Russian T-34 compared to ours?

[Margaret Diann]

Just noticed that
the Russian Tank, the T34, was an excellent tank used during WWII

How do our tanks in Iraq compare to it?

It had diesel fuel (less likely to ignite than gasoline)

It had a simple design for easy manufacturing and repair

It was a 2" thick steel that seems resistant to shells

Its artillery could penetrate a German tank from one mile away


It had a wide track that distributed the weight better - didn't get stranded easily.

[catman]

Maggie...the T-34 went out of service over 40 years ago.

Trav

[Margaret Diann]

If it was such a good tank ... why?

[catman]

It was a great tank for it's time, it's time has long since passed and there are better metals for armor, calibers for weapons, computers for range finding...etc.

two inches of steel would not stop todays armor piecing machinegun ammo, let alone 105 mm main gun round!

Trav

[DMZ-LT]

Thats a 120mm Main Gun on the M-1

[catman]

John...We are both right to a point, the M-1 has a 105, the M-1A1 and the M-1A2 both have a 120mm, score each of us a half point! And the first round is on me!!!

Trav

[Seascamp]

Actually the T-34 was a very good tank, given the Soviet criteria of quantity had a quality all its own. In engineering detail and construction the German Mark IV panzer was better on paper but out numbered and swarmed on the battle field, and therefore no contest.
The T-34 suspension and road wheel system were designed by an American and after our own US Army turned it down, the Soviets bought into it. For simplicity of operation, ease of manufacturing, reasonable combat worthiness, maneuverability and a high manufacturing rate, the T-34 was hard to beat.
Once the US got spun up, the Sherman was comparable in concept, but still no match for the larger German Tiger panzers. But like the Soviet?s approach, quantity proved to be the tactic that won the day. Head to head, a Sherman most likely would have out lasted a T-34 that didn?t have a reputation for continuous metal stress durability. 500 off road miles were about the drive train/suspension stress limits of the T-34 and beyond that number, their duty was considered done. And it wasn?t common for a T-34 to actually survive those kinds of off road miles anyway. At the time and situation within the Soviet Union, quantity and high manufacturing rates necessarily precluded more durable and expensive fabrication steels and therefore expected tank life time.

As a note, the early swarms of T-34 tanks used in Moscow?s May Day parades were kept in special tank barns, only taken out and run for the May Day parade and therefore kept very ?fresh?. It would not have been a good idea to have breakdown in front of Stalin and crew, nope, and that had to be a white knuckle exercise all the way.

In modern terms, the Soviet T-72 was the eventual successor of the T-34 and was reasonably easy pickings for the M1 Abrams or Brit Chieftain so I believe it safe to say the Soviet T series successors got well off the technology curve by GWI.

And during GWI, probably the best thing to do with an older T series like the T-54 was to park it and go AWOL at first opportunity. Or, as the Iraqi?s did, dig them in and use them as fixed defensive gun batteries. The poor old T-34 would have been nothing more than a down range target that self-disassembled with hits from an A-10 35 mm DU rounds.

Scamp