agreed

This or the panther.

No Tiger 2

he said: "this or the panther", stop being rude man..

im Talking to the idiot above me not Patriarch.

Very impressive since they broke down so often 70years it is impressive lol

@redtiger: This was the same what I thought as I saw this clip!

They still drive some Char Renault from this museum, 100 years old tank

+MuppetLord1 Then go and play Pokemon! :P

The only technical capability it had at time is to break down on it's way to fight

@@forader6494like the massive territorial gains it made during the battle of the Bulge? You know nothing about history nor technical information about tanks, 12 year old potential history fan😂

No modern Tanks much more brutal ;) greets from Germany

Soweit ich mich erinnere, ist Tigar2 Scheiße

billige Parodie auf Macht und dummes Genie

and yet they kicked Wehramcht´s ass. they literally crushed Wehramcht under the tracks of their tanks, and this will happen to any army which would try to attack Russia. remember Napoleon

@@Jakubescu The Russians did not beat the German’s all by themselves it took almost the entire word to defeat them and on two fronts. Don’t forget the lend-lease from the USA totaling 11.3 billion or 180 billion in today's currency. • 400,000 jeeps & trucks • 14,000 airplanes • 8,000 tractors • 13,000 tanks • 1.5 million blankets • 15 million pairs of army boots • 107,000 tons of cotton • 2.7 million tons of petrol products • 4.5 million tons of food Comparing Napoleon invasion of Russia to German's is ridiculous as they were totally different campaigns with completely different reasons for failure. Russia lost in Afghanistan remember that.

@@JohnBlessingPaligap Nah. It wasn't the Russians, Americans, or anyone else. It was some white snowflakey bois that stopped Barbarrossa

@@arcturus4762 ??

@@JohnBlessingPaligap Snow. Barbarrossa was halted by snow

Thea would have no chance against its predecessor.with a L55 120mm gun /the LeopardI2/A5-6-7)who can eleminate ANY tank on a distance of 4 Kilometer with a single shoot on the move. watch?v=67m2yvR_GTs

Rick2010100 My point was,that this Tank is from the second world war,and if you look at it with today's eyes,it would not look as if it was out of place, so imagine what it must have looked like in the eyes of soldiers in the second world war,and it had the 88mm gun on it that could kill any tank at up to 2 miles, the allies did not have anything that could do that until the British fire fly 75 pouder gun fitted to the sherman, so to see it now as it looked in 1945 was my point. I think it looks Awesome.

Tom Keir Indeed, it looks compared to the other tanks of that time alienlike, even the Tiger I looks small against this one.

considering allies were scared as heck to see a tiger, they probably pooped their pants on this one lol

They were getting ready to put range finders on it.

Most allied Tankers would try to disengage unless there was 10 of them

+1M0RTAL_CH1CKEN but 10 tanks didnt guarantee if they could kill the tiger 2 at that time..

Fatin Fadillah yeah. And the Sherman had the reputation of combusting into flames when hit.

nope , the panter aka Sd.Kfz. 171.

M Sharpals ausf? platform?

all version´s read here : sinsheim.technik-museum.de/de/de/panzerkampfwagen-v-panther and : www.welt.de/geschichte/zweiter-weltkrieg/article107281131/Das-Elend-der-deutschen-Panzer-war-ihre-Qualitaet.html the problem of the tiger II, he was to big and heavy and his motor was to small. the panter was a medium tank and has have enought mobility in fight ... All other you can read on websites. my fav in WWII tanks T34 cheap and simple , but high amor. Tiger expensive , (to)big , but fine amor and exelent canon Panter not to big, but fine amor and exelent canon M28 To late, the first modern US tank M18 hellcat, fast ( as a leapard 2 or M1) the worst tank : M3 and M4

Not really. That was the T34 actually.

the t34 was the first tank with modern form of amor. But the canon and the chassis of the panter was a better construction.

Et non.................................

Et si

Ostatní zůstaly jako šrot v Rusku.

Это "самый смертоносный танк" и повоевать не успел толком, большую их часть американцы авиацией погрохали еще до того как они успели в бой вступить, остальные либо подорвали, либо отдали. Лишь единицы успели повоевать. Да и кроме брони, ничего хорошего в нем нет. Самая убойная машина Тигр 1 - тот и не ломался и достаточно подвижным был и орудие офигенное и броня достойная. Вот это действительно был убойный аппарат, зачем они лепили всякие пантеры, кт, ягтигры мне не понятно, если лучше 1 тигра все ровно танка ни у кого не было.

TorontoChannel Check out russia ISU-152.Zveroboi

Злой Волшебник plus ISU-152 has less frontal armor than Königstiger or even Panther. It is a very powerful vehicle tho, and well liked by its crew.

We never would have moved after Normandy if it wasn't for our air superiority. We chose the best beach to land on; but bocage country was perfect for defensive warfare.

Good idea, bud the real grandpa of the Leopard 1 and 2 is the Panther!

The Tiger ausf. b was originally intended to be upgraded with the excellent 850hp fuel injected version of the HL 230, but the factory that manufactured the injection units was bombed and the upgrade was never implemented. also planned for use in the Tiger was the GT-101, a 1,500hp BMW Gas turbine engine and would have given the Tiger the best HP/ton ratio of any tank used in the war. It had already been installed and tested in a Panther chassis before the war ended, it was the worlds first turbine powered tank.

doktorbimmer Maybach HL 234 who at the end of the war was just prototypes build and he produced 900 PS (~ 888 hp) at the pike and who had give the Tiger II a power/weight-radio from ~ 13 PS per ton (with the 700 PS strong Maybach HL 230 he had ~ 10 PS per ton) ;)

Michael P Thanks for the comment, I am familar this the HL 234. From what I understand this individual tank in particular actually has a fuel injection HL 234 installed currently (or perhaps a HL 237 motor) Do you know any more about this? I have not been to Sammur to verify this. Cheers!

They (the Germans) would most likely have upgraded the engine if they had time..which they didn't. Could you imagine if the Tiger2 (King Tiger) and the Maus had the appropriate engines? And were produced at a higher rate?

doktorbimmer Not a lot. All i know is that there was produced some prototypes of the engine, short before the end of war and that he was planed for the "Entwicklungsserie" tanks. He should become the engine for the E50, E75 and E100. Which the E100 should get a turbo variant of the engine who was called HL 232 and who should produce 1200PS. But this engine only exist on paper ...

Soviet too

Darth Septimus challenger 2 when fully loaded weight 72 tons so

I thought it was 69.8; Leopard II, Abrams, Challenger II, all around 65.

except it doesn't take gas it takes diesel

+Nathan Munch look up maybach HL 230

+Nathan Munch I meant to say fuel but I had a brain fart :P

+Jorrdi Jabobo There was two versions of Köingstiger. One wee see here Henshel with characteristic turret and With porsche turret. My point is that Henshel's version of Köingstiger works on Oil not fuel or gas soo it's not that hungry as Porsche version :D. Not many people know about that fact. One more thing The main gun of Köingstiger is 110 mm not 88.

the maingun of the Kingtiger ist the 88, you mean the frontturretarmor of the porsche turret

it's maybach

Fatin Fadillah Yupz! i know it V-12 Maybach..just love the sound ^~^

+Azusa Nakano it's german technology ;)

Fatin Fadillah Yupz2! so tiger 2 is ur fav. tank?

+Azusa Nakano yea, one of my favourite ww2 tank. i love german tank especially for ww2 era..

That is not what MBT stands for. . MBT is "Main Battle Tank". It refer's to a tank that is capable of replacing a light, medium and heavy tank as it has characteristics of all classes such as high speed and manoeuvrability of a light tank with the armour and fire power of a heavy tank. The Tiger II (KT) is not an MBT, it is a heavy tank. . No such MBT's existed during or shortly after WW2 as this idea for MBT's was yet to be conceived.

HONORGUARD308 ah... No. Your knowledge of early MBT developement seems very limited. the MBT was conceived during WW2... The Tiger was actually designed before the term MBT was ever coined. An MBT IS a heavy tank... a fast heavy tank. The Tiger was the fastest heavy tank of the war... it pioneered most of the performance parameters of the MBTs that were to follow. Cheers!

doktorbimmer During WW2 and even shortly after tank's were designed and classed as either light, medium, heavy, super heavy, cruiser and tank destroyer. The concept of MBT's was rapidly expanded during the cold war. I know the Tiger tank's were designed and produced before the concept of MBT's that is why the Tiger tank's are not MBT's they are heavy tanks. The exact definition of MBT was conceived due to its ability to replace all past tanks with a single "MAIN" battle tank, the ability of obtaining characteristics of all predeceasing classes. You dont even know what "MBT" stand's for let alone the history of tank development and design, your original comment of MBT meaning MODERN battle tank (>wrong) is a direct contradiction of what you just said. It really doesn't matter what you believe the fact is the Nazi's designed both Tiger tank's as heavy tank's, official documentation proves this and a very fast research can prove that the KT was a heavy tank, NOT an MBT.

HONORGUARD308 No, Germany, America even Britain during the war did not agree on or use the same classification systems or terms.... so your point is completely moot. MBT was a term that became synonymous with a class of tank first seen with the Tiger... a heavily armored, heavily armed tank with the speed and mobility of a light or medium tank... this is the definition of the term MBT The Tiger was the first modern tank as it is seen today.... and the first to combine the features that define the MBT Cheers!

doktorbimmer I know different nation's did not have the same classification's but they used them, the list I gave was some German, British and Americana classification's. I never said they used the same classification's. Again, you dont even know what MBT stand's for so it's not surprising you have no idea about the history. Im not even joking though, you can do a simple search and it will prove my point.

und Deutsche stabile Sache :-)

The gun mantlet was much more desirable than Tiger 1 or Panther; it reduced the frontal area of the turret.

but if it got to the battlefield one shot in your shitty sherman or churchill and it was gone :D

Yannic Gerzen As a Soldier better a Fat Ass Tank then a Little Crap like the T34 or the Sherman , so many Soldiers Die useles in this Deathtraps and that was not the better Choice in my opinion ... But for me the Panther was the Best Tank of WW2 , not too Heavy not too Bad , a Real good Tank .

AMIGABLUEBIRD lol yea i agree ;D

but it still had the best armor and gun in ww2

there are a lot of videos here, where a T-34 gets fucked by a Tiger.

and unfortunately they needed 10 kingstigers to destroy one IS-2.. cuz 9 from 10 kingstigers always were broken..))))

Anton Rebrov Thats right, Soviet tanks were much more reliable... for instance they never had problems with things like radios, range finders or cabin heaters.. they didn't have any!!!! Lol...

Anton Rebrov you obviously dont know anything about tanks 1 tiger 1 could kill 20 is-2 with no problem then tell me why they would need 10 king tigers to kill 1 is-2 the tiger could penetrate an is-2 from up to 1500 meters and the king tiger could penetrate the is-2 from about 2000 meters to 2500 meters the tiger 2 gun had a penetration of 200 to350 mm just tell me where you get your information and one thing i need to tell ya the is-2 needed to point its gun down in order to reload the tigers and tiger 2s didnt need to do any of that and the tigers had alot higher fire rate

doktorbimmer I remember reading once that some of the T-34 crews had to use a small sledgehammer to smash/shift the tank into different gears.

***** That i have never heard, but the T-34 was perhaps the most unreliable tank of the war. the V-2 engine was only designed to last 100hrs in service but the quality of the air cleaner system was so bad the engines rarely lasted even this long. The T-34 did have a famously unreliable transmission as well, the defect rate was so high that T-34 units were often fitted out with a spare (strapped down to the engine deck) if you search old photos you can sometimes spot them. another interesting fact about the T-34, the Diesel engine had no heater system to aid starting for winter use, crews had to build a camp fire under the rear hull and leave the hatches open to warm the engine enough to start.

Triumph of nazi idiotism!

Anton Rebrov atleast the german tanks made it into moskou and didnt breakdown 30km out of the factory unlike the t-34 russian scrap *grabs popcorn*

Anton Rebrov lol idiot? i see u will pee on in pant when one of those tank rolling to you

Anton Rebrov lol idiot? i see u will pee on in pant when one of those tank rolling to you

MrJokerSaySHOOO You can't read you idiot? Mostly they COULDN'T MOVE AT ALL and were left by crews - that's what a problem!

shut up jew

Yannic Gerzen shut up nazi-german crap

Федя Бочкин Nazi et Staline

szolnok95 500 tanks per day = 182,500 tanks per year = 3.5x entire US tank production for WW2, so your comment is bollocks and you can't count :)

Russian fanboy. just admit that this machine just bud-fucked every tank that the Russians could throw at it. even post-war (Korean war) tanks would be bud-fucked. and that's even like 10 years later. not even speaking about the jagdtiger.