How Did Shermans Defeat the Superior Tiger I?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- Panzerkampfwagen VI aka Tiger I is a legendary war machine. This German heavy tank was used by tank legends such as Erwin Rommel and Michael Wittmann. It fought in the scorching heat of the North African deserts as well as on the icy battlefields of Kursk.
This steel juggernaut was designed to make breakthroughs on the battlefield by destroying enemy tanks at long range while absorbing hits from anti-tank guns.
It’s fame kept growing on during the post-war years as Tiger 1 found itself in many movies and video game series like Medal of Honor, Call of Duty and Commandos.
There is precisely 1 working Tiger I in the world.
This tank was used in the 2014 film Fury, the first time a real Tiger 1 has appeared in a feature film since They Were Not Divided (1950).
The venerable M-4 Sherman was a product of a different doctrine.
This tank was named after the famous American Civil War general William T. Sherman and became a legend under the command of General Patton.
Sherman was admired by both allies and foes.
Despite the initial Sherman's flaws, it underwent a number of upgrades and developed into an extremely dangerous foe to Tiger I.
Join our UA-cam channel by clicking here: bit.ly/3asNo2n
Find us on Instagram: bit.ly/3PM21xW
Find us on Facebook: bit.ly/3t2Huvb
Find us on Twitter: bit.ly/3wQfXzA
Find us on TikTok: bit.ly/3wNsBOu
Get the latest stories: interestingeng...
1 Tiger is equal to 10 Shermans. But there is always the 11th Sherman
And the 27.46153846153846 Sherman’s after that one
Who’s quote was that again?
@@zeeshanarif8687SpicyBurrito69's
History tells another story
And that another 88mm medium velocity shel
The Tiger was not encountered very often by American tankers(British crewed Sherman’s actually were).
They are two different tanks fulfilling two entirely different roles.
Tiger was a breakthrough tank and not meant to be used all the time. Tiger had about 6 months on the front until Germany switched from offensive operations to defensive. At this time Tiger became a very clumsy and expensive tank destroyer. While it was good in this role, the extended combat sorties led to severe maintenance problems and many had to be abandoned as the Germany Army was in retreat.
Sherman was a medium tank that fulfilled its mission quite well. The Normandy Breakout and race across France was textbook US Armored Division doctrine. The only thing that stopped them was the supply chain couldn’t keep up.
The Sherman was such a good design that Israel were still using them into the 1970’s.
Yeap that fatty could live long and prosper
The Germans could not compete with the sheer numbers of Sherman's and the T-34s being produced. Once they lost control of the skies it was all over.
The firefly fixed those tigers.
Lol...😂, right
by 1945 , the armour quality on German tanks had deteriorated , thanks to allied bombing the "Tiger factories " , so as The Sherman tanks evolved , the big cats became less resilient against the allied tanks and tank destroyers , some of whom were ALSO based on the M4 ( like the M 10 Wolverine )
These mainly affected the Panthers and Tiger II, I believe the Tiger I line kept the high quality parts and production for the entirety of the war, hence why barely any were made
No mention of the Sherman firefly - the big cat killer , WHY ?
Because it’s not popular unless you are from the UK or Commonwealth. Yes the US did eventually bring a 76mm Sherman into revive but it wasn’t available on D-Day but the Firefly was, plus the 17pdr packed far more punch. The other point not made was that the majority of the tanks Michael Whitman knocked out in Villegas-Bocage were Cromwell tanks & their QF75mm probably had to be 6” (yes six inches) away from a tiger to knock it out. Yes they did have a few Fireflys but what was the first tank he knocked out?? A Firefly!
It was very rare and hardly ever met a tiger anyway!
@@andrewkatai521 the firefly that killed micheal wittman: bruh
50,000 Shermans as opposed to about 8,000 Tiger Ones probably had something to do with it.
According to the video only 1,300 Tigers were made. - 2:36
@truthseeker9454 I accept your correction, but that only further proves my point.
@@SKBottom Agreed! I wasn't trolling you, just offering the more accurate number since I saw it in the video. Peace. 😀
This is how! The Brits wedged a 17 pounder in its turret and you had the Firefly. Tank Destroyer.
It's amazing that the Sherman did as well as it did given how it was outgunned and out armored by it's German counterparts.
Unless you were in a Firefly version of the Sherman , you had very bad odds of surviving an attack from a Tiger. I watched a YT video on one of the last battles in Germany involving tanks and the Allied tank crews were very discouraged with their tanks which had great difficulty penetrating German armor and they stood no chance against an 88 gun. The Germans could not replace their loses but the Americans could - game over. Also the Americans had overwhelming artillery and air superiority.
Maybe the short 75 gun Sherman would have a hard time killing a Tiger, but the ones with the 76mm and 17 pounder guns would have no issue going through that cat’s armor.
It seems it became the ultimate tag team strategy the tankers developed by using number of Sherman’s flanking the big German tanks, the did not mobility that the faster Sherman did. If they hit in the side or back the round fired could penetrate and kill the tank, as the armor in those areas was thinner. If a Sherman tried to attack the front it was suicidal. So tankers learned quickly if lived through the first encounter.
They used their mobility to shoot it right in the ol' Maybach!
So many of these WW II tank comparisons fail to mention the fact that the Americans had to get those tanks across the Atlantic. Weight mattered. Germany would have had trouble getting Tigers across just the English Channel if they had gone ahead with Operation Sea Lion.
"Sea Lion" was planned for 1940 and could possibly have happened in 1941 instead. Tigers did not exist until 1942.
88 mm anti tank gun captain questioned casually by his guard talked about the action he was captured in, said as soon as the m-4's appeared we knocked them out, shot until we ran out of ammo unfortunately, you didn't run out of tanks.
So many people say that the it took 10 Shermans to kill a tiger and that is such a lie it took like 2-4 with 75mm with a 76mm it was more like 2-3 and that’s not even mentioning the fact that the chances of seeing a tiger on the western front was so low and in most cases where they did fight a tiger they actually won and since the chances of seeing a tiger were so low you would probably be fighting a panther or a PZ IV and the Sherman had not problem with penetrating a PZ IV Tiger IIs we’re more common than a normal tiger (that’s if you find one that hasn’t been abandoned by it’s crew or knocked out) so tank engagements on the western front were most likely
panther v Sherman
StuG v Sherman
Panzer IV v Sherman
And the eastern front is just brutality
I appreciate that more people think the same. But the 76 thing is off because it only took one Sherman with a 76 to knock out the tiger. They just have to fire first.
@@THE_Dildozer. yeah I forgot about that
I don’t think I’ve ever drove a world war 2 tank
@@davidthompson6834 I’ve been in a couple like a Stuart a Sherman and a panzer IV
I wonder instead of regular M4 shermans how would a tiger do against the Sherman Jumbo, they iften had the L/55 76 millimeter cannon and they mainly carried HVAP rounds which could easily go through the front of even the panther
same - poorly
Johanne: ...Tommy, Ivan, Yank....face to face you cannot stop it. Cannot kill it. Cannot survive it's bite ...TIGER
Keep in mind that in parallel (competition) with its Armor Branch, the US army's US Tank Destroyer program fielded a whole family of lightly armored highly mobile TDs with 3" (M10), ,76mm (M18 ), and 90mm (M36) high velocity anti-tank cannons. Thus, US Army Ordnance had low priorities for upgunned M4s, and rejected several 76mm prototypes (including the British Firefly) in favor of the M4A376(w), which when into full production early 1944. Hundreds of the M4A376(W)s were left in the UK on D-Day, as existing logistics plans were built around the TDs, so the new M4 were considered redundant,.
U.S. manufacturing capacity wins this round.
I love them both
So we make a platoon of the Sherman's with the new canon's (9 Sherman's) and a tiger.
History is written by the victors ...
How Did Shermans Defeat the Superior Tiger I?
1000 Sherman vs 1 Tiger.........
Errors in this are:
1) the German 88mm in the Tiger I was not the best anti tank gun as the British 17pdr was actually better.
2) the British 17pdr was 76.2mm whilst the US had a 76mm gun, which was slightly more accurate but has less penetration. Also the Sherman Firefly (17pdr fitted Sherman) was available 2-3 months before the US 76mm Sherman. The Comet had a version of the 17pdr (although it was 76.2mm it was called 77mm to stop confusion) which with APDS shot was probably the best Allied tank gun because although it had a slightly lower muzzle velocity, it could actually hit things - unfortunately the 17pdr with APDS was almost useless over 500m due to being inaccurate.
Lucky for the Americans they very rarely encountered the tigers tanks.
Numbers that's it.there is not much of a argument here.
Easy Eight easy does it..
Numerical air and ground superiority is how.
Something that never gets mentioned in these comparisons is that Allies most common temporary bridge was rated at 40 tons, so it could just take a single fully-loaded sherman with a ton or two to spare. If the US had built the most kick-ass heavy tank in the world in the early 40s, it wouldn't have mattered because you couldn't get it to the battlefield. The over 40-ton tanks we fielded late in the war were possible because the engineers had the time to have built up sturdier bridges by that point, but early 44, those tanks wouldn't have made it out of normandy.
if you can choose in wich one you rather be in a one to one combat. i choose the Tiger, every single day. there is no comparison between this 2. it wil be the same as a combat between a Tiger 1 and a Leopard 2.
And when you Tiger broke down, without a replacement you would likely be given a rifle and told to fight as an infantryman. What’s the likelihood of being ‘one to one’. What if the enemy saw you first or had a gun perfectly capable of penetrating your front armour? It’s not a computer game.
If tiger could keep Sherman's at a distance. Undoubtedly the tiger would be victorious. But in close the speed & manouverality favoured the Sherman. Plus supiour numbers factor
The thing about tigers is if two Sherman’s are on either side of it, it can’t win no matter what. Not to mention if you broke down you had almost no chance of getting the replacement parts needed to repair your tank.
And yes, it only took two or three Sherman’s to kill a tiger, not five to ten.
This myth comes from Sherman platoons always coming in groups of 5 or more.
Sherman’s, while being in massive numbers of more than 50,000 Sherman’s across all the variants, this doesn’t mean that they weren’t also produced with very high quality, they were able to operate for longer than German tanks (specifically the Tigers and Panthers) and wouldn’t burst into flames just by driving a little too fast.
That’s not even mentioning the M18 or M10
Dildo😊
Also due to how losses were counted
Tigers one shot every sherman😂😂It was more likely to run out of armour than run out of tigers!
These new "Sherman are great vids" ignore the 1000's of German anti tank guns, which would more likely be uncounted.
Ever heard of the jumbo?
the bigger the guns got on sherman tanks the bigger the stiffy I got
The tiger was never superior, it just had a really powerful gun that had good range, other then that, it was inferior.
WHAT ARE U TALKING ABOUT?
This upbeat robot voice is impressive.
If the Sherman firefly is that good why they not been use in Korean war?
Because the British didn’t need to. They had the Centurion tank.
The Centurion existed
Seriously?
There is no match for tiger tank because if they know whats in it why they capture the tiger tank and send back for research and they cannot destory tank just attack on wheels stop mobility if they can destory they will show on youtube but they cant
What they don't tell you is that the Tigers were often built by slave laborers - which is why the Tigers frequently broke down.. The truth should be told about the Tigers poor quality and how they were able to defeat the heavier tanks with greater frequency.. How much greater frequency? enough to win the war.. Nuff said.
best
Bruce Peek
yeah the early years tiger crews were well trained.. But - they were built by slave labor and as a result broke down all the time.. The entire german war effort from start to finish was based on fancy designs that were thought to give a technical edge to their soldiers.. This was true from the air force to the tank crews.. The Messerschmidt 262 ended up having to be towed around airfields by oxen cuz the germans had insufficient fuel for them to taxi
What a useless video. Instead of showing us the exact tank versions and features they're talking about, they use plastic models, crude drawings, replica tanks and computer graphics of "a Tiger" or "a Sherman". Sometimes a different kind of tank by mistake!
What about the question they claim to answer - "How Did Shermans Defeat Tigers?" Their answer is: the Sherman got upgraded to a bigger gun. This should take no more than a minute to explain, the other 5 minutes of the video is unnecessary filler. There's a lot more detail they COULD put in those five minutes, but no, they talk about irrelevant stuff instead.
And it's hilarious that the caption says Rommel "used the Tiger". He was very high up in the chain of command, he was not sitting inside a tank! Anyway I don't think he ever really had Tigers under his authority.
People don't understand that the Shermans' 75mm gun ammunition had many variants. For instance, at 30 degrees the 75mm L/40 (M3/M6) HVAP T45 Could penetrate 117mm at 100 yard, and 64mm armor at 2000 yards. The Tiger I had frontal hull armour 100 mm (3.9 in) thick, frontal turret of 100 mm (3.9 in) and gun mantlet with a varying thickness of 120 mm (4.7 in) to 200 mm (7.9 in).[23] The Tiger had 60 mm (2.4 in) thick hull side plates and 80 mm armor on the side superstructure/sponsons, while turret sides and rear were 80 mm (Wiki) So even the 75mm gun on the Sherman could knock a tiger 1 out from the side. The 75mm gun was no joke, and the fast Shermans were no joke.
The main reason why the Israeli Merkava tank has its engine in front is to protect the crew. While the Merkava is far from being the best tank in the world, its possibly one of the safest.
A well trained crew is harder to replace than the tank itself. My point is: I fear many many American soldiers died inside of Sgerman tanks :/
How do ants fell larger prey? With their numbers. They lose a lot in the process but ultimately, they win. Look up the doco of the man who's job it was to wash out the shermans of their mince meated crews then repaint and weld new plates over the Panzer shell holes. The bloke even admits he felt sorry for the poor bastards. But they were told their tanks were just as good. Yet could be knocked out from near 2km in the dark by a Panther. With Night Vision! Fresh coat of paint few new plates smiling crews. The Sherman repairman said it did get to him but he was not allowed to talk to the new crews. He washed out the blood n guts painted and welded new plates and a new crew was assigned. Some tanks made it a half dozen times. You'll often see Sherman's with random Plates. Then there's the British Tank commander who had been fed the same propaganda about the British and U.S Tanks when Day 1 on the front a Round passed clean through the front Armour between his legs Killed the driver and loader and covered him in a mist of blood then the tank caught fire. The German's didn't call em ''Tommy Cookers'' For nothing! The fact they used petrol with such thin armour was a large reason many were knocked out so easily. Same deal with hitting any tank or plane Fuel tank or engine really. The soviet extended external range tanks on the T-34's made them an easy target to light up with AT Guns, even Tracers or Phosphorous rounds.
Belton Cooper right?
Never sherman is equal tiger😂😂😂
What tank do you think killed Micheal wittman?
1 sherman firefly took out 3 tigers including wittman.
What is the point of this video if it doesn't even answer the title question, no reference to the multiple occasions that Shermans knocked out Tigers or how?
Opening with complete BS - Wittmann didn't knock out 25 tanks in Villers Bocage, there were up to 27 lost across the three days of battle - Wittmann knocked out 11 tanks, which was impressive though 3 were light tanks and 3 other mediums were OP tanks with no gun, plus several of them were unoccupied. He shot a few trucks, halftracks and carriers but nowhere near the claim of this video and he wasn't alone. In the same battle he lost his Tiger and another 2 Panzer IVs, whilst another Tiger was also lost. Wittmann faired slightly better than the Brits, but the next day's fighting saw 4 Tigers advance on the town and were knocked out by a Sherman and AT guns without a single loss, plus several other Panzer IVs, which was a huge loss for the Germans.
Overall, that battle saw a great strategic loss for the Germans...
The Sherman was very much designed to take on tanks head-on, and was as capable or better than any contemporary medium tank, it just wasn't designed to combat *heavy* tanks like the Tiger, but still managed to.
No tank through most of the war could withstand a hit from the KwK 36 88 mm, even another Tiger..
The German attacks on the US forces in Tunisia at Kasserine pass involved no Tigers, there were 88 mm FlaK guns used at great range 🙈
In Tunisia, there were Tiger attacks on American tanks at : Tebourba; Sidi bou Zid; Maknassy; and several small battles in Northern Tunisia.
@@daveybyrden3936 hmm yes perhaps at the the battles. I had viewed this on the back of other videos claiming Tigers at the pass wiping out US forces which wasn't accurate.
My other points stand though
Tigers are not superior
of course he is, sherman is a burning box at first hit
@@yako2050 you watched to much history channel didn’t you, are sure you want to go there cause I’ll make you look like a moron, not that you already are, but I’ll make you look more of a moron
@yako2050 that’s over exaggerated.
@@yako2050 he?
@@yako2050 that’s only the British Sherman that spontaneously combusts because they overloaded the tank with to much ammunition causing the ammo to burn of explode, the American Sherman’s had wet ammo stowage mainly the M4A3’s and M4A2’s. I’m not so sure about the M4A4’s
Impossible
Against the m4a3e2 sherman jumbo 76 the tiger is fucked.
Sheer numbers and supplies to support those numbers as well as sane leadership deciding on how to go about the battle plan.
In wot u get smoked
Wittman got cooked by a 17lbr. The first king tiger knocked out was cooked by a 17lbr. The US lost roughly 7 thousand tanks in western europe in two years, and didnt have 17lbrs.
Most Shermans didn’t get destroyed in tank on tank combat. They are more likely to get destroyed or disabled by AT guns, mines, or panzerfausts.
Sherman crewmen typically prefer the 75 mm gun over the 76 gun, mainly because they aren’t fighting tanks most of the time and are rather used as infantry support vehicles.
@@GodEmperorEnjoyer Totally agree. The US lost 7000 tanks without fighting a single tank battle larger than a couple of companies skirmishing. Its a sad indictment and shows serious flaws in their doctrine.
Sherman could defeat tiger only because of their quantity
quality over quantity, but quantity has a quality all of its own
What if the sherman was a sherman firefly?
The 76mm guns coughing in the back while faintly wheezing:
@@ironboy3245and the tiger didn’t really have “quality”
@@danielmolinar8669 it was pretty damn good for it's time, unupgraded Shermans basically couldn't hurt it right?
Shoot the butt of the Tiger to knock it out if you're a 75mm.
Nah it would just kill the engine the Tiger could still fire again if ur in a 75 u want to shoot the side of the hull because that’s where the ammo and crew is
Unless the Tiger crew started to panic.
@@mafiosomemer3730 yeah then they would just abandon it
if you're a 76 you could just look at the tiger and shoot it no need to worry since HVAP rounds could easily go through the front of even the panther
One on one a Sherman would be TOAST!!!!!
10 on one is a no Brainer of who will win!!!!:/
Really poor understanding of how armour warfare works. Sounds like your knowledge is based on computer games than reality.
The Canadians called the Sherman the Firebox. The Sherman wasn't loved like this video is making it out to be. You sneezed wrong and it would catch on fire
Cool info bro, where's your source? Did you pull it out of your ass?
False
Atleast the Sherman actually had to be touched with something before getting set on fire. Ever look at the panther and tiger?
🧢 the reason the ammo would explode is because it was in a very exposed spot but once the moved it to the floor it stopped happening as often
Mad your panthers suspension and transmission kept breaking?
Shermans weren't even close to matching Tigers 1 to 1. Their fighter jets got owned by Japanese Zeros for most of the Pacfic War as well. The Allies, including America won on sheer number alone. Only during the late stages of the war did American military technology catch up to the Germans and Japanese.
“Their Fighter Jets?” WTF?
Late war Shermans could pose a threat to German heavy tanks and what is this Japanese technology you speak of they were still stuck in the 1930 with the exception of their navy and air force
@@Madduckkk I think that you’re right that the late war American tanks were getting better and in any event the cost and ease of manufacturing was a key technological advantage over the much more expensive and difficult to manufacture German tanks. Not to mention reliability, cross country mobility, ease of operation, all of these things were technological advantages of the Sherman tank. As for the Zero, it was a brilliant design optimized for range and speed and maneuverability but the lack of pilot protection and self sealing fuel tanks made it rather fragile opponent and at a disadvantage against planes like the Hellcat, Corsair, P-38 lightning, etc. Even the older American fighters at the beginning of the war were able to develop tactics to better deal with the Zero.
@@iakona23 German tank design in a nutshell:
Hans we need better transmission
MORE ARMOR YOU SAY
Nein better transmission
BIGGER KANONE YOU SAY
NIEN better transmission
BATTLESHIP KANONE YOU SAYS
@@Madduckkk when you compare the number of Sherman tanks and Russian T-34 tanks compared to the numbers of Mark 3, 4 and the heavier tanks after that, it’s just madness that the Germans managed to survive as long as they did. I guess that their best armored vehicle was the one with the big gun without the turret because at least it could be produced quickly in the necessary numbers.
40 to 1 and easy to maintain..Sherman
As I understand it the Allies used tank destroyers and air superiority as underlying strategy and the role of the Sherman was to support the infantry.
Yea, and for the most part it was fine because most of the German armored divisions were in the east fighting the Russians. The Sherman was outclassed, but there seems to be a revisionist movement to glorify the Sherman as the tank that won the war. Yet 70% of the German army was destroyed by the Russians alone.
@@lperea21 There were plenty of German tanks in France
Did you know that the non-Americans fought the King Tiger before any went to Russia?
Also France was used (up to D-Day) for German forces to rest and refit after the mauling in the East
There seems to be a revisionist movent to airbrush the American's Allies out of the war and by that, the true strength of the German forces
@@lperea21 9 out every 10 German soldiers were killed by Russians. To Germany, the British, and Americans were an after thought.
@@lperea21 slight pedant alert!! - 70% of the German army was was destroyed by the Soviet (Red) army (which was majority Russian but not exclusively so!)
Next; how the Super Pershing defeated the King Tiger.
Love all these comments from the Sherman fanboy club. Tigers were rarely encountered etc.
When they were encountered the results were Usually serious.
Italy July 1944 12 Shermans encountered a single Tiger at 1500m, the Tiger knocked out 5 of them, 6 crewmen killed & 11 wounded.
They hit the Tiger 13 times before a shot deflected off the turret into the engine and disabled it.
France August 8, very famous when 12+ Shermans ambushed 7 Tigers and knocked out 5.
Earlier that morning a group of German tanks engaged 1st Polish Armoured Division and knocked out 38 tanks while loosing 4 Pz IV and 1 Tiger.
August 9 4 Panthers & 5 Tigers annihilated Task Force Worthington destroying 44 Shermans, 2 Stuart's, 1 Valentine plus numerous other armoured vehicles, the Germans suffered No losses.
August 12 5 Tigers from 3rd Company SS 101 heavy tank battalion engaged 1st Polish Armoured Division and destroyed 35 Shermans without loss.
August 1944 a single Tiger engaged and destroyed C Company 23rd Hussars in 35 minutes, knocked out 14 Shermans, 1 anti tank gun plus multiple other armoured vehicles.
Task Force Wellborne, US 3rd Armoured Division engaged and annihilated by a group of Tiger tanks, loosing over 70 vehicles including multiple Shermans and M10 tank destroyers.
And l,m sure there will be an excuse.
Shermans were never a match to Tiger's.... even with the late upgraded weapon that only a few got it, was still very hard to break the Tiger 's armor..... opposed to the Tiger that pretty much every hit was a kill. Tank Vs Tank.... Tiger is by FAR the best!
T-34 and shermans can’t win from german tanks. They where lucky that the nazi’s where not able to get a higer production Numbers
The US heavy tank the Pershing came very late in the war, it was a match for the heavy German tanks.
Still Pershing cant defeat a tiger 1 with one shoot .It Takes 4 or 5 shoot to destroy a tiger
@@HENSIONAVDUlithat is the stupidest thing I have ever heard
@@HENSIONAVDUlithe pershing has a 90mm main gun, for comparison the tigers main gun is 88mm.
The tigers frontal armor is 100mm which the 90mm main gun of the pershing could easily pierce, the pershings frontal armor is thick and angled making it very hard for the 88mm to pierce it.
Not to mention the pershings mantlet which was thicker than the tigers mantlet.
The pershing is superior in every way.
@@HENSIONAVDUlihave you ever heard of the cologne tank duel? Rip panther.
@@infinitystormsafire2425 then why Tigers and Kings Tigers Destroyed Pershings Tanks in WW2 .😂.learn History,Pershings couldnt destryoed t-34s Tanks With one shoot in Korea war 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Platoon of 9 Sherman's with the new installed canons, and a tiger with maybe more versatile and faster moving treads? I feel like that'd be a squad to not mess with
"There is a certain quality to quantity", Joseph Stalin
From my reading, I've learned that the Sherman could be a death trap for the crew. Tending to burst into flame after a hit, they became known as "Zippos," after the famous cigarette lighter.
That’s actually false
@@Green-ader All I know is what I've read in the history books.
its actually ronson, not zippo
it was because of the slogan 'lights every time'
@@bobyoung1698 a 3-4% casualty rate, most of which happen outside the tank, is pretty good
@@ironboy3245 Thanks!