look at "best" tank. If we count all 3 main aspects of best tank being firepower, protection and mobility, it would be propably the M4 Sherman, but in my opinion the best tank of WWII was Pzkpfw V Panther, it had good firepower, mobility and protection, was much cheaper and easier to manufacture than rest of most effective German tanks like Tiger I, the only thing that made it not 100% best tank, was low number build.

[@Nickee_mcnugget]

Tbh the Germans were very close to soviet factories and the Soviets lost most of their BT-7s and T-26s in the first few months of the war so they needed armor fast, however by the end of the war with the introduction of the T-34-85, most of the issues of the T-34 was fixed. But I agree that it was poorly built in the early years of the war.

[@colmcmillan173]

Ironically, the Germans might well not have received a surprise with the T-34, Katyusha, PPSh, Il-2, etc., if on the eve of the war with the USSR they had conducted an elementary reconnaissance of the enemy's combat power. But they did not bother to do this because of typical European arrogance and a sense of superiority over "subhumans". Guderian wrote in his memoirs that Hitler first read his book "Attention, Tanks!" only when it became obvious that the Barbarossa plan had not worked. Guderian writes that Hitler was shocked and said that he would not have started a war against the USSR if he had known that the "untermensch" had 10,000 tanks. The West has demonstrated the same disregard for Russians now. After the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was concluded, the Germans invited the Russians to brag about their tank superiority over the "untermensch". The Russians were stunned. They reported to Stalin that the Germans were boasting as great achievements of those solutions that were already being decommissioned in Soviet tanks. If not for the stupid confidence in their superiority, the Germans would not have had to feverishly develop the Panther as an analogue of the T-34.

[@TheHSTguy]

The T34 is the worst tank of the war I would look at lazerpig video about the T34 to learn the right facts

[@bruhbruh9263]

bro imagine been the first crew to use one of these them mfs prolly felt indestructible

[@samsarex4318]

Nothing can even match the Bob semple tank therefore it is the best tank

[@terraflow__bryanburdo4547]

I think we can get a 17 pounder in that thing!

[@samsarex4318]

@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 just put it in sideways got anymore room for a radio?

[@klaus-peterborn1370]

A secret weapom in deed , any enemy was unable to shoot back from laughting.

[@Cedi346]

Nice vid 😊

[@bjornsmith9431]

T 34 was not invincible to PAK 37 mm anti tank guns side hits, the track and in the engine, plus it had a 75% causlites rate on the Eastern front and the M4 Sherman in US tank corps service, the tanks have the lowest causlites rate in terms of death rate 1486 tankers kill out of 49560 send overseas, half causlites was outside the m4 tanks.

[@Alex-pj8nz]

Doesn’t tigers eat the M4 for snacks 😂

[@showoe3126]

@@Alex-pj8nz not nearly as much as people may think, shermans can and did kill tigers, especially the later 76 model. additionally, the tiger was far less commonly faced by the americans than models like the panzer 3 and 4

[@terraflow__bryanburdo4547]

​@@showoe3126Americans were too late for most pz IIIs, but faced stug IIIs, panthers, hetzers and jagdpanzer IV

[@svon1]

this friends, is called cherry picking information, 1st of all i can confirm from german sources the 37mm was useless however the 50mm variant used at the same time could do some damage if ya know were to aim, 2nd the sherman's drivers were not also the factory workers who made them because the US/UK was playing on easy mode compared to the veteran-difficulty the Soviets had

[@bjornsmith9431]

@@Alex-pj8nzby early 1942 the Tiger, Panzer 3 -4 and Panther Tanks build at that time lack manganese and no vanadium to harder the armor steel plate, which lead to weak armor plates causing spalling inside the tanks deadly steel fragmentation, shots from 75mm M4 tanks could in reality knock out or destory Tigers tanks which was rare in the Western front, that why M4 tanks with 75mm guns knock out/ destroyed Panzer 4 and Panther long barrel 75mm gun tanks winning the battle of Arracourt, even the French win tank battles with M4 tanks in 1944 at the Battle of Dompaire.

[@Ringobobingo]

Even though the variant only saw limited action at the end of the war, its still a ww2 tank so slap me in a super pershing and id be happy. :)

[@bluewolf194]

Someone summon LazerPig.

[@opoxious1592]

Best tank of the war is the "Panther type G", period. And although the STUG III and Jagdpanther were not tanks in the direct sense, they were far better and effective tank killers than the T-34.

[@KakennRi]

Stug3 is not better than T-34.And T-34 is not better than stug 3

[@ChineseContructionDozer]

Simple History meant, *Overall* best tank, the T-34 was balanced in firepower and survivability, but it all depends on its production amount, as you probably know, the Soviets build TONS, and when I mean tons, I meant *TONS*, its already proven that WW2 was a numbers game, both Soviet Russia and the USA excelled in creating vast amounts of tanks, but the Germans were a bit late and focused in creating Hitler's fantantasies and other advanced tech, but by the time those new techs even touched the production line, Germany was already surrounded, but I do kinda agree with your statement, those tanks ARE proven to be good, but theres just more fish than shark.

[@coolguy2830]

The animation is as slick as Leonardo DiCaprios hair

[@BrewBlaster]

Has anyone done a video on What If Operation Barbarossa didn't happen?

[@sexiestmaninhalflife2]

Please do video on sam manekshaw

[@International_Corn]

Lets not all forget about the Tiger that confronted 50 T34 and none of the T34s was able to pen the Tiger

[@Arkasha-Z]

Mind giving more details?

[@SkyDream0655]

I dont think 50 t34s faced one tiger at the same time

[@noodlebomber4847]

Oh no. Another German fan who fell for the story again.

[@Java_the_doggy]

Can you make the battle of Yamato

[@thechlebek901]

T-34 being the best tank? lol ok

[@Grant-nt9pt]

I am personally of the opinion that the M4 Sherman and it’s variants are the best tanks of ww2. It was easy and cheap to produce, ship overseas, and fuel. It was easy to train crews on It was relatively spacious for a tank (something the T-34 is extremely lacking of) It is decently quick, especially for a medium It has a slow stabilising gyro for firing on the move It has good support capabilities, with sometimes three machine guns, good HE shells, and smoke shells for assisting infantry The 75 could easily penetrate all types of panzers The 76.2 could penetrate the front plate of a tiger (Those are main gun sizes) It had some of the best optics and made it easy to spot enemies Later models had liquid ammo storage (not sure if that’s ww2 or post war) Some people say that the t-34 has good armour. However, on the t-34, the soviets hardened the steel of their armour at temperatures that were too high, which led to it being brittle. Often, a shell from an enemy would cause spalling inside of the tank even without penetrating, and if it did the plates would crack and shatter around the impact, making it impossible to keep driving. I would encourage you to watch LazerPig’s video on the subject.

[@KakennRi]

I don't think the Sherman is better or worse than the T-34 at times, but be careful not to focus too much on its shortcomings as that would be biased, the T-34 had the highest mobility of any medium tank, was smaller and harder to hit, had a bigger main gun, and gradually improved in quality towards the end of the war. The lazerpig video is detailed but slightly biased, so I suggest you use Wikipedia.

[@Grant-nt9pt]

@@KakennRi Thanks for the comment, you do make some good points. I would just like to say that Wikipedia might not be completely neutral in it’s facts, and could contain errors. You are correct, however, that the Sherman had a tall profile and the cast hull variant had some noticeable weak spots. Also, Shermans were upgraded during the war: different mantlet designs, different engines, different turret designs, the aforementioned liquid ammo storage and so on. But I do see your point that they both have their own niches, but I feel that the Sherman preforms better at most things. I would love to hear more of your viewpoint!

[@user-ve3jk4uc3o]

Nah you have to give it to the crocodile great armour, great weapons and some of the best survivability throughout the war

[@ChineseContructionDozer]

*Overall* best tank was the T-34

[@user-ve3jk4uc3o]

@@ChineseContructionDozer in quantity yes but the reliability and survivability of the t34 wasn't good tbh

[@ChineseContructionDozer]

@@user-ve3jk4uc3o Agreed, but when I found your comment, I kind of got confused, because everyone chose the Shermans, Panthers, Tigers etc. as their choice to dethrone the T-34, if I can ask, why the Crocodile?

[@user-ve3jk4uc3o]

@@ChineseContructionDozer Armour and firepower of the Churchill with a long range flamethrower on it and it has one of the best win to loss ratios of any tank during WW2, sure you have to counteract that with the cost of one vs a t34 but I think the higher survivability is worth it

[@viewofascene]

The best tank of WW2 is the one you hate, and the worst is your favourite. Sorry, thems the rules

[@samsungtvmail]

There is a Russian word that means especially antiroad ,antipath, Unpath, unway ,wrongway ,noway." It's because of the thick lair of topsoil that is airy porous and rich in the summer and is a Jell-O in fall and frozen in winter.

[@rc59191]

The T 34 really isn't as good as it's cracked up to be. It was notoriously unreliable to the point they'd carry a spare transmission because it would break town after 100 miles or less.

[@terraflow__bryanburdo4547]

"Hey bro, you got an extra Panther final drive you can spare?" 😂

[@rc59191]

@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 I'm not a wheraboo if that's what you're implying.

[@terraflow__bryanburdo4547]

@@rc59191 nah, but all tanks introduced during combat operations had teething issues. This is why the pzIV, Sherman etc stayed on....reliable due to long field use.

[@xDynamiteDogx]

@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 We won' even start on the Ferdinand and it's transmission

[@teotselek1536]

With it's flaws like any other Tank it remains for me the best WW2 Tank!!...

[@nothing-lf4zi]

t34 being the best tank is literal stalinist propaganda that was in place until the 90s or early 2000s.

[@stevehartz4615]

Strength in numbers the tiger destroy ed them .

[@Eric-bv4my]

31:42 “they are all rushing forward…” don’t you mean “Russian forward”? I’ll see myself out

[@thesovietduck2121]

I'd honestly just hide from the government to not get consripted tbh

[@macieknowak81]

I love tis video

[@Isaiahbowling10]

Very nice

[@bltbrickstudio4862]

I disagree, I believe that the Panther was the best tank of the Second World War. One of the only reasons the T-34s beat the Panther was because of their numbers. In my research, I have found that the Panther was better in almost every way

[@bltbrickstudio4862]

While that is true, the best shoes or the best cars are expensive and aren’t produced in high numbers but that does t rob them of their title of “the best” now does it

[@ChineseContructionDozer]

Bob Semple solo's

[@Wt.__.Player]

Well the tiger 1

[@demian9715]

Best Tank in WW2 is now the worst tank in Ukraine Conflict.

[@schizou]

Source: trust me bro

[@twink276]

That explains why the Russians only had 1 parade t34 left last time 😂

[@titakristengco]

It a Obsolete tank now but still use by Ukrainian.

[@zillsburyy1]

STUG 3

[@Neverpullingitout]

Why remake on this video i saw a year ago??

[@AlonePopTart]

Because simple histroy recycles content more than any other channel on youtube. Only like 1/3 videos they make these days are actually new, the rest are just bullshit compilations.

[@Neverpullingitout]

@@AlonePopTart we gotta make new history i guess

[@sghsdhdkfh]

Why did t43 medium tank never seen in battles?

[@xDynamiteDogx]

It was outdated by the point it was introduced. Functionally the same as a T-34-85, which was already able to be mass produced. If the T-43 was ever made available, it would have been close enough to the complete categorical shift of vehicles from "Heavy, Medium, Light" etc. to predefined roles, the modern terms, such as "MBT, IFSV". The T-50 and T-60 series were but a few years behind, and became the new staples for the Soviets. They're still in use today, with a handful being fielded, and obliterated, in Ukraine at the present.

[@geesecouchtaming7223]

The Russian bias is real

[@danielsuarez3198]

There's a reason why the Germans feared it unless you were in a tiger.

[@seashellguy9416]

​@@danielsuarez3198the armor on the T34 was so badly made that even if it didn't penetrate, the tank basically collapsed

[@tizi087]

it's called spalling or fracture due to left over stresses from heating mistakes@@seashellguy9416

[@klaus-peterborn1370]

@@danielsuarez3198 More from the numbers as from this tanktype.

[@nirvana4165]

Japan and Italy tears with their eyes.

[@HughzaccharyVelasco-by4xx]

You know what's better the semple tank

[@WakJon-ii8ze]

Tiger 1 should be best tank ww2

[@Hitman-zp5wi]

Oh man we arent 25 seconds in and i have to correct......simple History i never thought i'd say or type that SO The 37mm Pak 36 German anti-tank gun used during the Second World War was always deployed in fireteams of 3-6 think of the scene in Fury where the 4 Sherman's are shooting into the treeline 2 of them would almost always be the Pak 36 because the 37mm shells were very easy for Germany to make in mass quantities and they would mainly use those 37mm guns against troop transports or half tracks or transport trucks "Logistics trucks" but the other guns would almost always be pak 40's The German 75 millimeter anti-tank gun a version of the same 75mm gun mounted in the Panzer 4's the KwK 40's So here's how it would actually go the T-34-57 rolls into view ALL gun crews would load and lock in on the front upper plate on the T-34 YES I KNOW my World of Tanks players they actually never taught anyone to Shoot for the tracks annnnywho the Pak 36 crews commander would scream the command FIRE and they would send a round IF that failed to penetrate the armor the closest Pak 40 battery commander would immediately without hesitation fallow up with his 75mm gun reducing the incoming T34 to a flaming wreck The T34's the 57/85's actually sucked they often left the factory with broken welds or broken turret rings LazerPig actually has a very good video he did on this topic and that was posted a year ago kzbin.info/www/bejne/eXq9Z4N8jrqAa9E

[@rubber924]

The comment I was looking for. Lazerpig has done so much to share accurate and unbiased info on tanks.

[@commandercody4682]

its not the best tank, its the worst tank

[@xS1leNtRapt0rZ]

As a war thunder player I cannot express my hate for this tank

[@heyaytlgno3951]

Unrelated: it’s actually very telling that simple history, after all these years, has never done a video on the My Lai massacre. And American and Soviet made tanks were the best

[@dansmith4077]

Great video

[@user-kt8yp5ho2y]

No Tiger tank???

[@raf9826]

The Shermans were objectively the best tanks of WW2, but clearly this channel doesn't want to lose their slavaboo audience😂

[@theman-wq5on]

it does get them revenue so

[@iconchik]

Are these the ones that burned like matches? Or the ones that were the cannon cape from the USA?

[@prinzstarrk]

If the title were different it would even be acceptable but the best tank in LoL war is not even better than a STUG 3

[@jeorgedavid3239]

The German flank gun fail because of the short barrel & as well the Sherman fail because of the short barrel the German took the German 88mm flank gun & use it on the tiger tank.but i still love all battle tanks

[@epik-fm4pz]

Nice video bro

[@johnnygreen2556]

Downvoted. The T-34 was one of the worst tanks ever built which was prone to breakdowns, was literally a deathtrap if it was penetrated, and had a cramped compartment. calling this thing the best tank of WWII over the Medium tank M4 is a mortal skin.

[@oriolesfan61]

Perhaps if soviet tank workers didnt have giant Stalin scowling over their work they have produced better. Smiling, thumbs up Stalin?

[@napalmfaceattack7950]

Frommer stop. 1912