PANTHER Panzer V Tank at Bovington Tankfest 2008

[Toni112007]

This machine could take out even JS-2

Js2 could penetrate panther frontal armor only from 500 meters or less

[perfuzz]

I'm pretty sure the techs vent, no not again when the 'tank soldiers' came down the road, towing the Panther.

[Falke40lg]

This Camouflage looks like one of the end of war

[GunnCommanderX]

@Falke40lg I dig that paint scheme, never seen this type of camo on a German Panther before.

[Falke40lg]

@GunnCommanderX

but i gives some like these in Ardennen 1944 and then it gives some there look like it in Münchberg

[GunnCommanderX]

@Falke40lg Thanks for the info. These Tiger stripes would have been befitting of the Tiger class models!

[alanfangor]

to bad germany only produced around 12,000 tanks total or else they might have stood a chance against the 80,000 Shermans the United States built

[PkayerZxz2]

@alanfangor You fail to take into account that Germany also had excellent StuG's and TDs to supplement their Panzers, and that could Panzers typically take out several enemy tanks before dying, or at least this was so on the wast front. Oh and, only 50 000 Shermans were made.

[Videomaster5555]

most powerful medium tank was soviet T-34 panzer V was strongest medium til T-34

[jangotrooper]

@Videomaster5555 ....uh, t34 was good but after panther came, it became the best medium tank of ww2. Best armour, best gun and its suspension was one of a kind. It aloud the tracks to take the brunt of the terrain while the crew wasnt being thrown around inside. The T34 relied on the extremely rough american Christie suspension...which was a horrible ride

[dude13302]

@Videomaster5555 what do u mean til the t34 the panther was based on the t34 and the panther was still more powerful than the t34 even after they upgraded it to the t34-85.

[F1zzzy90]

@Videomaster5555 T-34 ? Really ? do u have any idea about world war 2 ?

[dastotalebroetchen]

@Videomaster5555 Please just shut up if you don't have any knowledge about WW2 tanks...the Panther was much stronger than the T-34 and just by the way the PZ V was developed when the germans had their first contact with the T-34.

[Rangerfull3]

a bit cool seeing a modern tank and older tank side by side

[zyyu]

heard that the Panther's gearbox is a big problem.... they had to ship it as close to the battlefield as possible to avoid breakdowns during driving...

[TheBlackhawk123]

@zyyu all heavier german tanks had technical problems because of the complicated design and heavy weight. these problems could be fixed by any engineer, the only problem was that the engines were hard to reach. this made the repairing time quite long. its true that the tanks were delivered by train, besides the fact that it takes shorter, it also saves petrol. Most T-34 already broke down before they even reached the frontline.

[Benderswe1]

its not the normandy camo, and i wonder how many allied or russian tanks it has destroyed ?

[Alex555666555]

@ktc8308 yes at the tank museum but after the tiger because their tiger tank is the only working tiger tank in the world so they need to keep it running so after the tiger they will begin the project to get it working. Oh by the way they have all ready began repairs on the tiger.

[cas1029]

it al peeps and stuf :P

[PanzerAngriff]

@cas1029 It isn't peeps. How dare you.



[cas1029]

@PanzerAngriff how do you call it then ? :P

[EMIR72CC]

Best ww2 tank

[johnhalley974]

Great tank....awful paint job!

[ktc8308]

Any restoration project for this panther?

[andy4499g]

this panther was built by the British after the war from parts left over

[dzdz80]

Striking camouflage... Is this Panther in running condition now?

[justshootin]

hate to pay for the gas nut then again that gun can make people very generous ^-^

[bohemianh]

Pathner was a great tank, however due to England and usa bomobing the hell out of Germany it wasn't produced in numbers needed.

[hardcorecrusher12]

this panther got the same armor of the t34 at the front and the back side of the tank. some people said that the panthers quality of steel was better then the tiger. and other people said that the panther was stronger then tthe tiger

[MowagW200]

Great video, but too bad the Panther was not rolling with his own power.

[skeilak]

@slopedarmor

All of the later nazi tanks, Panther, Tiger and Tiger II, were over-engineered. Too expensive, under-powered, too mechanically complicated to be reliable, and too hard to build, given limited materials available, and constant bombing of the factories.

The nazis could only crank out one Tiger, for every thirty T-34s or twenty-five Shermans.

In battle, one Cadillac, nice as it may be, is not better than forty Chevy's.

[Bazgatow87]

@skeilak

well said, but you have to consider that the high russian output of T-34s was just possible, because they didn´t produce anything for the logistics, like trucks, recon etc. All this, at least most of the trucks were delivered by the US. If you see pictures of the Red Army in 1945, you will see that most of the supplies were carried by gmcs, studebakers and so on. Without the immense support of logistics, the russians would have stayed... Btw the Panther rocks, even its engine!

[skeilak]

@Bazgatow87

Indeed, Sir, I was aware of that. Even some of the Soviet trucks were running on Studebaker engines and transmissions. And a large percentage of the Soviet Air Force were US planes. The Bell AeroCobra and the C-47, being notable.

I had an Uncle in the Merchant Marine, during the War, who was in several convoys to Archangel and Murmansk, and had quite a few stories to tell. Like giving the Russians cans of peanut butter, which they thought was a lubricating product. *L*

[Withnail1969]

@skeilak

Great point. But you know what? Even if the Germans had produced 10 times as many Tigers, they would have been useless.

Why? Insufficient fuel to run them.

[skeilak]

@Withnail1969 : You'll get no argument from me, on that score.

The entire nazi war effort was constantly plagued by chronic materiel shortages.

They rarely had enough of anything to competently prosecute the war.

Their remarkable lack of logistic skills, only compounded that failure.

[nyctasiaselesq]

@skeilak I like how you think about numbers. It is so... impersonal. But answer this personal question. Where would you rather be? In one of those 25 Shermans, praying that is not you in that Tiger's sights? Or you would rather be in a Tiger, looking at those 25 Shermans and wandering what the hell are those generals thinking about sending so many tank crews to their deaths?

The reliability issue is greatly overstated. Provided with decent maintenance, Tiger and Panther were as reliable as T34.

[skeilak]

@nyctasiaselesq

I would rather have been in a Sherman, as my chances of survival were statistically much greater than being in any German machine.

Plus, if I survived, I could have held my head up, these past 65 years, knowing that I helped destroy the most evil bunch of goose-stepping scum that ever crawled out Hell's cesspool, the Nazis.

And no. Neither the Tiger I or II, nor Panther's, were anywhere near as reliable as the T-34 or any US tank. Read a book. Stop making a fool of yourself.

[nyctasiaselesq]

@skeilak This is a last answer to you, since you are clearly to missinformed. I have read more then one book, and I compare info considering true what more sources state, not just one. Every WW2 allied tank crew asked where would he rather be, chose the Tiger. Your statistics were higher only because the numbers, but that meant nothing to the guys that had to scrape you from the interior of a Sherman.

I have no knowledge of any german tank crew to held their heads low. They were the best!

[skeilak]

@nyctasiaselesq

So, in one breath, you acknowledge that my information is correct, and claim I'm misinformed?

Either you are a very confused, or you're working a little "political agenda", to put it very politely, that has little to do with the facts surrounding WW2 Armor Operations.

I suspect the latter.

[oberchobo]

@skeilak Damnit your first sentence is so fuckin dumb. I agree completely on the rest, but that first sentence is pure bullshit. There was NOT A SINGLE allied vehicle that had the survivaility or the kill ratio of tiger or panther tanks.

Tiger: 5.74 kills to each loss

Panther: ~ 4 kills each loss

And while those tanks were respected and for a great part feared by the allies you want to sit in a "tommy cooker" because it´s sooo save. You really owned yourself with your last sentence.

[oberchobo]

@skeilak Even allied tank crews would have changed their tanks for a tiger. Sitting in a sherman with higher chances of survivabiliy is just fantasy lillte boy. Go and visit some vets in your city and ask them.

Number of kills with tigers:

Kurt Knispel with 168

Walter Schroif with 161

Otto Carius with 150+

Johannes Bölter with 139+

Michael Wittmann with 138

What won the allies the war aside from being on the "good side" was QUANTITY... Now read a book yourself and stop makin a fool of yourself.

[skeilak]

@oberchobo

I really can't help it, if you are too stupid to comprehend, "chances of survival were *statistically* much greater than being in any German machine."

That is just a fact - pure and simple. If you so vehemently disagree, prove otherwise.

In the meantime, I would suggest you are the "little boy", who is "so fuckin dumb", he is "making a fool of himself".

[torinotom71]

it don,t run

[Kargaron]

medium tank? this tank was heavier than the tiger

[slopedarmor]

What? The panther is a medium tank and weighes 46 tons, the Tiger I is a heavy tank and weighs 56 tons.

[Kargaron]

na i mean that this tank has a better armor and a better canon than the tiger^^ so its "heavier"

[slopedarmor]

well weight really is what makes a heavy tank.

But yes the panther had, at certain distances, slightly better armor penetration capabilities, but the Tiger had a better HE shell.

And the Tiger's armour was definately better than the Panther's.

[wilhelmspw]

in theory the panther armor was way better but tigers were produuced muc more carefully.besides panthers were trhown into combat in hurry for kursk,so many failures.

[slopedarmor]

The biggest mistake was to give the panther only 30 mm side armour vs the 80 mm side armour on the tiger.

+ Tiger's armour higher quality.

So there you go.

[WTCTribute]

Panther was faster than the Tiger because of it's lower armor. Besides, 30mm is still good comparing what the Allies had. Even the T-34 couldn't knock it out without getting close enough.

[hatakashi1900]

Sadly that isn't exactly true...30mm was VERY thin and could be penetrated by T-34s or even Shermans up to 1000 yards.

[ThePanzerWarMachine]

If you flank A Panther, then it is a Dead Cat.

[slopedarmor]

Yep, but it is not a Jagdpanther :-)

Something more agile than a t-34/sherman and with a turret is a lot harder to flank :)

[ThePanzerWarMachine]

Correct. Panthers, land Tigers were best to be attacked with their Engines turned Off. that allwing the Sherman to sneak up to it, and to take it out with a Shell from close to Medium Range. The Tiger/Panther traverse is much slower then when the Engine is on.

[slopedarmor]

Not a strange thing considering the turret is powered by hydraulics. The engine off means doing it by hand.

[ThePanzerWarMachine]

wich Means a Billion and 1 Hand cranks and at the Time the Turret is facing hte Enemy, You're Either Exhausted or Dead.LOL

[petrwarry72]

slopedarmor-late variants of panzer IV ausf J didn't have any electric or hydraulic powered turrets,still able for fight (sorry for my poor english ,mate)

[Mustang1204]

they should of simplified the suspension.

[slopedarmor]

nah, this looks good.

But it would've helped a lot by making the tank simpler to produce, 16 independent torsion bars are expensive and a bitch to repair.

[ThePanzerWarMachine]

@Mustang1204

they tried that with the ''panter F''

a simplified ''G'' with single road wheels, and and easy turret. never left the procces stage. only 1 was build, and it is now in Bovington Tank Museum.

[Dbackfed]

@slopedarmor

The reason why the Panther was given thinner armor on the sides was because the armor was sloped, giving it more deflecting power versus the flat sided Tigers.

Example, if you threw a punch at a wall, you can deliver most of the force into the wall. But if you punched a wall they was angled like the Panther side armor, you will find a great deal of the force is deflected upwarded.

[slopedarmor]

@Dbackfed duh

But sloping the armor couldn't hide the fact that 30 mm of armor was very weak.

[xAlexTobiasxB]

@Dbackfed main purpose of sloped or angled armor is not primarily for deflecting. many people seem to confuse this. sloping armor is mainly purposed to make the armor plate thicker than vertical armor, this is the primary main purpose of angled armor. deflection is only a additional advantage that comes with it. And even the side armor was sloped but the angle was only very minor. This made it up to at least 40mm side armor (only 10mm added). It's still very weak as you can see.

[calimar28]

@slopedarmor Actually the Panthers side armor was 40mm. Later in the war it was thickend somewhat...but too late.

[Vendland89]

@slopedarmor

No... Panther's armor was better made. The highest quality of armor was about early 1944.... Panther was "light" and higly mobile in connection with extremaly tough frontal armor (even better than Tiger had) and extremaly accurate and effective KwK42 cannon that was a deadly combination. In addition Panther was twice more cheaper in production than Tiger was.

[slopedarmor]

@Vendland89

It might have had thicker (due to sloping) frontal armour, but the steel used on the Tigers was still of a higher quality.

[gowiththeflowish]

@slopedarmor the panther was the first ultra modern battle tank introduced into history, with an extended 75mm gun it was better than the tigers 88mm. To bad it was to complex to mass produce otherwise it would have one the war.

[hatemf23]

@slopedarmor panther armor was sloped, alot better than tiger's vertical.

there you go.

[slopedarmor]

@hatemf23

Somebody here said that already, and duh, I'm not a friggin retard.

Sloped or not, the Tigers side armour was way more protective than the Tiger I's side armour.

[F1zzzy90]

@slopedarmor The Tiger is The Tiger I u retard

[dekster14LP]

@slopedarmor

The angle of the armour plating on a panther is more shallow, so it has the same effectiveness as a tiger tank without carriïng the extra weight. (sorry my bad english)

[nyctasiaselesq]

@slopedarmor Side hull armor for Panther was at least 40 mm. Side hull armor for Tiger was 60 mm. Perhaps you use made a mistake on transforming imperial to metric.

Highest quality RHA steel went in the Tiger. Possible also used in front armor for Panther, but I can't say this for sure.

[ArgoPloetz]

@slopedarmor nonsense the side armour was 45 mm not 30 idiot! tigers armour higher quality??? the tigers have problems with steel because no Molybdenum!!! Panther is and was best tank of world war 2 people with world war 2 knowledge said this!!! stupid idiot

[Cosmin1511]

@ArgoPloetz

Hes right about the TIger`s armour quallity . The Tiger had the best quallity armour of ANY tank of ww2 , and there is no refference that there ever was a drop in quallty of the armour . The lack of molybdenium and its replacement with vanadium was a problem felt in the armour composition of the Tiger 2 not Tiger 1 .

The standard by which ww2 tank armours were judged was the Brinell Hardness Indicator . The Tiger had the Highest coeficient of any tank of ww2 by Miles .

[Cosmin1511]

@ArgoPloetz

The Tiger 1`s armour was a rolled homogeneous nickel-steel plate, electro-welded and interlocked . It had a Brinell hardness coeficient of 280 , by far the highest of any ww2 tank , and it had very rigorous quallity control over the manufacturing procces , and it remained the same throughout the production. To put it in plain english , this ment that 100 mm of Tiger 1`s armour was equivallent to more than 120 mm of british armour and 135mm of soviet contemporary armour .

[ScoopzyDaizy]

@slopedarmor no? armor had nothing to do with it. mechancal failures buried this tank. and the lack of resources coming from germany.

[haiherosner]

@slopedarmor Dude, the Panther had 50mm of side armour, not the 30mm that you quoted, that's false. The Panther's side Armour was as thick as the Shermans frontal armour (50mm), the frontal armour of Panther was 80mm sloped at 45 degree angle, effectively making it impossible to penetrate frontally.

[dastotalebroetchen]

@haiherosner The angle of the frontal armour was 35 degrees so he hab an effective armour of almost 140mm 

sry for my bad english ;)

[Dedoelker]

PANTHER Panzer V 44 tons

TIGER I Panzer VI 57 tons

[WaffenSS397]

@Kargaron The KingTiger was Heavier than the Tiger Mark I, the Kingtiger was a Copy of the Panther Medium Tank.

The Kingtiger weighted in almost 70 TONS!

[Licinius34]

It looks like this panther has been on safari judgeing by the paint scheme

[atatyrknumber1]

@Licinius34 Well, the Germans even had a panzer battlefront down in the middle east and Africa in WW2 (If I'm not completely wrong on this)

[headshot0211]

@Licinius34 what are you hunting to require that kind of firepower?!!!

[ichmalealsobinich]

Ich muß unbedingt noch mein Fahrrad ölen! Fällt mir grade ein :-))

[FinalWar1444]

vote NPD 1488

[ichmalealsobinich]

Finalwar, your channel is not available in Germany! It's censored!

[ichmalealsobinich]

why?

[JimbobHarrigan]

that would be the jagdpanther tank destroyer, roachmobile

[zoomotorpool]

Never seen this camo before.

Is this from Kubinka museum, Russia, where they like to repaint the tanks?

[winchuni22]

No, restored in the UK i believe. This is where the museum is anyway.

[3819oli]

its not a real camo job. i surgest that the guy who repainted this find another job

[roachmobile]

Supposedly, there was a Panther variant with an 88mm gun and modified turret. This variant was faster than a tiger I or II.

[hatakashi1900]

No all Panther Ausfs were all fitted with 75mm L/70 gun

[AARDVARK444]

I am not atr all sure that the cam scheme is correct and where are the turret numbers

[hatakashi1900]

I'm not too sure about the camo as well. However, many WWII german later war panzers had no numbers or any identification signs on.

[MesserschmittBf109g6]

I have never seen one only with a cross on the turret, besides this cross looks awful!

[chusillo88]

the panther is really runing???, or is being pushed/pulled by the other tank???

Wath these tanks nowadays is amazing. When i have 350.000 euros, ill buy a sherman... Muahahaha

[slopedarmor]

It's possible to buy a de-militarized t-34 for €35.000 ;-)

[chusillo88]

Where it can be bougth'?? And it will works??

[slopedarmor]

Don't know where, you've got to be on the look-out for a good deal. Yes everything will work except for the arnament.

[Scioneer]

Nice looking tank. Hope they get her running one day.

[allevontek]

Super restoration!

[centi521]

i think ¨they only painted this tank and in side is nothing do

[hatakashi1900]

This tank still has its engine, transmission and most of its original fittings in, all they need now....is money to "refurbish" the tank!

[AndreiTupolev]

Loved the way that had that displayed, in a camouflaged 'hide' among the trees. Most convincing. Now, how's about that for the next project? That'd look good next to the Tiger, wouldn't it...

[tiger0tank]

the tiger is finished I've seen it running

[25222537]

me too

:-)

[deathkill6969]

i trained at bovi

[Duelkenvideo]

great video - 5 stars!

[ktc8308]

Hope that Panther in running condition again.

What is the next restoration project of panther?

[Duelkenvideo]

Great camera work & shots. Too bad the Panther was not running!

[Dedoelker]

Thank you!

[hatakashi1900]

It has got everything inside...but sadly there are crystallined residuals left in the engine and pipes. All it needs is a proper cleanout