Tiger 1 vs m4 Sherman remake

[@lavishkirad5816]

King tiger supermacy ⚡⚡

[@goob4529]

Bro it was ass 💀

[@reapertalon]

Lemme give a comparison: Armor-----Tiger Gun----Tiger Penetration---Tiger Mobility----Sherman Survivability----Sherman Crew Comfort----Sherman Reload Speed----Sherman Reliability----Sherman Variants----Sherman

[@MarkBlack.]

Живучесть это к шерману точно не относится, у тигра во лбу 100мм качественной стали😂 И в реальном бою тигр уничтожит любой танк второй мировой

[@reapertalon]

​@MarkBlack. Mr. Wehraboo, a couple of corrections. The Sherman had the highest crew survivability of the war, with an 80% chance of the crew getting out if it were hit. The Tiger, if knocked out, (and it could be, because Sherman Firefly and Easy Eight go brrrrr), the crew would have a significantly harder time getting out of the tank. Tigers were also extremely unreliable and expensive to produce. The Sherman could be mass produced and shipped to the frontlines in a single week. It took the Tiger two weeks to just be built alone. Logistics win wars. And the Sherman, was the king of logistics

[@reapertalon]

Oh, and a quick addendum, survivability means the survival of the crew IF the tank was knocked out, or otherwise disabled.

[@jonny2954]

@@reapertalon No, survivability is the accumulation of all crew protection measures, that includes signature (don't be seen), silhouette (don't be hit) armor (don't be penetrated) and post penetration (don't be killed).

[@jonny2954]

@@reapertalon In fact the success of the Sherman is the reason why to this day the US stuck to the tank design philosophy of light, cheap, simple, easy to mass produce tanks. *M1A2 SEPv3, 66.8 tons, 27 million USD unit cost* _Hmm... Perhaps the Germans were right..._

[@heroicmachine2716]

Height is not a positive point though

[@Yessev_2a]

It depends. If you want it to defend, a heavy tank is a good option, it can also be used to attack enemies head on :p

[@operativesfromfrwispmc9859]

As long the Transmission wont broke down and yes the fact that is still a fatal weakness for Tiger Family.

[@BEANBOYOBEANITH]

cost and resource efficiency, sherman

[@jonny2954]

Tell that to the 27 million USD 66.8 ton M1A2 SEPv3. Guess which tank design philosophy lives on to this day.

[@BEANBOYOBEANITH]

@@jonny2954 the sherman was good cause of how modifiable it was, so pointing out a specific version is a bit redundant

[@BEANBOYOBEANITH]

@@jonny2954 also they didnt have the abrams in ww2, war changes?!

[@jonny2954]

@@BEANBOYOBEANITH That went completely over your head. Sherman design philosophy: Cheap, simple, easy to mass produce in high numbers. Tiger design philosophy: Expensive, complex, resource intensive in mass production in low numbers. Now guess which design philosophy of the two above modern Main Battle Tanks follow... The Germans were right.

[@BEANBOYOBEANITH]

@@jonny2954 you cant compare a ww2 tank to a tank that entered service in 2017? in ww2, one was made for a scramble of the world fighting itself with low resources and desperation, and the other was made by a worldsuperpower with no actual imminent threat with lots of technological advances… a lot of which came from ww2

[@user-jt2lq5hz7d]

Вообще довольно странно сравнивать но все же. У тигра лучше броня, скорость, вооружение, живучесть. Шерман более прост в обслуживании, больше никаких особо серьёзных плюсов нет

[@GracedBavaria]

The Tiger I is actually taller at 3.00m while the M4 Ranges from 2.74m-2.97m.

[@FOR-DEMOCRACY658]

oh

[@user-ez2le2bg9v]

Speed Tiger 1 38km Sherman 37 km

[@goob4529]

The Sherman was 48kmh though and How long does it take the Tiger to reach that though compared to the Sherman... And that doesnt account for Efficiency Either

[@Alekssandro-di-Buonaparte]

Tiger ist stark!

[@MarkBlack.]

Не особо правильное решение сравнивать эти танки, тигров мало, а шерманов куча. В бою 1на1 Или 1на2 тигр победит легко У тигра как бы лучше проходимость из за хорошей ходовой В тиграх были лучшие танкисты Германии, в шерманах обычные танкисты