The question of "what was the best German tank of the Second World War" is popular
among military history enthusiasts. On the other hand, "best" is a relative term
that means different things to different people. Many people will probably think of the Tiger and Panther when asked what was the
most technically capable tank. However, a lesser-known tracked combat vehicle, the Sturmgeschütz III, was arguably
more significant in terms of impact. The German Tiger and Panther tanks were iconic, but neither was produced in sufficient numbers
to have a significant strategic impact. Nonetheless, they were far more
potent and qualitatively superior to anything the Allies had
until the end of the war. Despite their omnipotence, the
Tigers were never produced in large enough numbers to have a significant impact. It was mostly used in small numbers and when the
Wehrmacht was retreating, rather than advancing. In reality, it was designed to be an assault tank. The Tiger's main flaw is that
only 1,347 were ever made. The Tiger II was much more formidable, but
production was limited to only 489 units. Perhaps a more interesting question in
evaluating Second World War German tanks is: what was the most significant design? Here Significant means: which tank
had the greatest impact in battle? The Panther was in some
ways superior to the Tiger. It had a better iron triangle balance
than the Tiger, because it had a higher power-to-weight ratio providing
improved cross-country mobility. However, early Panther models proved to be so
unreliable that they were a combat liability. Not until the Panther Model G debuted in early
1944 did it begin to have a significant impact. By the end of the war, total Panther
production had reached around 6,000 with less than 3,000 of
the model G variant produced. In comparison to Tiger and Panther
tanks, the Soviets produced 84,000 T 34s while 49,000 Shermans
rolled off American assembly lines. Military historians generally consider the
T 34 and Sherman to be more significant than any German tank because they could
be mass-produced at a lower cost. While absolute numbers were often the
deciding factor between victory and defeat, they also made equipment
support simpler and less costly. As a result, in terms of overall impact, production volumes and supportability are
important additional evaluation criteria. The Panzer III and Panzer IVs of
the Wehrmacht were more significant than the tiger and panther because they
were also produced in Greater quantities However, overall manufacturing was noticeably
lower than that of American or Russian tanks. A total of 8,553 Panzer 4s, and
5,774 Panzer IIIs were built. The Panzer 4's technical capabilities were mostly
comparable to those of the T 34, KV 1, Sherman, Churchill and Cromwell tanks it faced in combat,
but because to a mix of well-trained crews, successful strategies and enough numbers
to create a Blitzkrieg effect, it played a crucial role in a remarkable number of campaign
victories during the early stages of the War. The Sturmgeschütz III or StuG was the
most extensively produced German combat vehicle of the Second World War.
It was the only other German tank, along with the Panzer IV to be continuously built
from 1939 until 1945 with 10,086 being made. The StuG was a tank that wasn't really a tank. It was designed as an assault gun to
support attacking troops with direct fire, a role it excelled at in
Poland, France and Russia. It was specifically instructed not
to be used as a tank destroyer, because it was thought to be too vulnerable. Instead, it was to be utilised to deal with
machine gun nests, pillboxes and fortifications. Because the assault guns were used to
equip the assault artillery batteries, they were under the direct command of the German
Army's artillery rather than the Panzerwaffe. Without a turret, the StuG could only slew to the
left or right, using its tracks to rotate its gun. It couldn't fire while moving. It also had thinner armour
than the Panzer III and IV. Overall, the StuG should not
have been such a huge success. However, by the end of the war,
it had destroyed an estimated 30,000 Russian tanks - more than any other German
combat vehicle and more than any Allied tank type. Although the assault gun's primary role evolved
from assault artillery to antitank weapon, these units were still under
the command of the artillery. As a result, the StuG crews were
gunners rather than panzertrupen. The StuG III, StuG IV and StuH 42 fully enclosed
assault guns served as the backbone of such units. The Gross Deutschland division
StuG units claimed 44 T-34 kills in Kharkov in February 1943, while an equal
number of tiger units only managed 30. In the same year in Leningrad,
a StuG battalion, Abteilung 226, equipped with 41 StuG IIIs destroyed 221
Russian T-34 and KV1 tanks with only 13 losses. After Kursk, the Russian situation changed,
forcing the Wehrmacht to take a defensive stance. The StuG III was forced to be
used as a tank destroyer due to the circumstances rather than as an assault gun. Despite not being designed for that specific role, the StuG performed admirably in the
anti-tank role due to its improved weaponry. Their 75 mm L/24 short barrel gun
was eventually replaced by a 75 mm L/43 and later by the more powerful L/48 gun. These proved to be more than capable of destroying
most enemy targets, at ranges greater than 1 km. Despite concerns about vulnerability, the
design requirement called for a vehicle height of less than a man standing, resulting
in a lower profile than other German tanks. It was perfect for ambushing
enemy tanks because it was easier to conceal and presented a
smaller target to enemy gunners. The StuG was the simplest and cheapest tank
type built by the Wehrmacht and SS Panzer Divisions between 1939 and 1945, costing 70,000
Reichsmarks whereas a Panzer IV cost 100,000 Reichsmarks and a Tiger 300,000 Reichsmarks. Since the StuG III was built on the
same tested chassis as the Panzer III, it was simple to support and maintain
because spare parts were widely available. Transferring production to StuG III when Panzer
III production was halted wasn't a problem. It was simple mechanically making repairs simple. The training was also simple. The vehicle, which included a commander, a driver, a gunner and a loader was easy to
use and was well-liked by its crews. Crucially, the StuG III possessed additional
advantages that are frequently overlooked. It mounted the 75 millimeter
L/48 gun which was too large to fit within the turret ring of the Panzer III. Despite being less powerful than
the Tiger's 88 millimeter cannon, it could still defeat the frontal armour
of the majority of allied tanks making it more than adequate for the tank destroyer role. Compared to the Panzer IV, the StuG III
had better optics allowing it to engage targets more quickly, accurately
and over greater distances. These were coaxially mounted, not above the gun,
making it simpler to acquire and track targets. The StuG III had good armour
where it was most needed: across the frontal arc, despite having lower
overall armour protection than other tanks. The StuG III weighed less and was
more agile on and off the road, because it lacked a turret and the same
overall thickness of armour as the Panzer III. Because it was lighter, it put less strain on its drivetrain and thus broke down less
frequently than other German tanks. It had the highest availability rating
of any tracked combat vehicle in Germany. Its low profile due to the lack of a turret
made it an excellent ambush tank and the fact that it was less expensive to build than a
regular tank made it incredibly cost-effective. The advantage of the turret-less design was that they took less time to produce and
then get them to the battlefield. The StuG III was built in greater numbers as it
was recognised as a useful battlefield asset. Despite its many qualities, the StuG never achieved
the iconic status of the Tiger and Panther. It was plain-looking, unsophisticated
and less capable than its tank cousins, but it was responsible for
a disproportionately high number of tank kills in comparison
to other more capable German tanks. In reality, German assault and self-propelled
guns actually eclipsed the panzers. They were cheaper and faster to
build, and by the end of the war, they had frequently supplanted
tanks within panzer battalions. In summary, the technical features, production
numbers, combat performance and service longevity of the StuG combine to create a vehicle that no
other tank or tank destroyer has ever matched. This does not mean the StuG was flawless. On the contrary, it had flaws, but it functioned
sufficiently well to be incredibly useful. Due to a lack of tanks, they were frequently
called upon to fill the role of panzers. They were ideal for the massive defensive battles fought on the Eastern Front as
well as in Italy and Normandy, and ultimately they were instrumental in
delaying the defeat of Hitler’s Nazi Germany. If you have liked the video, please
subscribe and support the channel for more many thanks for watching.
