Startseite Doku Dokus Geschichte/Politik Zweiter Weltkrieg FURY Sherman VS Tiger Filmausschnitt

FURY Sherman VS Tiger Filmausschnitt

2.95M
556

Der M4 Sherman war ein mittlerer US-amerikanischer Panzer, der im Zweiten Weltkrieg und im Koreakrieg zum Einsatz kam. Benannt war das Fahrzeug – der meistgebaute US-Panzer des Zweiten Weltkrieges – nach General of the Army William T. Sherman (1820–1891).

Tiger
Noch im Ersten Weltkrieg wiesen die Panzer verschiedene Formen auf; die Konzepte mussten ohne Erfahrungen ausgearbeitet werden. In der Zeit zwischen den Kriegen entwickelten sich die Panzer in eine Form, die sich weitestgehend bis heute erhalten hat. Es wurden Panzer mit voll drehbaren Türmen konstruiert, die über Hauptwaffe und Sekundärbewaffnung verfügten. Zu Beginn des Krieges lagen die Kalibergrößen der Hauptwaffe bei 37 mm bis 76 mm. Die Stärke der Panzerungen schwankten zwischen 10 mm bei den leichten bis zu 100 mm bei den schweren Panzern. Mit dem Fortschreiten des Zweiten Weltkrieges nahmen Kalibergrößen und Panzerstärken weiter zu. Die Deutschen setzten dabei auf bewährte und probate Waffen wie die 88-mm-Kampfwagenkanone L/56. In der Sowjetunion wurde die 122-mm-Kanone eingeführt, das schwerste westliche Kaliber führte der US-amerikanische Pershing-Panzer mit 90 mm. Auch die Panzerung wurde weiterentwickelt. Statt allerdings immer dickere Panzerplatten zu verwenden, wurden die Panzerplatten abgeschrägt, sodass das Geschoss eines Gegners abgelenkt wurde. Nun war es nicht mehr nötig, die Panzerplatten ausschließlich zu verstärken, um einen höheren Schutz zu gewährleisten. Ebenso wurden Dieselmotoren eingesetzt, die den Aktionsradius der Kampfwagen erheblich vergrößerten. Auch die Fahrgestelle wurden neu konstruiert. Statt wie im Ersten Weltkrieg auf Holt-Schlepper zurückzugreifen oder deren Fahrgestell nur geringfügig zu modifizieren, wurden neue eigene Laufwerke konstruiert und den entsprechenden Situationen und Kampfarealen angepasst.

Eine weitere wichtige Änderung war die Entwicklung der Munition. Im Ersten Weltkrieg wurden noch herkömmliche Artilleriegeschosse verwendet. Im Zweiten Weltkrieg entwickelten die Konstrukteure aller Seiten Munitionstypen, die speziell für den Beschuss feindlicher Panzer geeignet waren. So wurden vornehmlich Hartkerngeschosse mit Wolframcarbidkern und Hohlladungsgeschosse eingesetzt.

Während des Krieges setzte sich ein neuer Panzertyp durch: der Jagdpanzer. Dieser ging direkt aus der Panzerabwehrrolle des Sturmgeschützes hervor. Dabei wurde meist auf einen drehbaren Turm und außer im Frontbereich auf eine stärkere Panzerung verzichtet. Dafür wurden leistungsstärkere Kanonen eingebaut, zum Seitenrichten musste das gesamte Fahrzeug bewegt werden.

Die immer mobiler werdende Kriegsführung verlangte auch für die Unterstützungstruppen eine ausreichende Motorisierung mit Panzerschutz. Die Grundsteine für die nach dem Krieg entwickelten Schützenpanzer und Transportpanzer wurden mit den relativ schwach gepanzerten Fahrzeugen wie Universal Carrier, M3 oder Sd.Kfz. 250/Sd.Kfz. 251 gelegt.

Kommentare(556)

    1. +Finbarr Arsenault This is the Spring of 1945. You can tell by how there’s
      Americans in Germany. They were in pretty bad shape at that time given that
      they’d just lost most of what strength they had left in the Ardennes, and
      the Soviets were pushing towards Berlin.

    2. +Nastrael Rowe Yeah, but this doesn’t exactly take place in a time when
      Germany was THAT dire.

      +snipercam11 More like 1 to about 15. Multiply that x5 for a complete zug
      and you get about 5 to 75. Imagine then an entire batallion.

    3. +Finbarr Arsenault I think you underestimate how dire the Germans‘
      situation was in 1945. If all your veteran tank crews are dead or captured,
      you’re not going to think twice about throwing green troops, or even
      conscripts into a tank when 10 million Russians are knocking on one door
      and half a million British and Americans are knocking on the other.

      Even if the crew was veteran, they would’ve been exhausted. Fighting a war
      for 6 years, constantly being moved from one front to another, especially
      in a vehicle like a Tiger, which were prioritized for the toughest pushes,
      seriously takes its toll.

    1. +Hale Bomm 17 Pounder on a firefy which was a sherman. This is getting
      stupid now. SHOW ME A SOURCE THAT STATES A TIGER FRONTAL ARMOUR WAS
      IMPERVIOUS TO 76MM FIRE.

      Check out all the gun pennetration tables you want. The 76mm gun is
      perfectly capable of taking out a Tiger frontally. Its pen values are not
      too shy of the 17 Pounder APCBC vs APCBC. Least not against a 100mm Tiger
      frontal plate.

      The Panther was a harder target to take out frontally. That was the only
      German big cat where there was a noticeable difference between the 76mm and
      17 Pounder. A Tiger 2 required APDS for a frontal pen anyway where the HVAP
      couldn’t.

      Look again. The Tigers protection was fantastic for 1941 when designed.
      Useless for at guns SPECIFICALLY designed to take it out.

      Also i’d love to see your sources of a Tiger vs US 76mm Shermans. Like i’d
      love to… because guess what? There was only 1 reported instance of it
      happening. From Normandy onwards they were only deployed on mass near Caen.
      That was it.

    2. +Crag_r if you mean by most AT guns the british 17 pounder than maybe but
      thats what I already told you because thats the fireflys gun no the
      standard and the Sherman Easy eight weren’t able to penetrate the front
      armour I think a person who was driving a Tiger knows much more about it
      than you do and I wont believe you cause I spoke with Tiger and Sherman
      crew so I know from real history you only know from WoT or something
      because only in games someone can talk so much bullshit

    3. +Hale Bomm Yeah no. The Tigers armour was a moving pillbox when it was
      designed in ~1941. In fury (1945) most frontline allied AT guns could slice
      straight though it well past effective fighting ranges. (~3km for a 17
      Pounder) 100mm is nothing, effective frontal protection wise a Panther was
      far better then a Tiger. I’ll refer again to the data i provided above.

    4. +Crag_r the tiger was a moving pillbox for the crew its armour was the best
      you will never find a sherman driver who would not prefer the tiger over a
      sherman

    1. +austin waggoner fore 1 tiger germany could have sent 4 stugs to support
      infantry and level a city block, I was just not cost effective for infantry
      support.

    2. +odisy64 the guns firerate was not that bad and while it was meant for a
      anti tank role it could support infantry and be a building killer as for
      the first 6 months of its invention no infantry antitank weapons worked
      against it and after ways to kill it were descovered they were never full
      prof now as for its anti building capacity it could level ant building that
      was a threat to infantry and no one will directly challenge a tiger

    3. +austin waggoner actually I did, it’s large gun meant a lower fire rate, it
      was high volicty so it was made to kill armor not trenches or stone
      buildings, you could not built 50,000 tigers so infantry had less armor
      supporting them, and it would be dangerous for a tiger to enter urban areas
      or areas filled with infantry becouse of there anti-tank wepons (bazooka),
      is that enough?

    4. +austin waggoner how many times have I linked you information, Givin you
      numbers, actual battles, and correct the armor and gun values of tanks?
      That’s right get out of here.

    1. +MontgomeryBL What movie would that be you’re describing? None.

      Hollywood has gone to crap with ideas, but I’m hard pressed to find these
      films to be pathetic. That ‚American bias‘ really doesn’t seem to exist in
      the way everyone imagines it. When it comes to realism, it’s been more-so
      bad recently, but definitely not terrible.

      +Lord Plum The directors just gave the Tiger the upperhand by getting Fury
      and the others to bounce. The 76mm guns on Fury and Peterson’s tank could,
      and would penetrate the Tiger at that angle.

    2. +IVAN SUSANIN do not forget about 20 stuka bombers shot down by sherman’s
      browning and a kriegsmarine battleship destroyed by a shell that bounced
      from tiger tank armor in same time 😉 Well, american movies are quite
      pathetic and something needs to be changed in hollywood.

    1. +xyrxes1 Oh come on. The Tiger tank was better in almost anything except
      speed. Yes a Sherman or T-34 could drive +40 km/h but had a horrible range
      not even mentioning the sights that weren’t 100% precise.

      They needed it to close the distance gaps with Tiger tanks in order to
      stand a chance. A lot of veteran tank crew (US as Soviets) preferred a
      Tiger over their tank.

      Also if you want to know more about Tiger tanks I suggest you to read the
      book „Tiger’s in the mud“.

      Talking about numbers just shows that German armor was better in every way.
      They entered battles with less tanks than the Soviets or Allies and either
      won or gave them tons of losses.

      If you would speak in terms of lives well 15 Allies or Soviets would die
      for 5 Germans (if they got lucky; Also generally speaking because it would
      cost around 4 Sherman’s / T-34’s for one Tiger. There are times when German
      tankers killed more but they are less common especially late war.

    2. +odisy64 True, in war all commit crimes but that doesn’t take away you can
      wash your hands clean due to the sole reason of winning the war.

      Germany kept its honor for taking the blame of their crimes which they
      actually committed but they also took the blame of those which they
      couldn’t do much about it because it was the fault of their enemies.

      At least have the honor and respect as a nation to accept your own crimes
      and take the blame for them instead of pointing fingers to the losers and
      state that it was all their fault. Very childish to say the least.

      I agree on the matter that both of us have a different view on it. The rich
      and wealthy disgust me even more now than I did before. Always saying they
      had to build from scratch and think what they earned is rightfully theirs.
      I can’t stand them. Their ancestors earned millions with both World Wars
      and they have enough money to pay the debts of every single country.

      Instead the low and middle classes get taxed, etc to pay for everything.
      Disgusting.

    3. +Myles Bogaerts its a difference in opinion and belief, we can go back and
      forward 100 times and not move an inch, i have to accept you believe in
      your information as much as i believe in mine and you have the reasons too,
      lets end this discussion before frustration turns it ugly. do i think the
      Holocaust has some miss information? yes, but that dose not disprove all
      the terrible things the Germans did and there mass killings. hell they
      starved Poland but could still feed there army.

    1. +MrChesterarthur not the front, it’s a heavy tank and it is designed to
      withstand 76mm tank guns from shermans. For a sherman to do any damage that
      would actually make a difference it would have to get within at least 100
      meters of the tiger or approach it from a weak point, all this without
      getting shot first.

    2. +Richie Audi Yeah. The tiger wasn’t on fire because of its poorly made
      transmission. Nor did its armour start to crack after the first hits. Also
      it had the fuel to get into position in the first place. The 76mm should
      probably have also penetrated the frontal armour straight up

  1. As long as the jews run Hollywood and they have tools like Brad can’t act
    for shit Pitt B.S. movies like this will be made.

  2. People saying this is unrealistic: Yes it is, the German tank would have
    never left its position, it makes no sense. But you have to realize that
    this is a fictional movie, not a documentary. The tiger took out 3 of the 4
    tanks there, and in real life probably would have killed all 4. But if the
    main characters were killed then that would be a pretty lame ending to this
    story, so the writers made it so the tank charged forward, giving the
    Americans a chance to shoot it from behind and kill it. If the writers
    decided not to do that then they all would have died and the story would
    have a lame ending. Yes its unrealistic but it still shows how scary the
    tigers were, I mean it killed 3 out of the 4 tanks, so I think they got
    their point across. Of course the main characters have to survive this.

    1. +Ratinho MoViadão if you look real closely the M4A1 sherman also had the
      M4A1 76 gun (has no muzzle) the fury has a veriant of this 76mm gun with a
      muzzle.

    2. +odisy64 Yep but one sherman is with a 76 and others 75! the fury have 76
      and they could kill a tiger by the front easy!

  3. And this kind of maneuver NEVER happened in real life. No German tanker
    would be STUPID enough to put himself in such a situation, going mano e
    mano with a more maneuverable tank in open ground.

    1. +TK-315 CloneM the firs shot did penetrate but since the Fury had improved
      systems to keep it from blowing up (I can go more in depth if you want)it
      only busted the turret hydraulics, the second shot hit the front armor at a
      bad angle and the energy of the round was deflected instead of penetrating.
      But no one complains the the shot from the furry at that close of a range
      could panetrate 150mm but bounce of the tigers turret wich is 120mm.

    2. +odisy64 I agree that two shermans from the group could have knocked that
      Tiger out from a longer range, but how about the tiger hitting Fury twice
      at point blank and doing barely any damage?

    3. +PKJohansson444 just like how Michael Wittman charged his tiger into a
      british convoy dispite him knowing that his tank could kill any allied
      tanks at 2kms.

  4. What is this shit? Tiger can’t penetrate M4 Sherman? In real life, Tiger
    can destroy Russian T-34 over 1600 metrics, and T-34 had better armor than
    M4 Sherman.

    1. +boycot gugle You are 100% right. When the allies landed in Normandy to
      open the western front, the Soviets were already at the gates of Warsaw…

    2. +DrCruel
      Saving the Bolshevics? From what? The US was like „Oh crap, if we don’t act
      now, Stalin will have pushed the Germans into the Atlantic!“ Germany lost
      the war strategically in late 1941 at the gates of Moscow and then bled to
      death slowly getting pushed west. Just like what the Wehrmacht had done to
      the Russians in mid 1941, the Russians copied in 1943-45 and wiped out
      whole German army groups in gigantic battles of encirclement. Stuff like
      the Falaise pocket (60.000 German casualties) is a joke compared to
      Operation Bagration (500.000). Or Hurtgenwald? Try storming the Seelow
      Heights. The Soviets paid dearly, but it was none other than them that
      almost single-handedly destroyed the Wehrmacht. Yes, the second front might
      have helped a bit, just as the lend/lease trucks before had, but what
      halted and eventually ground down the Germans were mainly some 50.000 built
      T34 tanks and millions upon millions of Russian lives spent.

    1. Yeah that’s what i want. Like early sets of tiger h1s when they fucking
      crushed every tank before the americans were able to beat them, something
      like the movie white tiger but where the tiger wins

    2. +Hatsune Miku if you want to watch something like that then don’t watch
      Fury because it takes place in 1945 which was the end year of the war and
      the axis powers were getting their asses kicked hard that they couldn’t
      even get any victories anymore. If you want to see the opposite then watch
      the WW2 movies that take place during 1939 and 1940 and 1941 and 1942 and
      1943 because those are the only years where the axis powers were getting
      major victories. WW2 movies that take place in 1944 and 1945 are going to
      have the Allies kicking ass because that’s how it really was. When those
      two years came the war was in the allies favor it’s fact everyone knows it.

    1. +Emperor Valkorion What was luck? It was well within effective gun range,
      Well in effective pen range and fairly common with German doctrine.

    2. +Crag_r As well as the fact this was open ground, and its well under
      1000yds (>1km), the 76mm M1A1 and M1A2 guns on Peterson’s and Wardaddy’s
      tanks would knock out the Tiger.

    3. +Lord Plum What do you mean a Tiger wouldn’t charge like that? Wittmann was
      killed in almost identical circumstances… except no Shermans died, at
      longer range and the Germans out numbered the shermans.

    4. He would just come out of smoke then stop and camp, he alrdy has range,
      armour and penetration advantage, kill the shermans if they charge at him,
      if they try to run ther ded anyway, least of all running at them would
      definitely not help him, instead it would only help them as he closes the
      distance!!!

  5. 3 Sherman’s for 1 Tiger. if fury didn’t have that add on armor( those logs
    the were on the side of tank) they would have been toast. This is what an
    experienced Tank crew looks like.

    1. +Erick Vollmer As would have the 76mm Shermans cut though the Tiger on the
      first salvo ending the battle before the tiger got a hit off

    2. +Matthew Arenson those logs would not have stopped that round, that round
      would have cut right through Fury like a tin can

    1. +windson7 The side shot did nothing to the engine, it knocked out the
      hydraulic/electric turret traverse. The 8.8cm Kwk 36’s Pzgr.39/42 APBC-HE
      shell would go through 3.5 Shermans before detonation fired at 25m as
      discovered by post-war tests.

    2. +Nathan Peterson
      None of these tanks would’ve missed at 500 yards, let alone up close. The
      Tiger’s side shot at the engine would’ve filled the commander’s ass with
      shrapnel.

    1. +JL Pacheco A 76mm can easily penetrate a Tiger at fairly close range, a
      bigger plus was the M4 could literally drive circles around Tigers all day.

    2. +JL Pacheco unlike you when I do my research I don’t stop half way and
      automatically assume „German superior, American inferior hurr durr“ fuck
      off you dumb ass

  6. gotta love yankees wet dreams about ww2… they fought against the
    crumbs of the wehrmacht and still did terribad. Best troop and equipment
    fought in the east front and the russians arrived to Berlin at the same
    time,

    You guys suck at war, go back to orchestrate coups in third world
    countries,

    1. +Joshua Willis You know what’s funny?
      If the Allies hadn’t won the war, the fucker above us would probably living
      in some backwater shit-hole with no internet and clean water.

  7. Ok so heres the Logic of The Tiger commander:
    4 M4 Shermans.
    2 Of them armed with the 75mm gun that cant penetrate its front armor.
    1 of them armed with the 76mm that can punch straight through its front
    armor with ease (Of course they wont show THAT here)
    The 4th one a E8 Armed with a 76mm gun that again will easily smash
    straight through its front armor (AGAIN not shown here)

    He decides to order the Gunner to destroy the 2 weaker tanks first rather
    than the other that could actually disable it with ease…
    And as well as that he orders his Driver to move forward just to get the
    tank as dangerously and pointlessly close to the Shermans as possible…
    Typically only experienced German tank crews got to touch a Tiger but this
    is just one unfortunate case where a Fresh new crew somehow got one.

    1. Still a pretty biased scene. In this scene both 76mm armed shermans hit the
      Tiger several times and their shells bounce off. And a Tiger would NEVER
      advance towards its target unless it was taking artillery fire. That 88mm
      gun could knock out shermans 2.5 kilometres away

    2. +COREY MCRANN By the looks of it 1 has a 76mm M1A2 (Fury, seen with the
      muzzle break), 2 have the 76mm M1A1 (Long barrel, no muzzle break) and one
      has a 75mm with the short barrel.

      At this sort of range spotting which one has the longer barrel or muzzle
      break while they are moving and shooting at you is nigh on impossible.

  8. Dumbasses in the comments acting like they are fucking ww2 tank experts.
    The tiger wouldn’t have came out of concealment but late in the war Germany
    started using inexperienced crew members in their tanks. Now I don’t see
    why they would come out of cover but it could happen and the tiger is slow
    as fuck during ww2 it did take about 3 or 4 m4 Sherman’s to take out 1
    tiger because the m4s had to get around the tiger and shoot at its rear or
    sides like they did in the movie. This is a realistic scene believe it or
    not.

    1. +Jose Avila Probably not. From the front a 75mm L/40 gun firing AP will pen
      a Tiger at under 400m (with possible interpenetration out to 700m depending
      on the exact hit location). If one of those shells penetrates the Tiger,
      there isnt any internal bulkhead. That round detonating will
      kill/incapacitate all the crew inside. And a round like that
      killing/hurting the crew the others wont stick around, they will bail…
      not even mentioning potential damage to turret operation or fighting gear.

    2. it could not take out a tiger from the front it could damaged it only .it
      would of killed the driver and the machine gunner but the loader,aimer and
      commander would still be alive to shoot back

    1. okay then, lets just agree that this movie does not portray neither the US
      Sherman´s nor the German Tigers accurately and that everybody did mistakes
      in the portrayed battle and nowone really knows who would win for sure as
      luck would also be involved in this.

    2. +fantasx portugal The 76mm Sherman guns were perfectly capable of knocking
      out Tigers frontally at that sort of range. And both crews should have
      known it.

    3. still, advancing on the sherman`s is what got the Tiger flanked in the
      first place, still its preety hard to smash the frontal armor of a Tiger
      with Sherman`s guns i believe thats why they advanced which is something
      akin to suicide

    4. +fantasx portugal Generally no. If the Tiger was to engage Shermans then
      closing and been able to engage would be better then letting them close and
      flank while it is in smoke.

      Then again for the Shermans (of which by the looks of it 2-3 are 76mm) to
      also advance when they could quite happily take out a Tiger at that range
      is just as silly.

    1. +Jeffrey Jungk +William Alforque Which shot? The one that hit the front was
      at a steep tri-axial position, doesn’t matter what distance, the 88mm would
      not penetrate that.

      As for the shot that hit the logs, that went straight through. Along the
      way through it severed the turret electric-hydraulic controls. David Ayer
      kept this true throughout the movie, they use manual traverse for the rest
      of the film.

      A 88mm (or larger) shell can and will bounce from freak miscalculations and
      by pure luck. One such example, a tank from Lt. Creighton Abrams unit in
      the 4th Armored was pulling out of a village near Bastogne. When going in
      reverse, a Jagdtiger (12.8cm) reportedly fired a shot at the turret of the
      M4. The shot cracked the armor, however it did bounce.

  9. the reason this scene is categorized under comedy is because 3 Sherman
    tanks at the range they showed would not have survived 4 minutes against a
    Tiger

    1. +drache444444 Using an early issue 17 Pounder AP round by the looks of it.
      Late war AT rounds were APC (no pointed nose), APCBC (no pointed nose that
      would stay intact) and APDS (No pointed nose).

    2. +drache444444 As could a Sherman firefly easily cut straight though a Tiger
      frontally at 2.5km and had a similar effective range. Also try dropping
      that rate of fire down a little plz fanboy.

  10. Ah,… American Plot armor, the most indestructible armor known to man….
    well known to film crews that is. That sherman would have been scrap metal
    on the second shot…

    1. +Parker “TheCommieGamer1775” Caison have u ever heard of a „Miraculous“
      survival of the sherman tank.. and an inexperienced tiger crew?

    2. +rObZoR212 i watched this seen frame by frame, the shell that hit the side
      penetrated, the shell that hit the front ricochet. it was not uncommon to
      have a 88 penetrate a sherman and not blow it up instantly.

    1. +nutuo qiu The Tiger lost to one Sherman, after knocking out 3. Relatively
      realistic. I mean an M8 Greyhound armored car reportedly took out a Tiger
      once.

    1. +darrenanderson728 Nope, it was a M1A2 76mm gun, American design. This is
      not a 17pdr, the US never used 17pdr guns. By numbers, it was actually used
      more throughout the world than the 17pdr was.

      M4A3 76(W) HVSS (or M4A3E8) with M1A2 76mm

      M4A4 Firefly VC with Royal Ordnance QF 17pdr AT gun
      (3).JPG

    2. +darrenanderson728 Nope, these (by numbers) were mostly US made 76mm M1A1
      and M1A2 guns. The 17pdr. was complex to produce.

  11. Tiger I was a good heavy tank but the Panther was just so much
    better……..everyone praises the Tiger I but the Panther receives little
    credit that it deserves. France used Panther tanks post WWII.

    1. +Krzysztof Zukowski They were never fully fixed in terms of reliability,The
      fact that the crews handling them were very inexperienced didn’t help with
      the tanks lifespan either.

    2. +Ben S The panthers were rushed straight from development and production to
      the front lines….they had no time to perfect the tanks just out of
      prototype stage because Hitler had a raging boner and rushed them to the
      battle of Kursk. After some setbacks all the issues were fixed and the tank
      became quite reliable.

    1. +KrazyBee KB Wrong, it over penetrated. Tests after the war show at 25m, an
      Kwk43’s 88mm Pzgr 39/43 APBC-HE could go right through 3.5 M4s before
      detonating. In this scene, it went right through one side, and out the
      other, knocking out the turret hydraulics.

  12. I can’t wait to see a movie where finally Germans and Axes forces are not
    dumb .. but like in true history when they fought very well… soooooo
    boring these american movies… always the same…. but if the Germans were
    so bad, why it took so long for American to win????? Please new movies!

    1. +David Ophiuchus Its worthwhile to note that been part of SS divisions his
      claims are expected to be exaggerated for political purposes. Wittman in
      particular been a bit of a poster boy for the nazies having strong
      political beliefs personally. Especially say the Village bocage raid where
      more tanks were claimed by Wittmann then were deployed in the area, let
      alone for the rest of the Battalion.

      Anyway the original point was the whole ‚Wittman makes a facepalm“ …
      Considering Wittman himself was killed in a sucidal charge similar to what
      the movie portrays (though at longer range, out numbering the Shermans,
      with no casualties to the Sherman’s) face-palming isn’t really a logical
      comment.

    2. +Crag_r you better explore what actually happened.
      He was credited with the destruction of 138 tanks and 132 anti-tank guns,
      along with an unknown number of other armoured vehicles, making him one of
      Germany top scoring panzer aces “
      read above.
      i am not fun of Wittmann , but what is true , he destroyed more then 130
      tanks and killed once. he was ace, not just one who „“ got killed“ …

    3. +David Ophiuchus I know right? Wittman’s Tiger (and group) got killed from
      single hits to the front at much longer range without even killing the
      Shermans 😛

  13. The Tiger tank didn’t stay where it was because otherwise Brad Pitt would
    have never destroyed it, hence the movie would be over… Remember guys
    this is the entertainment industry, this is Hollywood. So chill the fuck
    out.

    1. +IndieBFilms They were also blinded by smoke. Had the tiger stayed put it
      likely would have been flanked by all three tanks.

      And the general incompetence of the tiger crew can explained by most German
      tankers being poorly trained and inexperienced by 1945.

  14. The truth is, at this time in the war the Germans were starting to go on
    the defencive because of the allied advances. The Germans were also aware
    of the fireflies and furys and they were treated as priority (especially by
    tiger crews and destroyers) the tiger would have engaged fury first and
    knock it out before engaging the other non threatening Shermans. Its like
    dealing with the guy that has the gun first before going after the ones
    with the sticks.

    1. +Jay Romero Fury has the same gun performance as 2 of those other shermans.
      Telling the threat is hard. Hell trying to spot the muzzle break on a gun
      firing at you isn’t easy either when the Tiger is moving.

      Yeah no. The Tiger would have advanced, to let the Shermans close and flank
      would have been just as stupid.

    2. +Crag_r true, it would have been hard for the tigers tank commander to spot
      it at range, but i would have thought the muzzle break would be the
      giveaway. The commander would have been sitting there peeled to them
      binoculars to establish the biggest threat first. Thats why his advance
      from cover left people with raised eyebrows.

    3. +Jay Romero In theory anyway. Its almost impossible to tell the difference
      between the 76mm M1A1 and 75mm from a frontal profile. Even spotting the
      muzzle break isnt too easy if its pointing at you. 2 of the other tanks had
      that M1A1 in the group, its only 1 with the short barreled 75mm.

    1. +Ilker Aliev Well you said IRL 😛

      But it matters little. That US 76mm can still pen a Tiger at over 2km using
      HVAP. Around 1.4km using standard APCBC.

    2. +Ilker Aliev Keeping distance won’t necessarily do anything. Something like
      a Firefly can penetrate a Tiger at longer distance then the Tiger can pen
      it.

      Though ironically enough the Tiger wouldn’t keep its distance. Wittmann
      charged Fireflies and got rekt for it.

  15. Well, it’s very realistic scene. Horror horror. Fury as shooting a machine
    gun and Tiger fires once per minute. Just stupid. Tiger would never nevijel
    against 4 tanks. He stood on the spot and put out one after the other, and
    they never saw him and scratched. Simply turn a movie crap.

  16. In a documentary an 88mm went in one side of a Sherman through its 5 inch
    drive shaft and out the other side if it, do I think this tiger tank would
    have killed all these Shermans with ease, but hey its a movie.

    1. +USSR , Russia They showed the strengths of the Tiger, as well as the often
      overlooked strengths of the 76mm gun armed Shermans. What are you
      complaining about?

  17. I heard of a single Tiger get hit more then 70 times and still come out
    alive. Also everyone knows Wittmann in Villers-Bocage taking out 15 tanks
    and countless other pieces in just 15 minutes. But no, this Tiger with a
    88mm (the most powerful tank besides the JagdTiger and Nashorn) can’t take
    a tank out 30 feet in front of him! Yes the turret was slow but fast enough
    to take him out before he got near him

    1. +HerrWittmanRoblox Stogden Everyone knows about Wittmann getting
      slaughtered by Shermans at long range and getting his Tiger group wiped out
      without taking out any Sherman WHICH he out numbered.

  18. one of the most poorly written scenes in the movie LOL
    the 76mm armed shermans IRL would have preforated that Tiger 1 multiple
    times from the front with ease , no need for this WoT style circle fest and
    as for the Wheraboos that are screaming about 1km sniping distance…
    i hope you know that the average combat distance on the western front was
    inside 800m…. well within the range that the 76mm M1 armed shermans could
    deal with the Tiger from the front

    1. +mcjagermech and to finish off my rant… the 88mm could bounce off of the
      38mm of side armor on the M4 given that the angle was high enough like it
      was in the movie.

  19. 2:37 the biggest fkn bullshit i’ve ever seen… tiger could shot through a
    fkn whole sherman from 800 meters… here it doesn’t even penetrate from
    50m… fuckin‘ murica cunts. It should end after this shot to the side

    1. +Patryk Lisiak Well, there were only 3 confirmed encounters with Tigers in
      M4s by the US army in the first place. 2 were documented as 4 M4s, the 3rd
      was said to be 2 M4s.

      The British needed <22 Cromwells and Fireflies to kill Michael Wittman.
      Where as we killed a Tiger with a M8 Greyhound armored car. I'm pretty sure
      its a problem with the crew of the Tigers.

    2. +Patryk Lisiak Except for that almost two axis angle, what didn’t
      penetrate? The shot that hit the would went straight through one side and
      out the other. The M4A1 76(W) VVSS and M4A3 76(W) HVSS in this scene would
      of made as easily short work of the Tiger.

    1. +Russian Dude Tigers were rare, unreliable and vulnerable to other attacks.
      Both Soviet and Western Ally doctrine called for enemy armor to be engaged
      by AT guns, air attack, infantry or other sources. Allied tanks were
      generally used for support, unlike the Germans who used them in an
      anti-tank roll.

      And the Germans, while great at the tactical level, had serious issues with
      operational logistics. And that’s not even getting into the fact that their
      navy was a joke.

  20. Just to clearify why multiple people wonder, „why wouldn’t the German Tiger
    just stay put?“. To answer this is that staying still, gets you killed. The
    Tiger new that the M4’s didn’t have good firing range, so it keeps moving
    so it wouldn’t make it any easier to hit. But the Tiger underestimated the
    Sherman’s maneuverability and paid for it. If the Tiger would have rotated
    its turret and hull. It certainly would’ve destroyed the American M4. But
    in this case, its all about quantity, not quality.

    1. +Verlin Judie In this case though its less about quanity or quality. The
      Shermans present (3x 76mm guns among them) would have been more then
      capable of taking out the Tiger easily at that range.

    1. +Daniel Burianov I’ve been studying military history since I was a child,
      all I asked was for you to specify what you found „stupid“.

      The only bullcrap in this film I’ve found is the Pak 40 scene, as there is
      no justification for the Germans to continuously miss.

      This scene, if you actually think about it, and research numerous Tiger
      engagements, is actually ‚relatively‘ realistic.

      The smoke kept the Tiger from seeing the 3 M4s charging, however when the
      smoke cleared, Peterson’s tank and Collier’s tank (with the 76mm M1A1 and
      M1A2 guns) were well within range of penetrating the front of a Tiger (with
      APBC or the rare HVAP)

      As for the hits on Fury, the shot that hit the front was at a steep
      tri-axial angle, regardless of thickness, at that angle, an 88mm would
      bounce. Everyone seems to ignore what happened when the logs fell off,
      obviously, many think that the 88mm bounced, it did not. If you were paying
      attention it went right through the right side, clipped the turret
      hydraulics*, and out the other.

      All I want you to do is specify what you found stupid in this scene.

      *Thankfully, the director kept it true throughout the rest of the film, the
      crew were turning the turret manually.

  21. Tiger commanders were chosen from already proven commanders, no rookies
    lol. Tiger had no real reason to move up to them – shermans are tincans,
    easily destroyed. And that 88 bounce off the side? LOL

    1. +Mimir Wise As did the Shermans have 76mm guns that can easily pick off the
      Tiger at that range. Interesting enough the Tiger 76mm Shermans and firefly
      had similar penetration standoff ranges.

    2. +Mimir Wise And as i said. One of the better Tiger commander did the same
      as above.

      (By the way the Tiger had to move up, it was either that and have a chance
      at engaging the shermans or letting them close and flank in the midst of a
      smoke screen)

    3. +Crag_r The tiger commanders were also moved from eastern front like
      wittman did. Cmon, the guy commanding the tiger would actually know its
      pros and cons

    4. +Mimir Wise The Tigers most experience commander died in almost the same
      circumstances, except wittmanns Tigers out numbered the Shermans and were
      wiped out at longer range with no losses to the Shermans. 😛

  22. Why were the American Sherman tanks designed so badly? The U.S. was just as
    capable at building competent tanks as Germany was in WWII.

    1. Also need to take into account that the US was still mired from The Great
      Depression when they entered WWII while Germany was able to recover
      economically much sooner than most everyone else. When you have a
      benevolent dictator shit gets done.

    2. +chan young Choi Actually in terms of effective penetration distances. a
      Tiger could only pen a Sherman between 600m to around 1.5km or so. Which
      brings it into fairly equal footing with the 76mm and well shy of the 17
      Pounder.

    3. +Yassine Ngaoui The US evidently. During Husky and in Italy the US was
      forced to use 75mm Shermans against all their German/Italian
      opponents.During Normady the US only had 75mm Shermans deployed until the
      very end of the campaign.

    4. +chan young Choi
      That’s like saying the Tiger’s armor didn’t count because the Shermans with
      the 76mm gun could penetrate their upper glacis.

  23. lol a tiger 8.8 cm KwK 36 L/56 shot on the side of a sherman would have
    blown the american tank to pieces. this movie is bullshit

    1. and btw at 50 meters or less you dont fire an armor piercing… it would as
      you said go through more than 1 tank. different story when firing a HE at
      that distance

    2. i agree with you if we are speaking about AP or armor piercing projectiles.
      Totally different story when speaking about HE or high explosive….

    3. +Ar-Pharazôn Correction, it is 100% possible.

      It went straight through one side and out the other. In post-war tests, the
      superior, but comparable, Kwk 43 88mm gun, which with the 88mm Pzgr. 39/43
      APBC-HE would go right through 3 1/2 tanks before exploding at a 25m
      distance. The shell here knocked out the turret hydraulics.

    1. +Pedro Chemim 2 Sherman troops, ~8 Sherman’s. Not a full battalion. Only
      2-4 of them were fireflies from the Shermans engaging their front.

    2. +Crag_r You mean like charging a full battalion of covered Fireflys
      shooting from the side. So many guys were shooting that no one knows who
      really destroyed the Tiger.

    3. +Mark Mate If Wittman would seen this this^

      Jokes, Wittman died in his Tiger (plus 5 others) charging a group of
      Shermans… almost like in the movie… but no Shermans died 😛

  24. Went to see Fury on cinema. You could here guys saying „GG weakspots“ „Noob
    Tiger learn clutch-braking“ „GG easy 1vs3 noobs“ etc. World of Tanks at
    it’s best ^^

    1. +DilophoMS Nah World of Tanks is more popular in greece than Company of
      Heroes and as a World of Tanks player it made sense. I was staring and them
      😛

    1. +A Particularly Moist Sponge the luftwaffe is DEAD at this point.. the
      majority of their force is defending Berlin from B-17s at this point of the
      war… The americans rule the skies with the P-51s and P-47s

    2. +Mike Johnson the german tiger killed four us tanks with one shot per tank
      and one sherman needs ten roubds to kill the tiger thats embarassing idiot

    1. +Max Brünings 22 M4s vs. 1 Tiger (Michael Wittman): Tiger wins; 1x M8
      Greyhound vs. 1x Tiger: M8 wins. it’s not that bad of a film.

  25. „Fury accurately portrays how superior the German tanks were. A Sherman
    provided you with protection against most enemy fire but against a Tiger it
    could easily become your coffin. I remember a very near miss where an eight
    cm shell from a Tiger tank went within inches of our turret and we decided
    not to stay around too long after that. In open combat we never had a
    chance. So, like in Fury, we always had to be one step ahead. It was only
    because we could call up air strikes and had many more tanks than the
    Germans that we eventually won.“ Bill Betts, now 91, was a radio operator
    on Sherman tanks during the second world war. Tiger was feared by the
    allies. This is what i read when i read about ww2 tanks. I am not a tank
    expert but it seems the survivors of ww2 all say the same thing.

    1. +Crag_r Blah Blah Blah. I dont need your expertise. I already said i was
      not a tank expert or i was a fanboy. I read comment were people said the
      sherman could single handed take out the tiger. I dont think the germans
      would of been that stupid to invest and build tanks that could be taken out
      be something that mass produced and cheaper. I said i will do my own
      research but you throwing your opinion like its fact makes me laugh. People
      who usually do that have their head up their ass. No offence.

    2. +Dimithri Anthires Oh. So your telling me that allied AT guns in late war
      (Post Normandy where Fury is set) couldn’t easily take on a Tiger frontal?

      And if you didn’t notice i said above that the Tiger was advanced when it
      entered service and thats where it got its reputation….

      (Also just to note what you ranted on about is usually what fanboys go on
      about, they weren’t developing stealth it was a biproduct of the 229 design
      and the materials needed to build it… and it still wasn’t enough to get
      though radars of the time. Also the allies were developing jets as well,
      the most powerful engine running during the war would have been the Rolls
      Royce Nene putting out ~twice the thrust of any German engine and this was
      before the allies even got their hands on a German jet engine and the
      Meteor entered service within days of the 262 doing so)

    3. +Crag_r Nothing you said has anything to do with physics or logic. It more
      of lack of common sense. Finding knowledge is like looking for gold. Gotta
      get past lot of dirt before finding anything valuable. I am not a fanboy of
      anything. But i dont buy into bullshit because someone attaches the word
      expert. Its common knowledge the germans were more technology advanced than
      the allies. They were developing rockets, jets, Stealth etc. Lot of germans
      scientist were brought to america to continue their work.

    1. +thelongfella555 The color of the trace always depends on the chemicals
      used in the ammunition. German mixture for the rifle caliber rounds tended
      to be Green and Allies used red(-dish) mixture. However different weapons
      used different colors and different colors for night/day.

      Also some tracers are made to change color mid-flight to identify ranges.

    2. +thelongfella555 How can something that is inspired by WW2 (SW-franchise)
      inspire some WW2 movie. That just doesn’t make sense. And tracers actually
      look if not exactly, still close to what it is in the „Fury“.

  26. It’s funny because this late in the war the tiger tank was a joke. The 76
    on the easy 8 could butter it and if that 75 was firing M61 it could butter
    it too. Shermans angled at 30 degrees can and will bounce that 88

    1. +DeuX Well if you came up to me with a movie like Red Tails where a P-51
      goes head-on with a fucking Me262 that carries 4x 30mm barrells and
      survives ( even kills the 262 ) or does a cobra maneouver against a 109 G-6
      , yes i would say it is definitely a propaganda . But this is a well
      researched movie . Even the Tiger is a real one . Yes there is some
      bullshit that is flying around but come on that is a fucking movie . So you
      just can't say '' propaganda '' to everything that is
      american .

    2. +DeuX It’s well researched, except for the Pak 40 scene, which I want the
      clip to be tossed into the center of the sun. Everything that’s in this
      film happened in one way or another. „AMerican Propaganda“, for goodness
      sake that’s getting old.

  27. They is a documentary on tigers vs Sherman’s. The tiger was better tank in
    most aspects except with speed/maneuverability and the turret rotation
    speed.. However if you notice „fury“ had a different cannon then the other
    3 Sherman’s, Fury had a British designed cannon that was placed into
    Sherman’s and was capable of penetrating the Tigers armor. 2 things to go
    along with this video only 1-4 Sherman tanks had this cannon (there are 4
    Sherman’s in this clip) so it’s roughly historically accurate, 2 this is
    how the allies beat the Tigers by sheer numbers. 55,000 Sherman’s were
    created and only 1300 tigers were created. These facts come from the
    documentary.

    1. +D3ATHPROOF1 Its a US 76mm M1A2 gun. Not a British 17 Pounder. And 3 of the
      tanks have the 76mm gun. 2 have the long barrel M1A1 with no muzzle break,
      one has the M1A2 (Fury) with the muzzle break and another has a 75mm.
      During 1945 for US tank units this is pretty average.

    1. +Joshua Willis oh the fury had their advantages no doubt but it’s the lack
      of tact by the german crew. I am an American and it has been continued
      folklore that our commanders really believed in the sherman as a legitimate
      anti tank weapon. It was an early decision before our invasion of africa to
      use greater numbers to our advantage rather than build a heavier tank. Our
      true advantage was air power and numbers. The germans throughout history
      have always been the best warriors in the western world. Given a one and
      one war has never happened between the United States and Germany. Just my
      opinion from the history of pioneers in American but I believe at least 1/3
      of americans are former germans.

  28. Shermans never NEVER took on Panzer V’s head on. They swarmed and got
    behind while often losing a lot of guys. This scene is pure BS.

    1. +partysover What do you think the smoke rounds did? That was their cover as
      they pushed foward, they took it head on for >300m, and at split up.

      Plus it’s a Pzkpfw VI, not V.

    1. +Cameron Birk And the M4 Shermans could of waited for the Tiger to come out
      of the smoke at >500m and obliterated it, as they had 2 76mm M1 armed tanks.

    1. +Oli H. Oh don’t worry i’m not on the fury hype train, i hated this movie
      for the most part. And the Sherman bouncing an 88 shell was just icing on
      the cake. Thanks for the german lines btw.

    2. +Petar Colic He says: Fahrer, fertig machen! Panzergranate laden!
      In English: Driver, get ready! Loading Tank shell.
      By the way, this is a typical american Movie…unrealistic and excessive!
      Embarrassing….

  29. Normal Tiger commander could kill the Fury first becouse it was the
    strongest tank of them 3, becouse that 75mm shermans were not able to
    penetrate him

    1. +Radek Trembac Good luck trying to identify the precise Muzzle breaks on
      these tanks as they are firing at you.

      (Also 2 of the other tanks had M1A1 76mm’s which could easily pen the Tiger
      frontally)

  30. If that hadn’t been a Hollywood production, if it had been real, that Tiger
    would have taken care of the four Shermans within 4-5 minutes.

    But this is not the stupidest scene of the film. The most ridiculous scene
    is at the end of the film when they thwart an SS Waffen battalion (with
    snipers and panzerfausts) with a single immobile Sherman.

    Note : a more realistic way that this Tiger is disabled could have been
    that it simply ran out of fuel.

    1. +Evren Genc Truthfully, the Pak 40 scene was the most ridiculous.

      The last scene is not as far off as you might think, if you look up Audie L
      Murphy and his last stand at Holtzwihr, it’s relatively tame.

      Many keep forgetting the fact there are two 76mm armed shermans in this
      scene, which at that short a distance (>300m) could of easily killed the
      Tiger.

    1. +JF FOC Especially the Tiger managing to knock out 3 76mm gun armed
      Shermans within the smoke. The odds in favor of the Tiger were too high.

  31. lol total unrealistic the turret of the tiger would turn faster than the
    fury is drivin and also the tiger wouldnt drive forward and the last thing
    tiger wouldnt. miss a shot. stupid american movie

  32. I haven’t read all the comments, but I believe Brad Pitt is in a Sherman
    Firefly tank (hence the hammerhead at the end of the gun). Those tanks had
    17-pounders, and were designed to puncture the armour of heavy German
    tanks.

  33. First seconds: The tiger advanced straight to the shermans. at this moment,
    you know its bollywood quality. mocking the german tiger crew with stuff
    like this is just terribad. But what to expect? they want to do everything
    to give the shermans a good reputations for tank vs tank warfare. (it was a
    great infantry suport tank)

    1. +Xartim Just going to point out that someone like Wittmann (Germanies most
      famous Tiger commander) was killed and Tiger group wiped out charging
      Shermans in almost the same situation above (Just at a much longer range
      and the Shermans didn’t charge back… plus Wittmans Tigers out numbered
      the Shermans)

  34. This would have made a lot more sense if it was a Tiger 2 instead of a
    Tiger 1, Easy eights shouldnt have that much trouble destroying a Tiger 1
    from the front with 76mm HVAP rounds.

  35. There’re a lots of wrong historical details in Fury:
    1. Tiger – Panzer VI, had the 88 mm FLAK cannon, which originally for anti
    aircraft use, and like other anti air guns, it shot much faster than
    original tank guns. As Micheal Wittmann, the Ace of tiger in WWII can
    destroyed as much as 13 Allies tank in 15 minutes in a single „battle“.
    This Tiger is a really slow cat indeed.

    2. The command Sherman tank in this skirmish is a 76 Sherman, an upgraded
    version, in which it’s the only tank in the formation that can destroy a
    Tiger NOT in a point blank range (still useless with front amour though).
    Therefore, the Germans learned that they had to focus on the ungunned
    Sherman (76 Sherman, and Fireflies Sherman of the English) first when
    engage a troops of Allied tanks.
    The Tiger in Fury is quite a dump cat pick the lesser Sherman tanks first,
    or it just wanted to be killed before the war end.

    3. The vital advantage of the Tiger is not only firepower, but the
    effective range. The Tiger in most situation wouldn’t bother to move to
    engage the enemies, they would just stand still, shot, turn, and shot,
    until the survive enemies tanks (if any of them could survive the bullet
    rain) come enough close to them, then they started to move.
    That’s what happened in most of the war, and the main reason why the Allied
    and Soviet casualties of tank were so high.
    This Tiger was charging, like a fully amour knight with a hand cannon, and
    into the farmers pitchfork. That’s nonsense.

    4. According to historical records, Tiger tanks were really heavy and hard
    to control due to their complexity. Therefore, the tank crews were
    forbidden to shoot while MOVING since it will reduce the accuracy aim of
    gunners. And because the high velocity 88 mm gun came up with 100%
    accuracy, all they had to do is stand still, pick a target and shoot. Their
    absolute frontal amour would keep them perfectly safe.

    Though so, one good detail that I enjoy about Fury is, they use their
    machine guns not only with infantry threats, but also shot at enemy tank
    whenever possible. You may think it’s dump, but that a good reason for
    that.
    Though the bullets bounce at the amour all the time, but it make it’s
    difficult for the tank crew to look though the periscope or the gap holes
    in the amour, and with a chance to take out the periscope, which is vital
    for commander or gunner to aim without stick his head out. Brilliant.

    But still, Furry is not only a war film, it’s also an anti war film, like
    Saving Private Ryan. In the end, it depicts well a truth that war is never
    a good thing to happen, and people, from both side were never born just to
    kill each other.
    The last scene when the German young soldier spare the last crew man’s
    life, really strike the hearts of the viewer.

    I think, for a good tank battle film, some other Russian films would do
    better (White Tiger?). But for the morality value, I think it’s good enough
    for a good war movie.

    1. +Dong An
      Another issue was that while Tigers were awesome on paper, by the end of
      the war they were being rushed out of production and the Germans lacked
      quality steel, fuel and other materials. More tigers were lost to
      mechanical failure or scuttling than to enemy fire.

    2. Ah thank you for reminding me. I was a little confuse about the time.
      I thought it was in the time of „battle of the Bulge“ which was around
      1944. If it was already 1945, then the poor performance Tiger can be well
      explained as you said.
      Actually I almost forgot how the movie was, got to rewatch this 🙂

    3. +Dong An The Tiger crew mistakes can be explained by the fact that many
      German tankers were poorly experienced and trained by the end of the war
      and that was compounded by the fact that the Tiger wasn’t easy to operate.
      All the really skilled tank aces were on the Eastern Front (and most of
      THEM were dead, in prison, or deserting by 1945).

    1. +The Flying Dutchman The 76mm M1 (A1 and A2 gun) can penetrate well over
      130mm (Tiger has 102) of armor at 500m, as we can see here, it is very well
      under 500m

    2. Did you not see the tiger take out both Sherman’s you blind idiot? Also
      Sherman’s are not completely ineffective and tigers are not invincible

  36. The whole movie would be way more awesome, if brad pitt had under his
    command the only super pershing ever constructed. Super pershing had a
    total of 176mm sloped frontal armor and thick armor in the front of the
    turret. (gun manlet). with its high velocity 90mm cannon, it could pen
    300mm of steel at 100yards(91m). A super pershing knocked out a king tiger
    in dessau. If only in this movie we had a tiger 2 vs super pershing battle,
    the gemstones of nazi and US forces tanks.

    1. ? Whats your point? Those tanks are cold war-era tanks, and were much
      feared by the americans. But im talking about ww2. KT werent invisible at
      all. Sherman fireflies could penetrate the frontal turret armor(check wiki
      it has a photo) with AP, and the frontal sloped armor with APDS. IS2’s
      armed with 122mm guns, and access to BR741B with pen up to 207mm could
      devaste any german tank, including ferdi’s.

    1. +Crag_r yes but the sherman can penetrate 76mm at 1000yrds the tiger had
      over 100mm thick armour am sorry but I’ve seen a real piece of tiger armour
      shot by a sherman at that distance the round got stuck half way in its in
      my local Museum and they a have both tanks there the tiger would destroy a
      sherman anyday unless the sherman could shoot it in the back that’s why the
      Germans dident out thick armour in the back beacuse they thought nothing
      could get behind it

    2. +darrenanderson728 No i’m speaking as someone who knows what im talking
      about and how to souce it.
      Unless you
      can show that the US 76mm was somehow unable to pen it, let alone things
      like the QF 17 Pounder
      or larger
      Russian/US AT guns (90mm, 120mm ect)

      Now im curious as to where you got that its rear was its only weak spot.
      Unless you can prove otherwise its rear was 80mm at 9 degrees off vertical,
      its sides were 80mm at vertical…

      You understand how the effective slant distance increases thickness no?

    1. Did you not see the tiger take out both Sherman’s with ease? Also tigers
      are not invincible and Sherman’s are not completely ineffective

  37. a tiger tank doesent drive and shoot, it Stands still and at this short
    distans he shuld have hit with every shoot. No tiger crew is so stupid.

    1. +Paperbox Wittmann wasn’t killed by an aircraft bomb. His Tiger wouldn’t
      have only lost its turret if it had. No Wittmann (and his Tiger group) were
      killed when they charged group of fireflies sitting on a high ridge-line
      approx 1km to their front. For the particular engagement the Fireflies took
      no losses with 6 Tigers taken out (Wittmann included) along with supporting
      German infantry and tanks turned back. The Tigers tried shooting on the
      move attempting to use their own fire as cover while rushing across a
      completely exposed field… Needless to say they paid for it. The Fireflies
      butchered them with 4-5 verified Tiger kills by the Fireflies and another
      1-2 Tiger kills to a Sherman Mk.3 troop.

      The Typhoon strike which i think you are talking about happened 2 days
      later and used PR-3 rockets, one landing near the already taken out Tiger
      but failed to detonate. Again if it had hit there wouldn’t have been much
      left of it.

  38. 1, why would the tiger move out of cover ?
    2. why would he move forward ? hes got the long range gun on his side. if
    enything he would back up.
    3. why dosen the tiger use machine guns ? all that head out of tiger….
    nonsens.

    Well typical american war movie. i guess. but overwall a decent movie i
    think.

    1. +austin waggoner
      They will see you during their maneuver, because the smoke cloud doesn’t
      move back with you, and a Tiger in an open field is not exactly
      inconspicuous. The cloud will conceal them just long enough for the platoon
      to spread out so that you can’t just keep pumping rounds into them with
      minimal turret traverse

      They also have a huge speed advantage because they’re advancing, while
      you’re slowly crawling backwards.

      [there side is now exposed also that lead tank would be the first to die]

      So? They can’t survive a Kwk36 shot from any angle anyways, and killing one
      Sherman doesn’t help you any if they get within 500 metres. You kill one
      Sherman, get a second round of WP to the face, and they close the rest of
      the way and kill you.

    2. +Paul Zuk how will they see you backing up though the smoke also by backing
      up and allowing you to let then Flank your old position there side is now
      exposed also that lead tank would be the first to die

    3. +austin waggoner
      Yes, they will FLANK, which means they won’t be coming in straight through
      the smoke cloud, all nicely laid in for your gunner. They’ll split up to
      take advantage of your terrible turret traverse.

      In essence, by backing up you’re giving up a massive chunk of distance –
      your primary advantage – for no gain whatsoever.

      You can only reverse at about 10 kmph. The Shermans will start flanking,
      see you backing up, pop more smoke and close further. Even if you take out
      one before you get smoked again, the rest will still easily overtake and
      kill you.

      And IRL, of course, the Easy 8 can take you out once it’s closed to 500
      metres.

    4. +Paul Zuk no they can’t see though the smoke so you reverse to a good
      distance and take them out when they flank your old position

    5. The entire point is that tiger performs best at range, so reversing and
      waiting doesn’t improve your position at all – it gives the Shermans time
      to close, which is what they want ; And the Shermans will flank, rather
      than just driving straight through the cloud – so you’ll be put in a no-win
      situation.

    1. +dIRECT0R If you are counting late war fixes to Panthers reliability. Of
      which there isn’t that much information on if any. Then its only fair to
      take late war shermans no?

      It was less of any bugs as such and more of design failures. French post
      war testing using a variety of moddels gave the late war stuff at only
      150km before major drivetrain overhaul and refitting was required. That is
      not even remotely as reliable as other tanks. You don’t outclass
      competitors if your tank can sufficient get to a combat zone or operate in
      it. To note as well these problems required almost a complete overhaul of
      the tank to fix, requiring turret removal along with most of the fighting
      compartment. Further issues were caused by the gearing as well. With the
      during the battle of the bulge (Kinda past 1943 no?) Panther G’s you had
      around 35-40% failure and non-combat ready rates with mechanical problems.
      Again for a short sighted combat role they were great… but that wont win
      wars for you.

    2. Yes+Crag_r Its not ridiculous to take the most common Sherman design as
      representative of Shermans as a whole. Not at all.

      „60,000 USD“ for a Panther is not at all „horrendously“ more expensive than
      47,000 USD for shall we say, the average Sherman. In fact, given the
      quality that you receive compared to your opponents‘ equivalents –
      especially the Sherman – its a downright *bargain.* The reliability of the
      Panther was certainly not „in question“ beyond late 1943/early 1944. By
      then it was not particularly less reliable than any other tank in its role.
      But even if it was slightly more problematic even in that stage, again – it
      outclasses its competitors. Even the T-34/85, not to speak of the average
      Sherman it was likely to encounter…

      The Tiger tanks are not to be compared with medium tanks in terms of cost.
      They were never intended for the role, and were never intended for
      production in anything like those numbers. They were the very tip of the
      armoured spearhead, nothing more… and they were superb at it. In terms of
      pure one-on-one combat capability alone – the „Tiger II“ was probably the
      most powerful machine of the entire war.

    3. +dIRECT0R I never did. However to quote figures that may have been accurate
      for 75mm Shermans as to account for the rest is ridiculous.

      Just for refrence, many of the Panthers problems specifically its
      transmission system were never sufficiently fixed. With reliability of the
      tank in question throughout the entire war. Cost wise however the German
      big cats were horrendously more expensive then their counterparts. 60,000
      USD (equivalent), the M4 series sitting between 42,000 and 50,000 depending
      on the variant. Something like a Tiger II sitting at 320,000…

    4. +Crag_r Once again, its ridiculous to take the Firefly a representative of
      Shermans at large.

      The German problem was a lack of production capacity, much more so than any
      deficiency in the design of their tanks. Their tank designs were superb,
      unquestionably superior to any other side in the war – yes, even the
      Russians. The Panther is a common misconception: yes, it did have trouble
      in its early months – but that’s only because it was rushed into battle
      before any reasonable amount of field testing was done (and it very much *had
      to* be rushed as it was). Once it got through those problems, got tested
      like any other tank – it became by far the best overall design of the war.
      Fast, powerful, well-protected – and very cheap and easy to produce, as a
      matter of fact. It barely cost more than a Sherman or T-34, while
      outclassing both.

    5. +dIRECT0R 5:1 comes from 75mm Shermans. 76mm or 17 Pounder armed Shermans
      often had up to the opposite ratios with 5:1 killed for losses. Take
      Wittmans final engagement where his Tiger group (with supporting Stugs and
      Pz.4’s) charged a Firefly troop and got wiped out at around 1km.

      German machines were on superior in a short term tactical sense. For an
      overall war-fighting sense they were almost useless weapons of war, having
      so many reliability failures and design over sights they were often far
      more effort then what they were worth. And it would have simply been more
      efficient to use their lesser designs.

      Take the battle of Kurst. where of the ~200 or so Panthers deployed within
      2 weeks there were only 40 left operational because of mostly NON-COMBAT
      problems. They may have fought tactically well. But when it comes to
      actually fighting wars they were useless.

  39. I am American and as much as I don’t want to admit it, there is no fucking
    way in hell a Tiger would get into this situation.

    1. +Mister Gratton Do you want to explain *why* you think I’m bullshit? I
      mean, if you want me to cite sources for what I said, I could.

    2. +Mister Gratton Give me an example of one time you actually responded to my
      points, rather than just saying they’re bullshit.

  40. tiger crews were better shots than this
    the tiger would not have come out of cover
    the best thing for a bunch of shermans to do when they see a tiger is run.

    1. +nonfictionone The best thing a bunch of shermans with 76mm guns do when
      they see a Tiger is shoot it… and if they shoot it at a reasonable range
      the Tiger is dead.

    1. maybe stalin came in and said to the tiger U kno i hate you but i still
      help and then he took the shermans shell and made it deflect

    2. +dubravko ostic Looking at how far apart the Shermans are and the said
      range a few seconds later. Its not going to be even close to been enough to
      bounce the shot.

    3. yea after slowing down the clip the second one hits the front 100mm plate
      maybe its the angle of the shot that the shermans round hits the tiger that
      it deflects ?

    4. +dubravko ostic Dont know what your seeing. One of those hits definitely
      hits the 100mm plate first off. APCBC ammunition from the 76mm gun will
      also pen that plate at around 3 times that range.

    1. +TheRandomFish 11 most of the damage is done by the ammunition exploding,
      any gun can set of the ammunition, all an 88 dose is make a 88mm hole.

    2. +TheRandomFish 11 why dose everyone think an 88mm can do that!? its a good
      gun but not a fucking 152mm.
      some sherman models like the M4A3E2 could bounce PgGr39 at 300m. it was the
      most common ammunition type for a tiger, and it could also bounce PzGr40 at
      500m. but a 76.2mm on a sherman M4A3E2 could pierce the frontal armor of a
      tiger at 700m. meaning that some Shermans could out range a tiger.

  41. AMERICA won the fucking war, we can make whatever movie with whatever
    scenes we fucking want too, I think hollywood did a great job. All you nazi
    butt-hurt crybabies shut the fuck up. No one, (literally no one) gives a
    shit about your „this is so unrealistic“ comments. Go home. BACK TO BACK
    WORLD WAR FUCKING CHAMPS BABY.

    1. +DDpeck20 Oh so you and your bean sized brain is supporting the fact that
      thousands of people got murdered by your fucking small penis syndrome . You
      dropped a fucking atomic bomb but dropped a god damn shame on the history
      of human beings at the same time . No offence to americans . I have no
      words for your people or your country . Beautiful place indeed . But sick
      minded dickheads with no awareness like you gives me cancer . I bet you
      support the Halabja Massacre where KIDS got fooled by a fucking smell of
      candy apple and they were dead 5 minutes later . That smell was coming from
      a chemical gas mixture called mustard gas . What you did was to end the war
      . Fine . Okay props for that but do not fucking tell me its for good . Do
      not fucking tell me you wouldn’t be pissed and embarrassed if your kid or
      your wife got killed in the same way to end a pissing contest . YOU do not
      know shit besides your own fucking ego . Now fuck off and have some god
      damn humanity before you throw mindless bullshit around here .

      PS : I am sad for your students . They have to listen to this shit 24/7
      from a self-centered cock sucker .

    1. +Crag_r On the Fury and Firefly i rarely get into problems with it 🙂

      On the regular M4? Load the gold i will 😉

    2. +TheIcelandicPatriot 76mm’s on Fury and 2 of its accompanying tanks should
      have no problem with any AP ammunition at this range.

  42. the biggest bullshit in this scene is that fucking wood on fury’s side. i
    mean wtf?! did the wood vaporized the shell?

    1. +zzodr this is a M4A3 (76)W HVSS also know as the „fury“ it’s ammunition
      was stored on the floor of the tank the ammunition was also covered in fire
      resistant fluid that reduce the chance of fire from 50% to 10% the fury
      also had a diesel engine that was also harder to set on fire, so this was a
      sherman tank that could take a hit or two, the 76mm on the fury would have
      also penetrate any part of the tiger but it bounced twice.

    2. Sherman would have been blown to shit at that range by an 88mm. Also that
      section of the hull on a M4 is used for ammo storage.

  43. So why would the Tiger break cover and roll toward the Sherman’s? Also how
    did the Tigers 8.8 shells not K kill the Sherman later in the scene?

    1. +Squelch133 Because been flanked by Shermans while in a smoke screen seems
      like a brilliant tactical choice?

      Also how did the 76mm’s on 3 of the shermans not kill the Tiger? 😛

    1. +Chi Lung Wong Considering German intelligence knew of allied positions on
      the hill and specifically ordered it to be recaptured that’s irrelevant.

      Why im mocking it is because you said 3 Shermans = 1 Panzer, when
      historically it really wasn’t the case at the time of the movie represents.

    2. +Crag_r Wittmann and his squad were ambushed by Sherman Fireflies while
      crossing open terrain, because the division commander who ordered the
      attack wasn’t aware of the next attack plan by the British and Canadians. I
      don’t understand why you mock a legendary tank-ace because you are too lazy
      to check on the facts.

    1. +Nathan Peterson OOOOOOOOHH MY GAD!!!! THANK YOU!!!!!
      aaaaaararararaggrgrgrgrgdhdhdbbnnvajbejbdzm dzk skbfgk
      ksrnlsnksslslsmnlnslnsrlrylnyzrnkykrkgs fkgx sorry I had to smack my face
      all over the keyboard

  44. All these people talking like they were in the Fury tank in 1945. Strange
    things happen in war including circumstances that seem unrealistic and
    unlikely. Tiger crews were inexperienced later in the war. No, there were
    no picky deployment requirements for Tiger crews later in the war, and no,
    there were very few original crews left alive. The crew made a mistake and
    came out of concealment. Why did they do that? I have no idea, but they
    did. They did in the historical account, they did in the movie. How did the
    Fury bounce those two shots? Perhaps the camera gave the impression the
    shell would have gone in, when the shell might have glanced off at an
    extreme angle.

    Remember that just because things seem impossible, it isn’t just Hollywood
    making it impressive. These are men we should honor with respect and
    memorial. Don’t be so critical.

    1. +kamil tymek
      You’re talking about Hollywood, yet you repeat the same old myths that have
      been debunked by historians over and over again.
      There never was even one instance where the US had casualties of 1 Tiger
      for 5 Shermans. There is no historical data, neither done by the Germans,
      Soviets, Brits or US troops regarding the ratios on lost tanks due to
      Tigers, Panthers or directly to other tanks.
      I wish people would read books for once. Written by historians. People that
      did some SERIOUS research.
      There havn’t been even enough Tigers on the westfront. Do you know how many
      times US tankers faced Tigers in normandy? 3 times. 3 Fucking times. And
      one of those engagements didn’t even saw Tigers in combat. They have been
      shoot down on a fucking rail car. The British troops faced most of the
      German heavy tanks in Normandy, due to the deployment of the heavy Panzer
      battalions. And they managed them well enough.
      It was not before the battle of the Buldge where the US troops would
      actually engange German heavy tanks in substantial numbers. And funny
      enough, those included more Tiger 2s than Tiger 1s. Since the production
      stoped in 1944 for the Tiger 1.

    2. Read on the internet, find out the real and Analyse because Hollywood you
      so much shit screwed up to your brain that you connect not make ends meet.
      Really, the missile weighing about 20 kg at 800 meters collapses in a beam
      of wood, and you Zeta politely discredit fools believe it. Do you sure that
      Rambo is true. The first reflection is nonsense, but the second did not
      fully agree. Because the tiger had the best calibrated optics war could hit
      the T-34 in the stillness of 3 km and above. The ratio of destroyed tanks
      tigers losses among Allied forces amounted to about 1/5. There were even
      cases often that when the Allies saw a tiger that escaped from the tanks
      and this is the kind of courage for you! You boast that their soldiers for
      bravery, and suddenly leaving the tiger and all flee in fear.

    1. I have two number 9’s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a
      number 7, two number 45’s, one with cheese and a large soda.

  45. Any Warthunder players here? I ‚ve been playing WoT for a long time (I have
    a few Tier VIII and VII) but I want to try something more realistic. I’ve
    played WT with planes but I didn’t like it, as I prefer tanks (ships
    actually, but WoWs is all I need in this case). How much time does it get
    to reach a good tier (V or VI)?

    1. Avoid the game at the moment, the match making is broke in higher tiers. If
      you have tier 5 with zbk 5 or other heat ammunition you destroy everything.
      Also cannot forget to mention that right now Cold War era mbts face off
      against World War II tanks, very broke indeed.

    2. +jaumem9 I would say more…. For German tanks, it has taken me nearly 2
      years to get two tier 5’s…. I am pretty much tier 3-5 every nation but it
      takes a real long time. If you focus on one nation alone, it should take
      you about a year to unlock every tank for it… However the grind is
      really, really tedious which is why I have only got 2 tier 5 tanks for
      Germany (I tend to switch over to other nations and try and grind
      them-different play styles ect.) It really does depend on how well you
      play, whether you have a premium account and how long you play it daily…

      P.S, I do not use golden eagles or a premium account ( Golden eagles can be
      used to speed up research)

  46. 1. The tiger wouldn’t of moved out of its concealment
    2. The fury would be able to penetrate the tiger frontally with its 76mm gun
    3. The fury could of penned the tiger’s side, which has the same amount of
    armor as the rear
    4. A 88 side shot like that would of most likely destroyed the Sherman, if
    not kill/wound multiple crewmen while heavily damaged the tank

    1. +odisy64
      Hard to say, the US army had I think 2 tests at Isigny, France in 1944 with
      test firing their guns on 3 captured Panthers. The conclussion was that,
      they all strugled with the Panthers front armor from distances higher tahn
      200 meters. But they also found that some Panthers had a tendecy to shatter
      from repeated shots. Of course, since this was not a test under controlled
      environments, it is very hard to say if that was really the case, or simply
      the fact that they shot all kinds of weapons at those plates. Doesnt mean
      penetrations could not happen on the front. Like if the US tanks stood on a
      slight hill for example, shooting downwards, negating partially the angle.
      Or if they shoot the lower plate. Or hit some weak spots on the armor, like
      welds.

    2. +CrniWuk I think the Panthers frontal armor was listed as 120mm with angle,
      but it’s extream angle ment I’d did not need to use a harden surface, but I
      think there where some cases where hellcats destroyed panthers from the
      front at the battle of the bulge but they might have been aiming at the
      turret.

    3. +indeed
      From the US army ordonance testing, history books, and, last but not least,
      physics. By 1945 the Shermans using the 76mm anti tank gun had small
      numbers of high velocity armour pearcing (HVAP) shells available. Quite
      capable of defeating a Tiger from the front, at usual combat distances. It
      only struggled with the older uncapped AP shells, as they tended to suffer
      from shatter at certain ranges. And Improvements to the standard armor
      pearcing round, later in the war, also gave the Sherman a better chance. If
      it got close enough. Like 800 yards.

      The penetration figures are for armoured plates at a 30° angle. The 76mm
      gun had a lot more issues to penetrate the 85mm armour plate of the
      Panther. The angle of 55°, suggests that the Panther’s 85mm of frontal
      armuor was effectively the same as 187mm of vertical plate. In other words,
      that the Panther’s front plate was far in excess of the Tiger’s vertical
      110mm, and well beyond the penetration of the standard projectiles of the
      M1 76mm guns.

    4. +Charlie Chen „The fury would be able to penetrate the tiger frontally with
      its 76mm gun“

      where’d you get that from? world of tanks?

    1. +Anibal Rendon yes they can, they where ordered not to fire because of the
      lack of gyro stabilization making for crap accuracy, a tank in motion will
      not face any more recoil then if it where stationary.

    1. +BSAG2007 I actually wish that Germany would have won. Just look at europe
      now. Filled to the rim with gypsys and fucking muslims.

    2. +BSAG2007 The world did.
      Germany would have been content with fighting one enemy at a time, but the
      World said no and ganged up on them.
      Kinda unfair.

      XD

      In all serriousness tho, Germany did not up and decide to fight the world
      without reason. The Japanese for example attacked the US base of Pearl
      Harbor because the US where enforcing an embargo on them that crippled
      their economy and would have forced alot of people to lose their jobs,
      starve and die.

      There is always a reason for some action, nobody in the history of the
      world ever decided to just invade someone willy nilly.

    3. thank you so much I hate when people say „well Germany lost the war“ blah
      blah blah no shit they lost they were at war with the whole world and were
      fighting a two front war people that say that shit sound butt hurt that the
      reality is if Germany just took its time they would have won

  47. the power of the tiger tank would destroy anything that try’s to destroy it
    especially shermans because shermans are nothing for the tiger tank

    1. +Michael Jbeily Well, it depends on the crew of each tank, it took an
      entire British armored column to destroy one Tiger, where as we managed to
      kill a Tiger with a M8 armored car.

  48. This scene sucks… The Tiger would have stayed concealed, and I’m pretty
    sure Shermans didn’t slowly advance across fields in neat lines.

    For all of you Tiger fans out there saying the Tiger would have won in real
    life… Maybe, but you do realize hundreds of tigers were knocked out by
    the U.S., and many of those were by Shermans…

    1. +BJ SPADER that is a myth often tossed around by people who don’t know that
      shermans traveled in platoons of 5, so any target they met would result in
      5 sherman engagement.

  49. why does the fucking Tiger sound like a pissweak American V8? Guys,
    remember the Tiger tank in Saving Private Ryan and how damn intimidating it
    was, this big unstoppable lumbering Tank. how did this movie get it so
    fucking wrong…?

    1. +Nathan Peterson a lot of people are complaining about the tiger not
      pivoting to avoid being hit in the rear by the sherman, but i think the
      reason for this is because pivoting on soft terrain could damage the tiger.

  50. Not again! please delete that shite from youtube. Biggest history lies made
    by hollywood. American tanker crews would be ashamed if they would have to
    endure this movie…

  51. this got to be a american movie, they didnt do their job, wehrmacht was the
    most effective army with the best men in ww2 and especially their tank
    crews were superior dealing larger numbers of enemy tanks!!

    1. +Nathan Peterson yes thats true but a tiger would never engage like this,
      they could take out every tank except the pershing
      they would stay in their pos and take everyone of those 3 out

    2. +LordOfNoobstown The 76mm guns on Peterson’s tank (the guy whose whole
      upper body got taken off), and Collier’s tank (Fury) would of penetrated
      the Tiger very easily at these well >500m ranges.

    1. +PrishtinasiDE the Armata? you mean the one that had to be towed out of the
      parade because it broke down? Yea, not a good first unveiling of the „best
      tank in the world“

  52. A shame, Yankees were not man enough to get into any actual fighting during
    that war. European soil would have more American fat for the crop to grow
    better.

  53. Hard to believe that people are actually trying to defend this movie.
    Seriously? trying to rationalize all of the utterly stupid shit that
    happens in this movie? You’re pathetic.

    1. +King Grievous funny thing is, a lot of the people saying this movie is
      unrealistic and the tiger should have won, don’t actually no shit about
      tanks and history.

    2. +Vurryn i a gree that the movie has its faults but people who mostly
      despise this movie are more likely to not know anything about tank warfare.

  54. the tiger is the best ww2 tank ….this sceen is reallistic , yet you all
    can see how is the tiger on war thunder ,is not soo good because they meke
    him op at the bigining … thx all

    1. +GAL TIBI it was the deadliest American tank in WW2, sure it was thin but a
      group of these could hound down the heviest of german tanks.

    2. +GAL TIBI even if germany did make 20,000 tiger tanks they would still lose
      because of how easy it is to make a AT gun fit inside a light tank like the
      hellcat.

    1. +Ethan Rittershaus One would of bounced regardless, the second went
      straight through, a 88mm shell has been proven at under 50m, would go right
      through the side, and into 2.5 more M4s.

    1. +Acidic How? He killed the other 3 Shermans without problems, despite the
      fact there were two guns present (on Collier’s Fury, and Peterson’s tank)
      that would of penetrated the front of the Tiger.

    1. +HappyFunTime Typically, however the reason for this one being alone is
      because there is only one working Tiger left. Also that considering this is
      the literal last couple months, the Panzer divisions began dissipating.

  55. Funny, a side hit on a sherman by an 8.8 Gun would directly set the Sherman
    engine on fire. 😀
    That’s an american movie. :D

    1. +Pedro Chemim Several post war tests have shown otherwise, at, if I recall
      correctly 25m, the 88mm passed through 3 Shermans before exploding. If I
      also again recall correctly, it was at Aberdeen Proving Grounds.

    2. +Nathan Peterson It would be straight through only if it was a shell with
      no explosives, like the PzGr. 40 APCR. With the PzGr 39 APCBC it would have
      detonated the fuse after penetration and exploded, like it did with the
      other M4.

  56. What do you get when a skilled tiger crew go up against a sherman tank
    crewed by average joes? I’ll give you a hint. It’s called tinfoil. Even
    against the sides and rear of a tiger, the up gunned Sherman’s 76mm wasn’t
    exactly up to snuff.

    1. And where the Fury hit it WAS only around 80mm or so. Huh. Thought it was a
      bit thicker. Still, the real killer was that lack of traverse speed. >.>
      Get in close enough and you can outrun that turret. The Jagdtiger with it’s
      massive 128mm in the casement was even worse. Still…ouch.

  57. at least it was accurate in the beginning. the Tiger was impenetrable by
    the guns of a Sherman from the front. I read it in Great Battles of WWII

    1. +Val Lim Fury is mounted with a 76mm gun, the only unrealistic thing about
      this battle was the need for it to get behind the Tiger.

    2. +Val Lim 1mm means nothing. They were drastically different guns with the
      76mm been considerably higher velocity designed specifically for anti
      armour work and to quite happily kill things like the Tiger. At that range
      it should be more then capable of taking out the Tiger.

      Just for refrence though. The QF 17 Pounder (76.2mm) penetration values for
      APDS means that under ~2km a Tiger under no angle can actually bounce a
      shot.

    3. +Val Lim Only the75mm Sherman guns. The 76mm on one of the accompanying
      Sherman should have cut straight though the Tiger frontally at 0:46 …
      Sherman guns like the 17 Pounder could take out a Tiger at ~2.5km or so in
      theory.

    1. +Sean Brass Sherman body type was interdependent of gun mounting. With
      almost all Sherman hull types receiving up-gunning. The last one seems to
      have a 75mm, however the two previously knocked out (and the ones to bounce
      off the Tiger) have the slightly longer 76mm M1A1 (You can see from the
      longer barrel, and Muzzel flair)

    2. +Crag_r One of the tanks even has a rounded body like the early-war
      Shermans. This platoon is a bit of a mish-mosh. Also, the last tank to
      accompany Fury seems to have a 75mm.

    3. +Sean Brass Regardless, you can visually see the 76mm guns on its
      accompanying tanks. Also the platoon ratios of 76mm tanks to 75mm tanks
      improved rapidly from 1944 to the end of the war. Its a bit hard to make
      sweeping statements.

    4. +Luke Connell The typical American tank platoon had 5 tanks: 4 with 75mm
      guns and 1 with a 76.2mm gun. The Fury had the 76.2. mm.

      Realistically, the Fury would have penetrated the Tiger from the front and
      ended the battle before it started.

  58. hahaha laughflash.
    do the americans really think wehrmacht-soldiers were that stupid.haha
    and its even dufficult to hit the tiger from behind cuz he was more faster
    than the sherm.
    omg hollywood you suck. nice scene and place you made it but that is so
    unrealistic…

  59. A tank that can take out targets from 1800m with a pak40 gun has somehow
    decided to close the gap and take on Shermans that can never pen a tiger
    tank I but they somehow manage to out flank him because tiger tank driver
    did not knew that tank can also go left and right and not only front and
    back. Only tanks that made tiger 1 crew think twice before engaging were-
    1) Firefly with 17 pounder gun and 2) ISU152 with those high explosive
    shells.
    But US of A showing BS as usual…we are the best blah blah blah.

    1. +odisy64 Maybe the crew of this Tiger tank knew about this disadvantage,
      and wanted to close the gap quickly? Nevertheless, a Panther’s sloped
      frontal armor is more ideal against a 76.2 mm gun from 700 meters.

    2. +Matthew Booth problem is that two of the sherman’s in this scene had
      76.2mm guns that could penetrate the Tigers frontal armor at 700m using AP
      M79 shells, but they bounce at 400m because the tiger had plot armor.

    3. +Nomad Noman You’re right! In reality the Tiger tank was well suited for
      open country combat. It could do this because of its‘ armor protection and
      main 88 mm gun. Hence the reason why so many Shermans and T-34s fell victim
      to this monstrosity. However, Allied or Soviet tank crews rarely
      encountered the Tiger tank. The MBT the Nazies produced was the
      Panzerkampfwagen IV.

  60. Fury is the most confused war film I’ve ever seen, it has no idea what
    message it is trying to get across. Oh, and it is nothing to really do with
    tank crew and combat either. This scene is also completely unrealistic….
    why on earth does the Tiger keep advancing after sighting the Shermans?

    1. +leakycheese not every soldier is going to have the same feats as the
      other, this is about the new guy entering the world of a veteran crew that
      are not exactly just in there attitude.

    2. +odisy64 Have you ever watched Cross of Iron? That film deals with the
      issues that Fury attempts to address far more effectively… camaraderie,
      valour in the face of extreme adversity, the wastefulness of war, hypocrisy
      of leaders, combat stress / fatigue, rape.

    3. +leakycheese its a film about a tank crew and the crew members are not
      exactly charismatic… so you meen to tell me a film where 80% of screen
      time is the crew interacting with each other and during combat is not about
      a tank crew? if you watched the film then you would know the shot white
      phosphorus smoke shells at it and it tried leaving the cloud, the smoke
      cloud can spread and stay for a couple of minutes so the tiger wanted to be
      as far away as possible, tiger tank crews where also very confident in
      there armor and did not fa shermans.

    1. +Raldi Haxhia oh you poor fool, at 500m the Furys main gun could penetrate
      109mm AT A 30 DEGREE ANGLE, if the tiger where not tilted to the side it
      could do it at 750m, one of the tank commanders with the 76mm shout „AP 500
      yards (450m)“ a couple seconds later when it moves to the 400m range it
      fires and gets destroyed a bit later so basically it had around 115mm of
      penetration at a 30 degree angle at 400m but then again, if those tanks are
      400m away and only about 10m apart the angle would be more about 15 degrees.

    2. No im telling you that in the movie it was explained that it was 500 yards
      away.

      I was giving you the best case scenario by saying it was 15 meters away.
      Saying it was 6 only makes it harder to get a bigger angle.

      You understand how maths and Pythagoras theorem works no? Its basic grade
      school maths globally. In order for the other Shermans to be 30 degrees off
      the Tiger they need to be at 26 meters or so. This is basic maths. Stop
      assuming things and try and work it out.

    3. +Crag_r. Hahaha you ar calling me german fanboy ? So you must be murica fan
      cowboy ? Lool man those arguments are for kids !!!!!

      More seriuslly you are explaining me that a tank at 100m max 150m (just
      tell me where you did you see 400m lol you have seruis problem of view )
      and at 6m ( 6m is ok for me dont try to ad more ) at the right from center
      is fireing at 30°from horizontal ? Well i can do nothing more for you man .
      Even if i was wrong in this video you can see very well that this shot is
      coming at 30° from parallel yes but never in this world physics at 60°from
      parallel and when you see tiger front plate after this shot you can see
      very well the path of the shell who proves that this shell is coming from
      stiff angle . Now i know very well that you are going to camp on you
      position and going against physics so it makes no sence to argue with you
      anymore .Have a nice day

    4. +Raldi Haxhia Ugh…. No.

      Ok lets maths it shall we. Assuming the Tiger is perpendicular to Fury, now
      you state that the other tanks are 3m apart. Lets give you the benefit of
      the doubt and say that the extreme one is 15 meters away from Fury. NOW
      also to note that in the next few seconds one of the commanders calls out
      500 yards, add in the time it takes to drive that and we are looking at
      ~470 meters or so.

      MATHS TIME.

      We know both short sides of the triangle, we know that one of the angles is
      90 degrees and we want to find an angle… easy enough.

      That gives approximately 2 degrees.

      Hmm, well what would it take for Fury accompanying tanks to hit at a 30
      degree angle (the angle that you are seeing the shots bounce from
      historical fugues) … 270 METERS FROM FURY

      Well um what about what range would be needed for it to be 30 degrees but
      still be a good 15 meters from Fury… 26 METERS FROM FURY TO THE TIGER…
      Yeah no.

      Ok sush up German fanboy.

    5. +Crag_r Man at 0.46 you can see tiger from fury view ports and tiger is
      perfectly horizontal ro fury . Now those to shots are coming from tanks
      next to fury wich are at least at 3m from each other so when you are
      telling me that those shots are coming at 80° or 70° from parallel to tiger
      front (this is what you mean when you said 10°or 20° from < >)
      will all my respect this is bullsh*** simbly because at 6m from horizontal
      yoh canot fire at 70° from this horizontal …. Im telling you again even
      if we consider this shot is coming at 45° from horizontal its never going
      to pen tiger front

    1. +Jo Warscheinlich 4 Shermans were „considered“ average to take on a Tiger
      H1 for starters. Secondly the M1A1 and M1A2 on Peterson’s tank could
      penetrate the Tiger under 500m.

  61. Question from a noob. Was the Tiger really that much better than a Sherman?
    Because in this scene the Tiger shells pass through the American tank’s
    armour like a hot knife through butter. And another thing I don’t get. Why
    did the germans move out of their hiding? If they would’ve stayed hidden
    they would’ve taken all Sherman’s without breaking a sweat.

    1. +odisy64 The Tiger had a 12-1 ratio, not to mention most of the tigers were
      destroyed by aerial bombardment and because of running out of fuel or due
      the lack of crew experience.

    2. They didn’t show it in this clip but just before this scene started they
      were driving along the road and the tiger destroyed the tank at the rear of
      the column so they all turned and reversed after a few seconds they spotted
      the tiger and fired smoke rounds at him so the tiger and shermans charged
      each other

    3. +odisy64
      That’s what you would think, but that’s not how the US Army classified
      things back then. It was a holdover from some pretty bad doctrine.

    4. +Rabbit on Da Moon if it has the same chassis I concider it a veriant, some
      where 150mm and others had 105mm cannons capable of killing T-55s but a
      Sherman is not a gun it’s a tank.

    1. +rickstotenkopf No i didn’t know that. Probably because the 76mm M1A1 gun
      (or the M1A2 on Fury) can quite happily take out a Tiger frontally at 1.4km
      or so firing standard APCBC. HVAP considerably longer. 17 Pounder on
      Firefly will just do it at ~2.5km or so using APCBC and well APDS
      theoretically considerably longer.

  62. If those are Fireflies the movie got something wrong. Well, they aren’t
    because fire flies can kill those things from a mile away.

  63. Unrealistic hollywood. The shermans could knock out the tiger, but only
    from short ranges while the tiger had a shot/kill ratio of 80% below ranges
    of 2km. In no way the shermans would approach a tiger like that in an open
    field at such close ranges. Its suicidal.

    1. +tom seagroatt In case you are a troll: please, just go. If not, you need
      to educate yourself. The Fury is M4A3E8 which indeed is a Sherman. Also
      Shermans had 5 men crew. AND M4A3E8 looks nothing like Chaffee.

    1. +Mohammed Ali I don’t get why you German fanboys say it was impossible for
      allied guns to take a Tiger frontally. Put it this way, this is the
      ‚results‘ of a Sherman firefly vs a Tiger from June 16th 1944. First 2
      shots at 900m, with the 3rd been at 400m.

      (Join between the lower plate glacius)

      The Tigers armour was 100~ mm thick frontlaly. But it was vertical. By
      comparison APDS or HVAP fired from the 17 Pounder or US 76mm M1 could take
      on over 200mm, in the case of the 17 Pounder 270mm at point blank. The
      100mm of Vertical armour on a Tiger wasn’t that much to write home about.

    2. +Mohammed Ali No.

      The 76mm M1A1 gun easily had the penetration values to cut clean though the
      Tiger frontally at that range. Also if you think the only way to kill it is
      from behind try taking a look at its armour values.

      Other guns (like the 17 Pounder) could quite happily do so frontally at
      long range. Needing to flank it only applied for the 75mm gun.

    3. Thick armour of a Tiger would bounce Sherman tank shells off in the air the
      only way to destroy a tiger is to flank it and hit it from behind which is
      quiet in impossible task because tiger would take few seconds to reload and
      shoot at deadly accuracy sending american troops in smithereens along with
      their tank.

  64. first off not a sherman that would not work at all tee weak second its
    called a hellcat a tank destroyer it was i belive the replacement for the
    sherman idk but its not a sherman

    1. +Markus Klein How? The Tiger was caught behind in smoke shells, he couldn’t
      of seen the M4s until he drove out and they were well below 500m. The APBC
      or even AP ammunition on Peterson’s or Collier’s 76mm would of went
      straight through the Tiger.

  65. Why would the Tiger Commander order to leave its hidden position and play
    Chicken with the Shermans ? Especially stupid when you know that only
    experience crews operated the Tiger which was concentrated in Heavy tank
    groups because it was so rare.
    Typical Hollywood Bullshit

    1. +vonStahlmach Hardly. You seem to be confusing the situation for reality.

      Now whats worth-wile to note that most of the Tigers knocked out during
      that action were out of effective pen range of the 75mm shermans on
      Wittmans flank. The bulk of the Tiger losses can be attributed to the
      Fireflies on the end of the hill that Wittmans group was charging. Only
      Wittmans tank himself was potentially suitable but regardless it matters
      not since you have Tigers taken out when charging Shermans frontally with
      one of the most experienced German tank commanders.

    2. +vonStahlmach At this point in the war most of the experienced tankers from
      the eastern front were either dead or making stupid choices leading to
      their death (Wittmann).

      If it was an IRL engagement; an experienced tank crew it would have charged
      out to not be flanked, and taken out by the 76mm Shermans as they got out
      of the smoke screen. The 76mm Shermans (of which 2-3 are) would have quite
      happily fired on the Tigers silhouette before it was clear of the smoke
      screen and could put in effective return fire. If it was an inexperienced
      crew it probably would have stayed still and been flanked or reversed and
      got stuck.

      … Wait. Charge in an open field, experience from the eastern front, long
      range, dead Tiger, Shermans opening fire frontally… This sounds an awful
      lot like Wittman. (Though they didn’t lose 3 Shermans)… Yep sounds
      especially just like in real life.

    1. +Darkpassenger 1 Well in theory anyway, in practice the Sherman variants
      that went up against the Tiger (76mm & 17 Pounder) were more then capable
      of taking out Tigers on their own, or at least when out numbered.

Schreibe einen Kommentar zum Dokumentation Stream

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert.

Schreibe einen Facebook Kommentar zum Doku Stream