Added: 3 years ago
From: ME262MKI
Views: 224,207
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (501)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • the king tiger is a treat to both allied and soviet duh!

  • and the sad thing is why cant we all JUST GET ALONG.

  • Comment removed

  • Plz, i know well USA, I know Wash. DC is the capital. :)It was just an example.Pf, you dont know your own history! XD "Hawaii is the newest of the 50 U.S. states (August 21, 1959)" - from english wiki page. Learn more before... " they choose to..." yes, they went to America,but they were German etc. Von Braun had german parents and he was a big scientist in Germany before and during the WW II. And he was not German?? Hm, it is interesting. And if he didn't go to USA after WWII, he ...Nürnberg.

  • and.. Goddard stole from Ciolkovsky etc... but W. von Braun was the american Moon-project's "father", because US couldnt go to the Moon in the 60th, without von Braun... The big "american" scientific were european. (Von Braun german, Ede Teller was hungarian, Tesla was south-slav etc. etc.) The most luckiest "nation" is around the world: american.

  • @Andryshun Goodard stole nothing. These were alll American citizens. They choose to become Americans.So I guess you are the dumbmest msot unluck idot?

  • @ColumbiaRules THEY WERE CONVICTED NAZIS WAR CRIMINAL SMUGGLED AWAY not just decided to go, TO AMERICA you bloody fool, In Europe WE HANGED ALL OUR NAZIS, not gave them homes jobs and new identities, you American TIT.

    Mind you, you were short of Brain, Europe never has, all our dickheads left with our blessings to go start a life in America.

  • You wrote: " The US was attacked at Pearl Harbour and Alaska in WWII... No luck involved." Hawaii was not America, just some islands where lived some us soldier and civil. (Admission to Union: August 21, 1959 (50th)), America is Washington, San Francisco, Dallas, etc with 140 million people. But there was not war! It is fact! So:"Since the Civil War,Americans do not know: what means the war in their own land." and it is fact too.

  • @Andryshun You poor fool. Hawaii was a US territory as was Alaska ( Washington DC is not a state either but its the capital) If you are storng you don't have to have your own land ravaged, idiot

  • @ColumbiaRules I think it always smart to have two places or even 2 children with the same name so there is no confusion. Also dont bother making up new names that takes imagination and brains, no just put "New" in front of a European one or just call your place after a European place, again this apparently saves any confusion. I have mates from York, Birmingham, Paris, London, Prescot, Manchester, Boston, Newcastle... Are they American? Have you dicks got a Glasgow USA yet?

  • I know that people might bash me for what I'm about to say, but while playing world of tanks, i get a little worried when i see that the enemy has a tiger, or even worse, several.

    Even though i know it's just a game I still get a bit anxious.

  • @solitajre222 noob lol

  • The Tiger I was the Lepard II of its day

  • TIGER FTW!!!

  • Germany had the greatest tanks of the war but couldnt produce them in anywhere near the numbers that Russia built T-34's (85mm) or USA built Shermans. But check out the flying turret at 0:58 after the Tiger 1 splattered it with an 88!

  • ahh no body talk about of the IS-2 with the 122mm gun.

  • @BizzLeVrai

    Actually that gun was slightly weaker or slightly more powerful than the 88 in the kingtiger. I was really shocked when i found that out.

  • If the Germans could have figured out a cheap way to cheaply mass-produce machines of this quality, they could have had some chance to defeat the Soviet Union and of course, everybody else soon thereafter. But the USSR mastered production of good-enough machines in large quantities while Nazi Germany went for the high road...and fell as a result.

  • King Tiger and Tiger I is very complicated to built, unlike the cheap and easy to build T-34 can be mass produce anytime anywhere, but the Superiority goes to the two Tigers :)

  • @Andryshun Even if Germany had produced 100 000 TIGERS it still outnumbered by the allies.

  • Nice song RAMMSTEIN, TIGER awesome machine, the tank from the future, a real

  • Great piece of machine. The only thing that's wrong about it probably was because it was used on the wrong side.

  • YES, WE MADE THE GREATEST STUFF, BUT, WE WERE OUTNUMBERED BY THE ZOGISTS'

  • stalin tank vs king tiger

  • Tiger was a great tank, but it was too expensive. Unfortunately. 5 Sherman were cheaper as one Tiger. But it is fact, 10-15 Tiger in an action were dreadful in the enemy's eyes. :)

  • @Andryshun No, just a big, fat, ripe, target for air atack

  • @ColumbiaRules

    From the air, yes.The Airforce were the only thing,why US was the winner. Otherwise german tanks, troops,handguns, rockets :) (Wernher von Braun) etc were better. But the americans, soviets, etc were a lot more, than the germans.US is far away.It's a lucky thing.Since the Civil War,Americans do not know: what means the war in their own land. It is very destructive.Fight for your child in the own garden,it is the war. If they want to fight, they take a journey around the World. :)

  • @Andryshun In teh Air, at sea, in supply, artillery, technology.ML Browings guns, were far superior nad are still in use today. Von Bruan in his biography copied diredty form Goddard. GErmany never had the technolgy and capability to invade teh Amercas (No navy, no sealift, no strategic air force)The US was attacked at Pearl Harbour and Alaska in WWII and is the only possession of Great Britian to recieve Independence by force of arms. No luck invovled.

  • @ColumbiaRules Hmmm. Pearl, Alaska? It was nothing.How many people,civil people were died? Perhaps 1000?And how many was US's population? 140 millions? :)And where they lived?4000-8000 km from Hawaii on the american continent.:)But in Europe,there was a big war."ww ii casualties wikipedia" plz look at it and learn, i am a historian. USA:1700 civils death,400.000 soldiers. It is not so lot in the WWII.So USA was lucky.Thats all. In the amer. continent, in New York,Washington etc. was not war.

  • 1 word... Mangnificent

  • strongest German tank was Panzerkampfagen VIII Maus with 128mm gun (Tiger has 88mm):)

  • @olgierdynka the tiger did do a very good job at least

  • @olgierdynka The Maus tank was never used, there were only 2 of them ever made. 1 was a prototype, and the second one never even finished.

  • @Verzekeringsmakelaar Second one didnt had tower, finished Maus is now in russian tank museum :)

  • Comment removed

  • A very beautiful, mighty and expensive tank, yet inferior to soviet tanks in some ways. T-34's was easy to mass produce, even women and children could do some details. Tiger was very expensive and required sophisticated maintenance.

    To say a word, Tiger II armor could be penetrated by IS-2 gun. The main drawback of IS-2 was its firing velocity (ca. 2-3 shots per minute). Tiger II was like a relic, only the most elite tank divisions posessed some.

    Yes, and imo Rammstein here is a no no no.

  • its not really a good tribute to the tiger once u put in random non tiger footage anymore imo, for example the panzer III and the footage of soviet artillery firing on germans lol

  • All I know, is that if the Germans had put speakers on their tanks playing this as they came through the Ardenne Forest, I would have shit my pants and never stopped running.

    Sorry, there it is.

  • Still soviet heavy tank IS is more brutal then this >.>

  • @Artanys62 How smart are you ? -_- IS tank came LATER than the Tiger

  • @22tasos22 I know it CAME later i didnt said it camed earlier >.>

  • @Artanys62 Yeah so when it came LATER it had better equipment than the tiger its obvious

  • @22tasos22 Still Tiger had many problems....

  • @Artanys62 Not really.

  • @22tasos22 Problems with engine, transmission and later versions had bad hull armor...

  • @Artanys62 Your talking about the King tiger now...

  • But these tanks couldn't break russian defence at the Kursk battle

  • Fucking allies call "sherman" and "churchill" things as TANKS..Trololol :)

    Feuer frei, bang bang :)

  • T-34 THE BEST!!!!

  • Oh,and we should not forget the Panzer IV,after the F2 version with the 75mm l/43 cannon it had become a T-34 killer.

  • @Riellysdad With 84% of WW2 production T-34'Sbeing lost.It was a miracle if a T-34 survived its first week on the battlefield.In 1941 it was the best tank but by 1943 it had become Tiger and Panther food.

  • T-34 was the tank that won the war.A mass produced ugly thing but did the job. If they had had more time with the Tiger and got the sloping armour etc in place and ironed out the bugs it would have won hands down

  • @Riellysdad the germans did it was called the king tiger or the Tiger II it was the biggest and baddest tank of world war 2 none were destroyed by enemies it earned a fearsome invincible reputation but suffered massive engine problems due to a unreliable transmission and weight. they were only destroyed by their crews to prevent the tank from falling into enemy hands.

  • Cool! I have a king tiger in World of tanks! GOOD TANK!

    

  • The kill death ratio for German tanks (Tiger I&II and Panther) in World War II was something along the lines of 5:1-10:1 so the only thing that was killing them was allied air power and shear numbers. T34's were no match for those three models. A Rhenium diboride shell would allow the 88mm gun to wreak havok on the modern world. Hell, add in rocket assistance for an even harder hit. I'd crap my pants is a Tiger II popped up on a battlefield, I'd feel safer shooting at an M1A1 Abrams.

  • He is right the only thing good was easy to produce

    but come on the tank was a pile of metal

  • @timotje112 i mean the t34 the tiger tank was the real tank killer

  • you people talk about the tigers engen or gun but ist best part was the fact that every enemy solder on the battelfield was scard to hell only by the sound of its name.

    ps. sorry for my pore engelis

  • @ieatedbutter Hated t-34 too :P and didint know that part...mybad :P but i knew it was the only thing that could penetrate it Before heavier tanks

  • @ieatedbutter First of all check your name your the idiot its Iatebutter ...second of all a firefly destroyed a tiger tank easily

  • @ieatedbutter its was the exact same situation for the panther just good old German engineering at its finest!

  • @ieatedbutter still come on its just a better tank overall it as faster and had better armour

  • i got a liger tank way better :p

  • Well When the tiger tank was made there was literally NOTHING able to stop it so the germans just kept advancing so it can be said that it Was a powerfull tank...

  • Thanks for ruin this footage with your Rammstein crap... EPIC FAIL!

  • Fuck with any ss trooper with a Tiger you know your going to get fucked up!

  • So much for the Tiger Tank....Uhhmm....They lost  the war...

    Buenas Nochos Racist Germany!

  • @DannyBruiz How are they racist by looking to one leider dosent necessarily mean all of them are. Let me give you an exampel of todays world if 51% people voted for an extrem right party would it make the other 49 racist to?

    But if one american talks bullshit we wont care cause there is duizend left on the internet

  • @BIGUNKboy

    Didn't they despise and hate Jews and incarcerated millions of them?

    Uhhhmmm....What would you call that action?

  • @BIGUNKboy

    I can tell this conversation is going nowhere.

    But one can't help but admire the Germans for their Incredible ability to create the world's best killing machines.

  • @DannyBruiz so shut up a don't watch it ;) vw beetle is also german product, so is it racist???

  • @cahounek and why racist? racists are people, tiger is just machine...

  • @cahounek

    Chill dude.

    What does the VW have to do with Germany persecuting millions of Jews?

    Let me guess...The Jews built the VW?

    Heh...heh...

  • cool vid, but WHY this anoying noise.. please next time you make a movie about a tiger, put the sound of the 88 killing eastblock :\

  • Super! Michael Wittmann is our Hero!

  • German Tiger is really nice tank but not heaviest.... And i dont know for sure i take look but i think in the last moments in war Russian build a betther tank.. but it don t fighting...

    2:51 then had germans enought of oil

  • German Tiger is really nice tank but not heaviest.... And i dont know for sure i take look but i think in the last moments in war Russian build a betther tank.. but it don t fighting...

  • @Stalin646

    The Soviets in the End had some pretty lethal tanks which could easily combat the tiger, but the tiger was top dog(more like cat) for most of the war still.

  • @arr5612 Right, when in germany they build one tiger in Russia we buld 5 tanks T-34 _ when tiger meet 5 tanks T-34 it have longer firepower so it can destroy them but 1 fast T-34 get behind it and it was dead...

  • กูกะแล้ว -*- เยอรมันนี ปะครับ *-* (ไม่ชอบ 555+ ชอบสัมพันธมิตร)

  • credit where credit is due...the Russian JS-2 could blow Tigers and Panthers away...i'd say THAT'S the most powerful tank of WW2

  • Comment removed

  • @xxcarlosxx16 lol wut? learn to spell before you try to insult the video retard.

  • ramstein ,,,yeeeeeeesssssssss

  • whats the song?

  • Awsome cut!

  • Wasnt king tiger the best tank ? xD

  • @22tasos22 nope the panther was :) it had a bigger gun was faster and had sloped armor so it had better protection

  • @22tasos22 not really just get the tiger tank get heavier armor and longer gun but make it guzzle up gas to the point you need a gas truck behind it all the times and so heavy it would break bridges

  • @TheFallenRedemption Yep :P But that one about the bridges didint know that one,Anyway totally agree with u but tiger tank had the best penetration in WWII

  • @22tasos22 no it was the russian t 34 :)

  • @TheZansibar No way ! xD that tank sucked ! :)

  • @22tasos22

    No. It was formidable, but not the 'best'.

  • @erronae The Panther was the best at that time. It had a lower weight which is a plus but armor was still excellent and the75mm gun could wipe out a good portion of the tanks the allies could throw at it. If the Tiger was a little faster and didn't have drivetrain issues as often as it did it would have been the best tank.

    Just thinking: I don't know why people rank the Sherman so high on best tank lists because it only had a production/speed edge but otherwise sucked.

  • @scoped98k Agree on sherman sucking (Is that the tank that blow up ? when shot ? >:D) Anw :l I believe on armour and gun tiger was the best it had better penetration than the panther but was a real fuel drainer xD

  • @erronae And why not ? It had the best gun and a quite thick armour...And we are talking about tanks and not tank destroyers...~

  • @22tasos22 Not enough produced compared to the Tiger or Panther

  • @ONOSwitchMonkey Yes but i am pretty sure it could kill more than Tiger and Panther combined 

  • @22tasos22 nope it wasn't..

    i can't choose between king tiger or jagdtiger.....

    but both are better then the tiger tank;)

  • @Paulusnl123 True Thinking of king tiger .I dont remember but i think it was faster than the Jagdtiger but the jagdtiger had 200mm armor but the same gun with the king tiger with less penetration but yeah tiger didint even have sloped angles dam (Excuse me just woke up xD)

  • @Paulusnl123 Actually wasnt jagdtiger a tank destroyer ? :)

  • @22tasos22 yes it is,, but it is still a good tank

  • @Paulusnl123 *tank destroyer :P

  • @22tasos22 It was indeed the strongest ever !

  • @TheEMIR95 German engineering.... :P

  • @22tasos22 yep , No one could ever built such tank hunter s, i m ean , al lgerman tanks are built to hunt down other tanks , look at JS2 , 122 mm gun , from a long range artillery Gun LMFAO , they can't built a simple anti tank gun fro god's sake , all what htye know is large calibre , and HEAT shells LMFAO

  • @TheEMIR95 yea but was slow and om nom nomed the fuck out of the benzin

  • @vlad007001

    Tiger II was not slow, it could achieve max roadspeed of 41km/h and sustained speed of 38 km/h, making it faster than any russian or allied heavy tank.

    Also it's fuel consumption was less than the Panther for both cross country and road and less than the Tiger I for cross country.

  • @Dreachon dude i was talking about Tiger 1

  • @vlad007001

    My apology but I assumed given that the two previous poster were talking about the tiger II you were also referring to it, still even the Tiger I wasn't slow, it also had a sustaibned roadspeed of 38 km/h, it was also very manuverable.

  • @TheEMIR95 Not if you play the free onlinegame "World of Tanks".....

  • @22tasos22 HELL YEAH IT WAS!

  • @MrVolcanoes22 hehehe ;)

  • @22tasos22 The king tiger wasnt realy the best.

    The E100,Pzkwf VII maus, Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and the Landkreuzer P. 1500 monster are better Cannon wise and armor.

    Though bomber would have a realy hard time missing the landkreuzers

  • @22tasos22 The king tiger wasnt realy the best.

    The E100,Pzkwf VII maus, Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and the Landkreuzer P. 1500 monster are better Cannon wise and armor.

    Though bombers would have a realy hard time missing the landkreuzers

  • @keegamii MOst of them were not created.And the Maus was a prototype i think.

  • @22tasos22 the E100 and Lankreuzer P.1500 monster never got of the drawing board so far i know.

    The maus was being made but captured and the P. 1000 got canceled halfway

  • Comment removed

  • @22tasos22 BTW That are just a few german tanks there were more countries in WW2

  • @keegamii Yea.And with that what do you mean ?

  • @22tasos22 yes but it had many quality problems as germany was low on necessary ores and composites to make high quality steel armour towards end of war when tiger II was produced so the armour spalled constantly, making it weak in armor if it gets hit alot. The best tank gun was mounted on it tho, i'll give u that.anyway best would be t34 in terms of impact on war, in terms of fighting quality, tiger, js-2,pershing are all on the list.

  • @jizzinmypants191919 Not really.Germans always wanted high quality stuff so i dont THINK it was low quality of course i dont know i am just a 14-year-old that likes WWII.But really the t-34 ?Sorry thats not even a tank for me...especially on 1 vs 1 it was doomed from 200 yards ? :p Its armour wasnt even made looking good :p and wich t-34 ? (quite a few t-34 tanks)

  • @22tasos22 That is the common stereotype thats wrong."OMG Anything german is high quality!!".they wanted high quality,but they cant always achieve it.For example,late model Panzer IVs's(Pz.IV Ausf J)couldnt even afford to put on electrical generator for the turret,so the turret had to be cranked manually because Germany needed to simplify production.As for T-34,it was a medium tank,and it was superior to German medium tanks the whole war,T34/76 crushed early war PZIII's/IV, 34/85>late war Pz.IVs

  • @22tasos22

    Indeed. But the Königstiger(Tiger II) was made in late 1944, so he was made in the end of the war, Tiger I was made in 1941 , and he was one of the most powerful, till Königstiger came.

  • @22tasos22 for a guy that like ww2,u reallty need to do some more research on it.In tank to tank combat, superiority in 1 on 1 doesnt mean that tank is the greatest tank of the war.It may be most powerful,but not best.The T-34 turned the tide for the Soviets,so it is the greatest in its feat.Also,i hate when people compare a stupid heavy tank with only 1000 made to a massively produced medium tank.For gods sake,compare tiger to Soviet heavy tanks,and u see tiger is not superior.

  • @22tasos22 then u compare t-34 to other german MEDIUM tanks of same weight class, because or else its unfair. once u do that,u see the t-34 is superior to any german medium tanks(as an expert, i can argue with u all day why),in treading the mud/mobility,in armour,in firepower,reliability,and in ease of manufactore.You say German stuff always high quality? well, Panther and Tiger always broke down before even fight!Before Kursk battle half the german tanks were writeoffs to mechanical breakdowns!

  • @22tasos22 Look up some stats friend.in beginning of war,germans couldnt do crap about soviet KV-1 or T-34s,the only weapon they had to kill it was flak 88.Late war?T-34/85s as a medium tank were of course inferior to heavy tanks in 1on1 combat,but would crush any Pz.IV's(better armour and gun).Heavy tanks?JS-2 can penetrate tiger front from 1500m away,Tiger?less than 100m because of well sloped 125mm hull armor of JS-2.TigerII?indeed most powerful.How many build?500.Unreliable and brokedown too

  • @jizzinmypants191919 I was talking about KING tiger.So why did u say to me about the Tiger ? Also tiger was unstoppable the time it came out i believe the tanks you mentioned came after Tiger tank,(do not know.And kind of lazy to figure out :p)

  • @22tasos22 i talk about king tiger too,and it was unreliable and broke down,and made in tiny numbers. and guess what?the T-34 and KV-1 were unstoppable when they came out, and only until mid 1943,right before kursk did the German aquire TINY numbers of tigers (~100) to counter the onslaught of superior soviet tanks.Too bad the war ended too early,because the JS-3 was about to go into service(it in fact served in SOviet invasion of Manchuria vs japs in August),230mm of armor,mobility still bettr

  • @jizzinmypants191919 Yes i know you talked about the king tiger too :).Ok awesome thank you for the info and i never really never heard of the JS series (?).Hmmm Do you know the penetration of the JS-3 ? and the mobility ? that would be nice for me to know :P.How about tank destroyers.Jagdtiger..opion ? thanks :)

  • @22tasos22 look 'em up.IS-2 could penetrate tiger front / panther from 2000m.go look up the a-19 gun mounted on it.it fired slower(2-3rpm)but the huge range was a advantage.Its 125mm well sloped front hull armour was virtually impenetrable to tiger and panther(though some German sources claim 800m penetration,which was very possible since armour steel quality of soviet tanks varied).3856 were produced in total.JS-3 came a month after ww2 too late but it rumoured to>king tiger with 230mm armor...

  • @22tasos22 jagdtiger was crap.hitler is an idiot.if i was him, i'd focus on building more panthers/jagdpanthers.only 88 jagdtigers were ever made throughout the war because it too time consuming,material consuming,money consuming.Germany lost becuase it produced crap like this.yeah it might kill a few enemy tanks,but germany is hurting itself allocating resources to produce these stupid superheavy weapons.These were so heavy they couldnt even go over bridges,and logistics were painful.

  • @jizzinmypants191919 Well i do admire hitler but i agree.But why panthers ? Myself not really a fan of that tank.Althought he shouldnt have went in to three fronts at the same time escpecially attack USSR at winter !

    Allthought the tiger tank was heavy it was roomy inside and the driver and radio man could lean and sleep if they wanted it also had a steering wheel.But its frontal armor was heavy but sucked it wasnt sloped.Well thanks anything else ?I would love to learn more.(No more charact

  • @22tasos22 roominess dont matter.the only thing that makes or breaks a tank is combat capability.tiger was bad period.soviets had CHEAPER heavier tanks that can easily destroy it.Panther was good becuz it had better armor actually(80mm front hull vs tiger 100mm,but sloped at good 55degrees),its 75mm kwk42 has HIGHER muzzle velocity,penetration and accuracy than tiger 88mm,AND it was 2 times cheaper than tiger,panther costed 130000 reichsmarks tiger 210000reichsmarks.6000 panthers made tiger 1300

  • @22tasos22 as for tiger II despite the fact it looked good on paper,it was a nightmare for german industry and took up production capacity for other more useful and practical tanks.Plus it had distinct disadvatages:extreme heaviness led to transmission failures=breakdown,turret traverse VERY slow,making it bad for close combat,low quality armor despite thickness since by the time germany made tiger 2 it lost precious resources needed for high quality steel to soviets as they advanced.

  • @jizzinmypants191919 yea but it did its job tho.It was the one miracle Hitler wanted but i believe he didint create any new equipment for the king tiger that's why it had all those problems?Yea heard a lot of king tiger break downs.Really alot.Well the problem was with the air superiority the Allies had the air superiority that's why every time a sherman saw a tiger they called for an air strike :P

  • @jizzinmypants191919 as for other decent tank destroyers,the jagdpanther was much better than jagdtiger. decent well rounded armor,amazing tank gun.one of the most powerful anti tank guns, accurate,high muzzle velocity meaning deadly penetration at long ranges in combination with nice german gun sights.however,the soviet SU-100 was imo a good match,and the best AT guns of the war would have to go to te british QF 17pdr mounted on sherman fireflies and soviet BS-3 gun,kill king tiger from 1000m

  • @jizzinmypants191919 js-3 used same gun as js-2, so same penetration. kill tiger/panther front at 2000mas for numbers,i cant give accurate as diff country measure different ways,use different quality steel in test armour(make big difference).4 example,soviets count as penetration only if 80% of shell fragments go through tank armor while germans count penetration when only 50% shell fragments enter tank.mobility?is-2 go 23mph . is-3 is lighter despite heavier armor.idk exact but go figure.

  • It's fun to read all comments saying that the Panzer IV was sucky against T-34 and so on. The Panzer IV entered service ine 1937 and the T-34 first entered the war in 1940. At that time, the Panzer IV was out of date, the T-34:s slsoping armour was better than the 90 degrees armour of the Panzer IV BUT, the russians didn't mount a good gun on the T-34 until the T-34/85 was produced. The time the tanks were made does play a big part on the effectiveness of a tank, even if it's just one year.

  • Tiger tank = Reason why germans were so successful

  • @Ch4nster So sucessful they surrenderd uncondtionally

  • he was more for fear ... than action ... he was killer but 1500 made cmon ?? that guy on video was tiger ace destroyed almost 120 russian tanks ! but t-55 was best tank ever made ...

  • @CE3EHbKA the Is-2 was a great tank.. but if there were most of King tigers... bye bye daddy...

    soviet tanks are CIGARRETE BOXES....

    TIGER IS TIGER ... and t-34 is bullshit..... sorry

    the is-2 had a great cannon.. but it was a horrible cannon at large distances....

    and had low ammo... the King tiger was betther than the is-2...

  • @lucasmconcordia IS-2 is design to fight the Tiger I and Panther. IS-3 was the counter to the Tiger II.

    @CE3EHbKA Also, if the M4 Sherman is ***** then explain why in Korea there were more T-34/85 loss to the M4. M50 Sherman overcame the T-34/85 again in South West Asia and even T-54s. So check your information before saying anything. T34 had the same bullshit ratio as the M4 against the Tiger I and Panther. To disgrace you even more. The British 76mm 17 pounder even out power the Soviet 122mm.

  • @CE3EHbKA

    JAJAJAJJA

    the T-34 only can run fast......

    the tiger was slowly, but the germans broke some soviet asses.... 8.8cm for ever!

  • @lucasmconcordia the tiger was not slow, it could do 24 mph easy, and had a very good power to weight ratio and had a excellent suspension system and was shorter than the t34

  • @packr72 24mph on road..cross country sucked , maybe 12mph? especially on muddy russian/snowy russian steppes. famous for bogging down. As for panther and King Tiger, HORRIBLE drives, suspension, often break down because the suspension/drives couldnt support the weight. And the armor is overrated..it cannot penetrate is-2 armor from less than 100m but is-2 front armour penetration is achieved from 2000m vs tiger front hull.only 1300 made.most overrated and romanticized tank of ww2 goes to tiger

  • @jizzinmypants191919 no actually the tiger1s suspension and tranmission were fine, the tank was lower to the ground than any russian tank and had very wide tracks. the tiger1s gun was more than capable of penetrating an is2 armor at over 1000m. and the is2 gun had below average penetartion for its size, it would have to get within 500ms to penetrate the armor, and the is2 was a horrible tank when it came to mobility

  • @packr72 my bad. iwas thinking about panther transmission/suspension.The is-2 gun penetrate tiger front 2000m+ tho wth are u talking about. it pepnetrated 125mm of 90 degree vertical armor at 2000m and 105mm at 3000m.Tiger's 88 could only penetrate 99mm of sloped armor at 1000m...it gets js-2 at below 500m my bad but js-2 has advantage.mobility? was better than tiger are u friggin kidding me, much lighter and lower profile targett too.plus much less tigers made.

  • @jizzinmypants191919 the is2 hardly ever pierced tigers armor, most tiger kills were the concussion from the is2 artellery 122mm gun, its not an anti tank gun, the major problem with the is2 was its mobility, the tank suffered from problems, its engine wasnt powerful enough

  • @packr72 ...seriously, go look up some charts. go google some.read the wiki article.read battlefield.ru. go look up the graphs.it is stated everywhere that penetration is achieved at 2000m at least to 3000m. The encyclopedia of soviet artillery has a chart of soviet tank gun penetration,and shows that the js-2 cannon a-19 peirces 100mm of 90 degree armor at 2000m,115@1500m,130mm@1000m,15­5mm@500m.MORE than enough to destroy tiger front.Mobility?is-2 24mph on road. same as tiger,also 24mph.???????

  • @packr72 by the way,according to David Higgins in King Tiger vs IS-2 Operation Solstice, it is stated that is-2 was clearly more maneuverable and lighter. much more able to go across bridges and traverse across hilly terrains,espeically since it was reliable and never had transmission problems/mechanical breakdowns,unlike the tigers.Oh yeah, and known fact,the turret traverse on it is MUCH faster,making it more adapted to cqc.Tigers turret traverse was RIDICULOUSly slow.......................

  • @jizzinmypants191919 well the king tiger was an idustrial nightmare, on paper it was awesome, but the truth was the tiger 2 had poor quality steel and it was to heavy for its tranny, suspension, and engine, the orignal tiger had better quality steel, almost unmatched in quality, and although a tigers turret was slow, it had a much higher rate of than the is did, only 2 rounds a minute, the is2 was a breakthough tank designed to take hits from at guns and punch holes in german lines, no

  • @jizzinmypants191919 it is stated though that the is2 couldnt penetrate even the front glasics plate of the panther at close range, the is2 ap rounds were rather wimpy and the gun had a much lower muzzle velocity than the 88 or 75, the one thing that could knock out a german tank though was the concussion from its high explosive shells hitting the tank

  • @packr72 stop citing stupid german propaganda "tests".Go read any book on the tank or ww2,and personal accounts,(like that of German general Mellentin,who consider IS-2 SUPERIOR to tiger/panther).That test was incorrect and it was towards end of war,where germany needed propaganda badly. If u look at Kubinka results,the IS2 went thru front glacis and straight through back from 1500m of a panther.But u dont have to look at Kubinka,look at other neutral German sources and u'll see.

  • @packr72 i agree in all , but dude , king was way longer then a small bugged T34 :D

  • @packr72

    The Hellcat was faster than EVERYONE.

    /argument

  • @packr72

    The Hellcat was faster than EVERYONE.

    /argument

  • @killerkirbydude how fast

  • @22tasos22

    45mph. That's how fast.

  • @killerkirbydude hetzer 40 mph ? :o

  • @22tasos22

    Could it do that off-road? 45 is the Hellcat in a field, not on a paved road.

  • @killerkirbydude no idea :D How do you know about the hell cat ?

  • @22tasos22

    Well, personal knowledge from here and there, as well as Wikipedia to confirm my recollections.

  • @killerkirbydude hehe :D well ill thumbs up your comment then ! but..wikipedia can be edited by everyone ;)

  • @packr72 T-34 were made in many, MANY modifications, it was main medium soviet tank tho.

  • @Artanys62 i know that but for the most part they were cannon fodder for tiger tanks.

  • tanks are cool but bring a cobra or a A-10 in and you might as well paint a big target on a tank.