What is the best WW2 tank?

Attached: centurion-mk1.jpg (893x478, 51K)

Shit meme and no longer funny, much like the "bOb SeMpLe WaS tHe BeSt TaNk" posts

Purely by combat stats
1939-42:T-34-76/KV-1
1943:T*ger unironically
1944:IS-2
1945:T-44

T-44 never saw combat though

Stats

Tank quality and performance cannot be assessed by looking at stats, so it's a pointless comment anyway.

Fuck off

The tiger? Is this really even a fucking question? Tiger crews would literally run out of ammunition and have to retreat to get more before the Americans would run out of tanks.

44 and 45 would be Tiger II if you just go by "stats".

SEETHING

>stats
Brainlet detected. I'll use your first example to prove my point. The T-34 and KV-1 should have been world beaters in 1939-1940, yet they weren't. Why? Because despite their superior hard stats compared to German armor, their soft stats (crew efficiency, visibility, coordination, etc) were far far worse.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no
>thinking I'm mad
Just tired of the same circlejerked nonsense

Start of the war: Panzer III.
End of the war: M4.

Not really

>yet they weren't
Except they were
German tankers literally shat themselves at the first sight of kv1 and preferred to retreat until arty/planes disable it

Stug a good boi

Sure it would. They had a bunch of problems with them but on paper they where the best tank around at the time.

Yet the Soviets were still losing tanks like water through a sieve and retreating closer and closer to Moscow with every passing week.

slavaboo, pls.

Keep in mind the t34 and kv1 where honorable at any level but the individual level and when it comes to the early production ones they where taken out by guns that shouldn't have killed them on paper because the where poorly made.

>T-34-76
uh... no. Any tank that leaves the factory in such a state that the crew can see outside light through weld joints is not a good tank.
>KV-1
A good breakthrough tank, but entirely obsolete within months of the German invasion. Poor mechanical reliability was also a pretty significant issue.
>Tiger
There was actually a brief period where the Tiger was top dog, so I'll give it 1943
>IS-2
Incredibly poor crew ergonomics to mount a gun designed almost exclusively for bunker busting. Good for blowing up strongpoints, but not really of much use in more traditional tank roles. M4A3 76(W) tanks or T-34-85 here.
>T-44
Never saw combat, or if it did it was against Ha-Gos in Manchuria. On paper it was a good tank, but in terms of "combat stats"... well there aren't any, so by that metric the Fiat M13/40 was a better tank in 1945 than the T-44.

user here is smart

FT17

This list is mostly ass, but I'll vouch for the KV mainly because of the insane k/d ratio those things had as well as their relatively good reliability, even the stupid designs like the KV-2 were capable of excelling.

The T34-85 is widely regarded as the best tank of WW2. In one incident, an entire company of Tiger 2's attempted to destroy a lone advancing T34-85 only to have all their rounds bounced by the T34's superior angled armor. Said T34 dispatched all the Tiger 2's with a single shot to their frontal armor that was constructed of pig iron. Wartime records indicate that the T34-85 had a K/D ratio of 50,000,000:1. The single lost vehicle due to the crew drinking too much in celebrating their 1000th Tiger kill, and then driving their tank into a 20-feet deep river of German blood. Fear of the T34 was so great, that Germans would immediately surrender upon sight of them. The prisoners were then forced to lie down, and promptly run over by T-34's to avenge the 6 million Jews. Many historians contend that the Allies only won WW2 because of the T34-85, and by extension, the T34-series as a whole.

It depends on the year. At the beginning the b1 was probably the best thing around 6 month later the panzer 3 etc...
Also theory and practice differ. The kv1 was a beast in theory, in practice the situation awwerness of the crew was 0.
Due to bad vision