Added: 5 years ago
From: rrsafety
Views: 1,747,679
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (2,083)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • The Russians know how to build stuff to last.

  • Nice tank

  • A Very BADASS TANK

  • only thing you can find in russia is junk.

  • Wow, I`d love to have such luck lol.

  • Gee I'm Gonna have a crap life no fuel  floods :''(

  • т-34  немецкий

  • the nazi were german dumbass take a history class im a russian i would know

  • @kingpheno It has the german cross painted on it, so that means it was a russian built tank that was used by nazis.

  • @kingpheno Russian tank used by the Deutsche Nazionalsozialisten. Trust me, I'm an American ;D

  • @SaucyJake ^Nationalsozialisten

    my mistake

  • Yes, but how can the engine be still in working order? Sure, just add fuel and it is ready to go. Why would anyone want to spend the time to rescue this heap; there are larger problems in the world today.

  • in ww2 german was very interesing of t-34 but is superior than many other tank

  • captured T 34 idiot and not sherman or nazi tank bullshit

  • this one my friend is a sherman thank us army not russian or german

  • @panchovillaxx7 that is a captured russian t-34 tank you can see it from the turret the sherman's turret is way more round than that and sloped armor on every side wich the sherman only had at the front and also those hatches and some other things i dont know the name of

  • @panchovillaxx7

    You are either blind or not familiar with tanks. That is whitout a doubt a russian T-34. Put it on google and look at some pictures.

  • THATS AMAZING!!! :O

    Wish I was there :(

  • t-34 captured

  • das könnte event. Großvaters Beutepanzer sein; ohne Witz; er erzählte einmal, daß er, am Ende des Krieges, einen T34 fuhr; ganz dunkel erinnere ich mich auch noch an folgendes: Strohballen als Sitze ?!? Keine Heizung, ständig gefroren darin.

  • @tritop halt die klappe xD

  • suddenly: nazirussian tanks EVERYWHERE

  • check out my channel

    I have the full six minute video of this tank salvage!

  • Engine still in working order? After 65 years under water...

  • how great! anything from recovered from ww2 germany is superb! thats awesome!

  • @blacksonne19 Its actually a Russian T-34

  • Comment removed

  • @IzPk Its a Russian T-34, with German markings. Meaning, its a captured tank the germans used in service.

  • Wonderful discovery !!!!

    Great beute T-34 panzer

  • How is that thing not rusted to shit after 6 decades under water? I would think they were primarily constructed of iron and steel.

  • @sonbuhitsunei the mud probly preseved it if had been in more clearer water i reckon your right it would rust up pretty quickly but becuase it was in muddy water there was probly a few factors that preserved it such as like of gases and mud is known to have good healing propeties probly applies well to everything it touchs look how clean worms are

  • @markjoachen bro, metal doesn't have a vitality composure that can be "healed" lmao

  • @kingmigget all things are matter even you,,,it was trapped in mud no gases could get to it to erode it

  • @markjoachen i understand that, but it can't be "healed" by mud dude.

  • @kingmigget but the mud acts like a sealant much like we humans use parafin to stop gases getting to the skin of execma patients to give there skinj a chance its in dermol moistures but i find nivea works better becuase it does not contain parafin,,,see now we use machine oil for the skin on humans and mud kept the machine sealed and not rusted to buggery,,,,pigs use mud to kept moist and to keep thre skin healthy much like humans do in some place in russia and other places,,see now

  • @markjoachen but you can't fucking HEAL metal, you can preserve it, but you can NOT "rejuvenate" the metal it's self.

  • @kingmigget where did i say heal metal lol i said preserve it,,,it just stayed in that state once the mud drowned it in its self excalty the same as skin skin heals itself under a planket of mud or parafin thats why doctors can only subcribe parafin to excuma patients cuase they have no cure for excuma other than steriods or telling the patient to sort out his or her diet

  • @markjoachen " mud is known to have good healing propeties probly applies well to everything it touchs " you said it right there.

  • @kingmigget ya peace anyway great debate lol

  • @markjoachen debate? you're a fucking retard that made no valid points..

  • @kingmigget lol yeah it did besides when have debates ever given valid points lol

  • @markjoachen since debating existed? the whole "point" of a debate is to validate your "point"

  • @markjoachen and i did

  • chuck norris 

  • Т 34 с крестом, удивило, зачем нужен ваз, если бмв есть, и стрелять по форме танка будут, а не по обозначению

  • yep. germans oftenly used captured soviet vehicles. it is normal. russian army also used tropheys from german side. it is also normal

  • захваченный фрицами т34-85,в чём проблема?

  • davaj davaj russia vodka the best

  • I wonder if there is any point in blocking comment sections on military videos... That can only postpone human retardation, but not fix the "my country's (which fucks me) shit is better than your country's (which fucks you) shit"

    Boys gotta grow up

  • Wow! That's in great shape for being under water for so long!

  • @emeryerz

    but on the Tank is an GERMAN Iron Cross!!!

    captured Tank?!?!

  • A German T34/76???

  • @Gorgoroth439 yah its a t34 :o

  • That poor thing :( first repainted to kill it's own people ,and then dumped into a lake/river for who knows how long :,(

  • What a find. Too cool.

  • Begs not cleaning it!

  • What the hell is doing the pulling?

  • @Rick6315 7000 Russians and a bull.

  • @Rick6315 Vladimir Putin

  • @Rick6315 A rented Komatsu D375-2 Bulldozer.

  • @Rick6315 Its either diesel or diesel. Because only a diesel can pull something that runs on diesel lol. Im so bored hahaha

  • @Rick6315 A bulldozer : )

  • @Rick6315 chuck norris

  • @Rick6315 Chuck norris sits inside an drive.

  • @Rick6315 The strong man Mariusz Pudzianowski

  • @Rick6315

    a single russian

  • @RegularRage as opposed to a married one?

  • That is one tough tank to still have a functional engine after sitting at the bottom of a lake for sixty years!

  • HOW THE FUCK DO YOU LOSE A TANK!!!!!??????????

  • i heard about that tank a few years back apperently (just wat i heard not saying its true) a few hours of cleaning it out they put fuel and oil in and it was up and running like never before

  • we should have made some aswell and fucked those russians up!!

  • Comment removed

  • @reflex1312 it's captured soviet T34. but nazy red necks are very indignation now =)))

  • That is quite well preserved , a museum would pay alot for this tank

  • Józek bieg wybij :D

  • Listen I'll just close with this T-34 is no match for Panther... T-34 is no match for Tiger... T-34 is barley a match for PZIV.F2+... What makes it the best tank is that... It's EXACTLY what the soviets needed at the time...

    Would I wan't to be in one? Hell no! Tiger Ausf B please! But you wouldent dare say the Ausf B is a "better" tank than T-34 would you?

  • watch?v=fVg6gFmuRlE THERE! according to even this crazy american show... the T-34 is considered the greatest tank OF ALL TIME! So NOW YOUVE HEARD it said the T-34 is the greatest... and not by me! by somewhat experts!

  • Thats a t34/85. All of its specs are superior to a PIV. Its only logical that if russians forgot/didnt have time to scuttle the tank after it was damaged the germans would take over it.

    And no Germans did not have the best tanks in WW2. Other than the panther every single german tank was inferior to what russians had.

  • @LiezAllLiez

    Yet during the war the Soviets lost 20 times more tanks than the Germans. DERP DERP.

  • @Panteraforever67 A green crew make an amazing tank average. A weak tank makes an amazing crew average. See what i did there?

  • @LiezAllLiez

    The best Soviet crew in a T-34 couldn't handle the best German crew in a PZIV.

  • @Panteraforever67 Well then switch crews. Germans had better tankers than russians ever had.

    Personally im sure the german crew that ditched that tank in the bog when it ran out of fuel/dropped a tread, racked up more kills than it would in a PIV. Why would they take over t34s in the first place if they werent superior to any other medium tank of its time? It would be easier to just pull the fuel and leave the t34 to rot if that was the case.

  • @LiezAllLiez Moreso - the only thing german medium tanks were better than russian t34s and /85 series were the optics and lack of radios. If those were in place russians wouldnt lose half of what you claim they have lost in armor.

  • @LiezAllLiez

    . They would take Sherman M4's and Polish tanks, that doesn't mean Polish and American tanks are GREAT! Get real, all sides used captured equipment in all stages of the war. It's a FACT regardless of what piece of equipment it was.

    T-34's were seriously mechanically flawed in many ways. Poor optics, lack of radios,no turret basket, a very cramped and low turret (the gun could not depress more than three degrees severely restricting use on a reverse slope or at close range.

  • @LiezAllLiez

    Poor turret drive reliability, and generally poor target observation and indicator devices (including no turret cupola and only one vision periscope for the tank’s commander). Then add in that the Tank commander was the gunner.

  • @LiezAllLiez

    "A combat account from Operation Barbarossa highlights the problem with the T-34s fire control systems and also why its overall combat power is so overrated. “What is really important in this story is that the AT gun managed to get 23 shots off, and it turns out that the T-34 in this report didn’t even manage to hit the AT gun. Once better AT guns appeared, which they rapidly did, T-34s would be lucky to survive 2-3 rounds" You can only blame so much on the crews!

  • In Soviet Russia, tank recovers you !

  • i want to know what pulled it out so easily?

  • @TheMadin22 would say another tank

  • WTF did they use to pull this thing?? That thing should way 10-20 tons+ and it was pulled so effortlessly...

  • T-34-85 is the tank. This was a very good tank and im not suprised the Germn's captured it.

  • Looks like someone had trouble parking their tank.

  • Hope the stupid russians dont ruin this one too! They let that PERFECT StuGIII pulled out of the bog go to Rust! They let looters and scum ruskies strip everything off of it and then let it sit in the elements in a field. Those people should be shot. I hope the best for this tank

  • @12thpanzerHJ

    Piss off, Nazi fuck.

  • who pulls it?

  • It's a t-34

  • The tank was not found in russian lake.It was found in estonian lake.

    

  • why would they capture a Russian tank when they had the best tanks

  • @xCh34pShOtx Ran out of tanks? You know the more the better.

  • @xCh34pShOtx German Tanks were good at France and Poland becuse there was lots of roads.

    German tanks wasn´t so good at off-road. Just like American M4 Sherman.

    Unlike German and US tanks Russian tanks were really good on off-road combat.

  • @xCh34pShOtx

    because in 1944 germans were on the run all over russia, luftwaffe in scraps and they had even less tanks.

    they could have used the russian tanks for sabotage missions behind enemy lines or just paint the swastika over the russian star and use it against them when all their P-IV and Tigers were destroyed.

  • @Thefallenraptor

    Germans were using captured equipment from the start of the war. Each side used captured equipment. It had nothing to do with how the war was going.

  • @Panteraforever67

    in this stage of the war the reasons stated above well aply also what i didn't mention being captured in enemy tanks would mean a slow and painful death as a spy in the hands of NKVD

  • @Thefallenraptor

    It seems like you have watched too many movies. "they could have used the Russian tanks for sabotage missions behind enemy lines or just paint the swastika over the russian star " For one, they never used tanks behind enemy lines, what are they going to do when low on fuel? Drive up to a Soviet fuel depot and get out and ask for fuel? LOL. The only times Germans would paint Swastikas on tanks would be for aerial recognition on the top of the tank. Stick to the video games.

  • @Panteraforever67

    books mate, books

  • @Thefallenraptor

    Oh those fictional books you read. Good one. You must think everything written in those comic books are true too! You believe in super man too?

  • @Panteraforever67

    insult all you like, you don't know half of what was going on the eastern front. do you even know the costs and time let alone complexity it took to build one tiger let alone bring it to the front after luftwaffe's demize and petrol left in tea cups.

    sabotages and recon behing enemy lines was an everyday ordeal any means neccessary often by nothing mentioned in the geneva treaty. ever heard of brandenburger commandos? read up thicky

  • @Thefallenraptor

    Give me one documented time when Nazis used a captured T-34 behind enemy lines. The Brandenburgers NEVER did. They were used mainly as a ADVANCE team, if you even know what that means. Stop reading your comic books and get in reality!

    What the hell are you talking about Tiger tanks for? Who said anything about Tigers? And peak output of the Tiger was 671 per month(T34 1300 month), not too bad if you think about it. How that is relevant to what I said is the real question.

  • @Panteraforever67 fairly certain that tigers didnt peak at 671 a month, cause there was only 1300 something made

  • @adamonsf I imagine that he is asserting 671 Allied tanks killed a month, not German tanks produced. German put out propaganda asserting over 1400 tanks produced a month. With a few captured, the Allies performed a statistical analysis of serial numbers, and deduced that the peak German production was about 275. In English the mathematical problem is called "The German Tank Problem".

  • @DonMeaker i still dont think thats what he is talking about, but it might be.

  • @DonMeaker Good fellow (im making an assumption here) would you mind explaining to an obvious simpleton like me, just how it is possible that one can statistically deduce the actual production rates for a piece of machinery just by looking at a few captured tanks? And allso do you have any sources or anything at all, because I can't help but laugh at the insanity that is the type of person to which would make such ludicrous claims, and baseless slanders upon the 3rd reich....

  • @iamjacobnz There is a nice article in Wikipedia that lays out the 'German Tank Problem'. It presumes a uniform distribution in the serial numbers, and from a small sample, estimates the mean. serial numbers were available from engines, transmissions, roadwheels. It was a case study in my statistics class at Univ of Arizona. The wiki article is sourced.

  • @adamonsf A hundred and fourty four was the absolute peak in april 44. And this includes repairs.

    This video is clearly a captured T34 with german markings and possibly a german cupola fitted, not a tiger

  • @mossel1977 i never said this was a tiger. some guy said 671 tigers a month which was retarded, so i corrected him

  • @adamonsf then they made them bloody fast sir lol peace

  • @xCh34pShOtx because it's expensive and time consuming to make a tank. makes sense to use whatever you capture. it was common.

  • @xCh34pShOtx They didn't start off that way... the Red's T-34 was a game changer for everyone. the germans had to work hard to fix that.

  • @xCh34pShOtx

    Each side used captured vehicles. Why would't you? If you can add 1 more tank to your ranks, then why not.

  • @xCh34pShOtx

    A: They didn't have NEARLY enough tanks

    B: German tanks may have been the best engineered tanks... but Russian tanks tended to be the superior designed tanks (i.e. T-34/KV/IS)

    C: Germany used almost as many Czechoslovakian/Other tanks as German tanks during the war!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    LOL! Russian tanks were superior designed? Look up the battle of Kursk. 720 German tanks lost to 5 thousand Russian tanks. SUPERIOR! Next you are going to tell us that Soviet tactics were superior to everyone else's, yet they managed to lose 5 million men before the end of 1941.

  • @Panteraforever67 Soviet Tactics were good for what the types of tanks they had... But overall Germans had Better Tank crews... better engineering... better doctrine... but vastly outdesigned tanks!

    The T-34 had sloping armor... the KV was impenetrable for the first year!!! The IS was designed to beat the tiger. Thats not to sasy russians were the masters of armored warfare... But NOONE disuputes the superior design of the T-34!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    The Sherman had slopped armor, that doesn't make it a good tank! Get real!

    "better engineering... ... but vastly outdesigned tanks!" Um, what do you think engineering means? Who do you think designed the tanks? Engineer's! You contradict yourself on so many levels! Look up the losses of the T-34. They lost more T-34's than the Germans lost tanks during the whole war.

  • @Panteraforever67 ALSO! the battle of kursk was literally the turning point of the war where the soviets broke the back of the germans in the Eastern front! Curious that you should use that as your example! ALSO at the begining of the war... French tanks were by far the best tanks on the field! Yet the germans overwhelmed them with Superior Doctrine! So don't come at me with your cherry picking bullshit! Everyone knows the T-34 was the best tank of the war! design wise ESPECIALLY!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Hahah! I suggest you actually do some research. Stalingrad was the turning point o the war, a million Germans were lost. I use it as an example because it proves how crappy soviet tanks were. 720 German losses to 5K Soviet tank losses, most of those were T-34's. GET REAL!

    France had the best tanks in world? LOL!! They had one of the largest tank forces in the world! But how is that relevant to the T-34? Are you off your rocker? You keep contradicting yourself!

  • @Panteraforever67 I don't know how to respond... you literally just cherry pick a bunch of crap! The T-34 was feared by German tank crews for its Numbers/Strategic speed/Durability/Tactical Speed and of course ease of manufacture!

    German tanks were feared because of their technological superiority/Tank crew training/Tactical genius/Tank doctrine.

    The point is very simple... Russians were not able to produce high tech tanks... so they relied on very efficient design!

  • @Panteraforever67 Germans relied on their very efficient engineering! and careful construction! A T-34 is no match for a PanzerKamfWagen 6 Tiger! But that is TOTALLY missing the point! 1 Tiger's construction cost is 49 T-34's! Furthurmore... T-34's could go in much harder terrain! Required 1/9th the fuel! Were easily repaired! were not vulnerable to anti tank guns! You just don't understand the full scale of tank use!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    The T-34 was the best tank of the war yet despite having a K/D ratio of 1/10. LMFAO!! Good one. Keep smoking that crack!

    The only reason the T-34 is even in the top 5 for WW2 tanks is because it's extremely slopped armor was the first of it's kind. It was decimated all over, look at the numbers, NUMBERS DONT LIE!

  • @Panteraforever67 It seems as though you are intentionally dishonest... You are straw manning my arguments... The French point is also very simple... a VASTLY VASTLY VASTLY inferior tank force was able to easily defeat the French with SUPERIOR STRATEGY AND TACTICS, Tank Crews and Tank Doctrine! that does NOT MAKE the inferior early war German tanks "superior" Reverse the tank crews and you will inevitably have changed the result! You think inside a nutshell...

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Um I don't know what crack pipe you've been smoking but PZIII and PZIV's were not "VASTLY VASTLY inferior tanks" when compared to the French tanks. I suggest you actually do some research before making yourself sound even more stupid. Your analogy is so stupid it's actually comical!

  • @Panteraforever67 While invading France... Germany's main battle tank was the PZII... IT wasent until they had already invaded France that the first PZIV's were on trials! The French Char B1 tank was about the same effectiveness as the KV and the Tiger 1 when they first appeared on the battlefield!!! NO german guns could penetrate them! They simply drove around them! waited for them to run out of fuel! or just bombed them!

    YOU SIMPLY DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    HAHAH I GUESS THE HISTORY BOOKS ARE WRONG AND YOU ARE RIGHT! THEY HAD 211 PANZER IVs WHEN THEY INVADED POLAND. HAHAHAHAH WHAT A FUCKING IDIOT YOU DON"T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. DO SOME RESEARCH. I JUST DID TO MAKE SURE I WASN"T WRONG, AND IM NOT!! HAHAHAHA

  • @Panteraforever67 If you understand how the Blitzkrieg worked in poland... and the role of the PZIV... you would understand that NO SIGNIFICANT ACTION WAS TAKEN by the PZIV until it had completed it Trials! the PZII was was it's main battle tank... the PZIV as YOU know it with the Upgunned 75mm/Hardened plate/upped engine and high mounted turret dident exist until the END 1940!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    LMAO NOW YOU ARE TYING TO CHANGE YOUR STORY! The PZIV was in service during the invasion of Poland in 1939 and the invasion of France ONE YEAR LATER. You said the PZIV wasn't in service during the invasion of France. WRONG. Keep it coming little kid, I love proving you to be an idiot! It's great!

    "The first mass-produced version of the Panzer IV was the Ausführung, A , in 1936" Yet you said it was still on trial 4 years LATER! LMFOA! You're an idiot!

  • @Panteraforever67 That's not what I said at ALL! the PZIV that YOU are talking about... the one able to take on the T-34... which is exactly what YOU said... DID NOT exist until operation Barbarossa's second act! The original PZIV's were basically unused in both France and Poland as they had been going through ongoing trials and upgrades! The blitzkrieg relied entireley on Cavalry tanks... NOT infantry tanks! You literally have no idea about anything... you just cherry pick crap!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    LMFAO? ARE YOU SERIOUSLY THAT DUMB? " IT wasent until they had already invaded France that the first PZIV's were on trials" " IT wasent until they had already invaded France that the first PZIV's were on trials"

    Can you not comprehend what YOU SAID?

    "the first PZIV's were on trials"" THE FIRST, I repeat, THE FIRST! Keep shooting yourself in the foot kid! It's comical!

    They were unused yet you're own sources say otherwise. Keep it coming kid! COMICAL!

  • @Panteraforever67 Yes the FIRST PZIV's with the Upgunned 75mm... the Torsion bar suspension... the upped frontal armor... the High mounted turret...

    but even then... the POINT of that was that the Char B1 could literally bounce all german guns firing at it... EVEN THE MAXED PZIV with the armor skirt and the upgraded engine is no match for a Char B1 which was obsolete in 1943 when those PZIV's came around!

  • @Panteraforever67 It seems as though you are just cherry picking and intentionally misleading... I personally have no dog in this race... it seems as though your just a giant german nuthugger!

  • @Panteraforever67 "The T-34, however, effectively made all German tanks produced to that date obsolete. In fact, at its height the T-34 was deemed so successful, and so capable in every role, that production of all other tanks except the IS-2 was stopped to allow all available resources to be used exclusively for this tank. The T-34 forced the Germans to adopt new, heavier designs such as the Panther and Tiger"

  • @Gooseman2k2

    LOL YOU TAKE THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT TO TRY AND PROVE A POINT? Look little kid, look at the numbers. The T-34 was decimated, it's been proven. You have already made yourself sound stupid a fuck by saying the PZIV wasn't around when they invaded France.

    "When Germany invaded Poland on 1 September 1939, its armored corps was composed of 1,445 Panzer Is, 1,223 Panzer IIs, 98 Panzer IIIs and 211 Panzer IVs".

  • @Panteraforever67 I don't understand how you can say the T-34 was decimated? It's the tank that overran all of germany... The tank without which Russian would have lost the war... the Tank which ALL tanks after use as inspiration... The tank which for a time was the most powerfull tank on the battlefield... The tank which ALL tank historians agree was the best tank of the war and possibly the best and most influential tank in HISTORY!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    LOL! How was the T-34 decimated? Wow, um maybe because at all the major battles it would take 10-20 T-34's to take out one German one! The T-34 was destroyed all over Russia and Germany. They lost MORE tanks than the German Army ever had! They lost 4 times as many tanks as the Germans on the Eastern front, if that's not decimated I don't know what is. LOL Almost ever argument you bring can be brought in favor of the Sherman!

  • @Panteraforever67 The highest german kill ratio for any unit is 16.67:1... a unit comprised almost entirley of Tiger 1's and Panther's... The average German Kill ratio on the eastern front is about 2.54:1... and in 1940-1941 when the T-34 was still new the kill ratio was 1.7:1...

    By far the most effective tank in kill ratio's of the war is the PZVI Tiger... with a ratio of 5.74:1... all other German tanks being significantly lower! So obviously you are just delusional!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Lmao! Keep it coming, it's comical how dumb you are! Please share these sources since I seem to find numerous sites that say otherwise. "The combat results for 1941 show the Soviets lost an average of over seven T-34's for every German tank lost, If all German fully tracked AFVs (assault guns, tank destroyers, SP artillery, etc) and losses from Germany’s allies are included in the German figures, then the ratio drops to 6.6 to 1 in the German favour."

  • @Panteraforever67 Yea and 6.6 is sure as shit not 20-1 dumbass... niether German vs. Soviet AFV losses - 1941-45. 06/41-02/42 1:5.0 03/42-05/42 1:6.6 06/42-10/42 1:7.9 11/42-03/43 1:1.3 04/43-08/43 1:5.7 09/43-11/43 1:2.5 12/43-06/44 1:1.4 07/44 1:4.0 08/44 1:2.0 09/44 1:1.0 10/43-11/44 1:1.3 There you are you clown... Hell that's lower than I even thought! as if any of this has ANYTHING to do with the design superiority of the T-34...
  • @Gooseman2k2

    LMAO! IT's called hyperbole you uneducated retard! YOU CAN'T EVEN READ WHAT YOU JUST POSTED? LMAO!

    "German vs. Soviet AFV" AFV, NOT JUST T-34'S RETARD! I posted STATS about the T-34 and you post shit about AFV's which means all tanks, SP guns,etc. GOOD ONE!

    Funny, I was just reading about how the shitty design is the reason why so many T-34's were lost to "obsolete" tanks! HAHA! But hey, I bet you have some excuse that it took 6-7 T-34's to take out one German tank!

  • @Panteraforever67 Actually it took about 10-20 Russian tanks to take out a German one... but 6 might die! Also Tank on Tank combat is rare... It's called COMBINED ARMS! Something they invented in WW1! And THAT is what the Germans truly mastered! Combined arms assault aka BLITZKRIEG! The tank itself is but a vessel! It's the crew using it... the command ordering it... the aircraft and infantry supporting it... How can you not understand this?

  • @Panteraforever67 you ASKED me to find you the stats for AFV's if you had asked for Tanks... it would take longer as all of my tank books are in storage...

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Seriously, just type in "T-34 losses" in a search browser and read what the experts had to say about the T-34 design. There's a reason why it was decimated through out the war.

  • @Panteraforever67 The simple Design of the T-34 allowed over 80,000 of them to be built... I think that about 55,000 of them were built during the war... THIS is part of the power of the design! The ability to field a tank in 1940 that is better than any german tank at the time... AND is easier to make, has more strategic and tactical speed. can be repaired much easier... Is logistically beautiful requiring very little supply! and perfect for unskilled tank crews!!!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    LMAO The Sherman had almost as many built during the war, and guess what the Soviets, British, Canadians and Americans all used it. The Sherman Kill to death ratio compared to the T-34 is almost the same! That in no way makes the M4 a good tank! You're delusional!

    "The ability to field a tank in 1940 that is better than any german tank at the time" Yet it would take 6-7 of them to take out one German tank! GOOD ONE. DON'T LET LOGIC GET IN YOUR WAY!

  • @Panteraforever67 The americans had a MUCH bigger production line than the soviets... and a much more sophisticated production industry... Once again you FAIL in understanding the bigger picture!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Exactly, maybe that's why the Americans only lost 3K tanks while the Soviets lost over 80K. GOOD ONE! You FAIL to understand how pathetic you sound making excuses for a shitty tank!

  • @Panteraforever67 Now let's see you try and make excuses to why the Germans lost the war? Can you say T-34??? hmmm???

  • @Gooseman2k2

    The Germans lost the war because of the T-34? Are you seriously that stupid? I mean really? It had nothing to do with fighting on multiple fronts by multiple enemies. Nope, not that. If the T-34 was that good then the Germans wouldn't have steam rolled the Soviet union for 3 years.

  • @Panteraforever67 I guess you can't count... even you said Stalingrad was the turning point of the eastern front... and that was in what 1942??? so thats... 1 year? or perhaps 2 if you consider the END of stalingrad! SOOOOOOO Delusional!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    STALINGRAD was 90% a INFANTRY battle. So what does the T-34 have to do with Stalingrad! LMAO You are the delusional one. The Soviet Union was invaded in 1940, Stalingrad ended in 1943. The Soviets were SLAUGHTERED for 3 years!.

  • @Panteraforever67 Invasion of russia 1941 June.... Stalingrad Ended 1943 February... DON'T LIE TO YOURSELF! Not to mention... Stalingrad was lost LONG before 1943 Feb! The 6th just likes to hang around!

  • @Panteraforever67 T-34 is considered the best weapon the Soviets had in WW2... to say it was not a MASSIVE MAJOR factor in Germany's defeat... is to not understand... well anything!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Yes, The T-34 was considered the best the Soviets had in WW2, that speaks VOLUMES about how poorly equipped the Soviet Union was. No wonder they lost 5 million men in 1 year of fighting!

    The LEND LEASE is considered to be a HUGE factor in Germany's defeat. Hell you act as if the T-34 was the only tank the Russians used. Who cares about the American and British tanks, or the American airplanes, trucks, boots, ammunition, guns,etc.?

  • @Panteraforever67 Ima just rattle off some quotes for you... "Although its armour and armament were surpassed by later tanks of the era, it has been often credited as the most effective, efficient and influential design of World War II."

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Lol Nice quote from Wikipedia, did you write that yourself?

    Since we are using Wikipedia quotes that mean nothing ". The Panther's excellent combination of firepower, mobility, and protection served as a benchmark for other nations' late war and immediate post-war tank designs, and it is frequently regarded as one of the best tank designs of World War II"

  • @Panteraforever67 I agree... the Panther is a brilliant tank... LAWL! DESTROYED! When did I EVER say the Panther sucked? Hell the Panther is probably as good as a Heavy tank like the IS! ITS LIKE YOUR ARGUING WITH THE LEFT SIDE OF YOUR BRAIN! Not me!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Um, LOL It wasn;t that you said the Panther sucked, it was that the quote said the Panther was the best tank of the war...LOL You fail to get the point I was trying to make. The point I was trying to make, is that not all EXPERTS thinks the T-34 was the best tank, as you claim.

    The Panther was actually a medium tank,DERP. You're an idiot. KEEP IT COMING!

  • @Panteraforever67 Every tank junkie in the world agrees that the T-34 was perhaps the greatest design in tank history of all time! Yet you think it's horrible!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    Every tank junkie? Yet there are hundreds of thousands of people just like me that think it wasn't LMAO You are dilusional. Hell, there are thousands of morons that think the SHERMAN was the best tank, lmao.

    Funny, I didn't say it was horrible. I actually said it was a GOOD tank, not a GREAT one. Learn some comprehension!

  • @Panteraforever67 Now your changing your story... Sucks bieng on defense eh? You said many many times that the T-34 sucks! Now your saying it's good not great... even though it's considered one of the best of all time!

  • @Gooseman2k2

    I said it sucked compared to German tanks! The K/D ration PROVES that without a doubt! Overall looking at the whole picture, it was a GOOD tank.

    I have never EVER heard the T-34 was the best tanks of all time! LOL.

  • @Panteraforever67 I never said any other tank was bad (much less the late war panther) YOU said the T-34 was garbage! so YOU have to defend YOURSELF... your like a creationist saying "prove there is NO god!"

  • @Gooseman2k2

    LOL I never claimed you said anything about the Panther. I was merely quoting something that said IT WAS THE BEST TANK OF THE WAR. TO PROVE THE POINT THAT NOT EVERYONE THINKS THE T-34 WAS THE BEST. LOL Are you crazy?