German T-34?

plenka

Banned
Everybody here knows of the Soviet T-34 tank which was considered one of the best tanks in the world when it first entered combat in 1941. 84 thousand were produced in two main variants and it is an icon of the Soviet struggle in Second World War.

Now my question is, what would happen if the Germans decided to directly copy the T-34, only modifying it to make it more usable in their service? The same modifications they implemented on captured Soviet tanks. Things like commanders cupola, improved radio equipment, side skirts and very likely their own, German made long 75 mm gun. I am not sure about the engine, would they use diesel engine like in original, or would they use petrol engines like in the rest of their tanks.

Would it be put in production instead of Pz 3 and 4, and would it butterfly away completely the German Panther tank?
 
Everybody here knows of the Soviet T-34 tank which was considered one of the best tanks in the world when it first entered combat in 1941. 84 thousand were produced in two main variants and it is an icon of the Soviet struggle in Second World War.

Now my question is, what would happen if the Germans decided to directly copy the T-34, only modifying it to make it more usable in their service? The same modifications they implemented on captured Soviet tanks. Things like commanders cupola, improved radio equipment, side skirts and very likely their own, German made long 75 mm gun. I am not sure about the engine, would they use diesel engine like in original, or would they use petrol engines like in the rest of their tanks.

Would it be put in production instead of Pz 3 and 4, and would it butterfly away completely the German Panther tank?

There is an old story that one of the German Tank factory's was asked if they could just copy the T-34 for German service.

"No Sir." The factory manager responded. "Quality control would never let it out of the factory."

The aluminium alloy diesel engine was apparently not something the Germans could copy. After that there is the basic issue of why they didn't just copy it. The idea was around, which is where the story I started with came from.

They must have had a strong reason not to do it that we - or at least I - can't see. The simple fact that it was a design from Racial Inferiors might have been enough, it was NAZI German after all. But was there some other pragmatic reason not to do it?

Did they have a solid reason or was it prejudice? That is the issue.
 
Daimler Benz submitted a tank for the Panther trials that was more less a Germanized T34, the VK 3002DB or something like that. Real spiffy tank.

It likely wouldn't change much if the Germans had adopted it though, it would have been around 42, 43 when it came into service and a change in tanks isn't going to win the war. The best Germany could hope for is delaying the Soviets in the east so the Wallies liberate more of Europe.
 
Daimler Benz submitted a tank for the Panther trials that was more less a Germanized T34, the VK 3002DB or something like that. Real spiffy tank.

It likely wouldn't change much if the Germans had adopted it though, it would have been around 42, 43 when it came into service and a change in tanks isn't going to win the war. The best Germany could hope for is delaying the Soviets in the east so the Wallies liberate more of Europe.

Wouldn't the T-34 copy have put a dramatically greater emphasis on ease of mass production? That is one cliche I have repeatedly seen, that one of the Soviets strengths was that their equipment was easy and cheap enough to turn out quickly and in huge quantities that it made producing and equipping huge armies possible. Same with the Sherman. That the German equipment was NOT designed with mass production as a foremost, or even important consideration.

That this is the stated reason that with all Europe's industry at their disposal the Nazi's produced less than any of their opponents individually did. Or at least the reason I have seen. Also was the T-34 more survivable than STug's & Panzer 4's that stayed in production instead?

If so there might have been a lesser manpower drain due to lower casualties. So the quality of German manpower does not drop as fast, with units kept better up to strength in equipment - all those extra T-34 clones - and more of the experienced crews still alive?

It would have been bloodier. It might have led to the Iron Curtain being a little further east. Patton filmed after his crews liberate the Treblinka.

Germany still loses.
 
T-34 probably had half the parts-count of a Panther.
Does that mean German factories could produce twice as many T-34 clones? ... or would shortages of steel alloys slow them down?
Would German quality control insist on such tight tolerances that German-made T-34s freeze solid in Ukrainian winter nights?
Would German optics factories still be able to integrate aiming systems/ telescopic sights?
 

plenka

Banned
Yes, to me it seems that the biggest problem about T-34 production in Germany was that it was a product of their "Racial Inferiors", but other then that there was no obstacle. Engine could be replaced by a petrol version, you could possibly put a modified turret that could hold three men, and gun could be changed to a German one.

Wikipedia gives me the first German encounter of T-34 on 23rd of June 1941. If the German decided to put it in production, unchanged except neccesary modifications needed in German service, what do you think would be the earliest we could see it in action?

Let us also say that the manufacturers are ordered not to change anything that could slow down production. So no modifications based on each respective factory, only the base design, being produced as fast as they can get the materials in the factories.
 
Although the T34 is good all around tank at the way you look at it, if memory serves right didnt the soviet loose around 40k+ of T34s or around 80%+ of the T34s by end of the war? More or less more tanks that the Germans ever produced?

So if you are going to use kill per death ratio, the T34 was aweful on that statistic. Of course that statistic has many factors into it besides the tank itself.

If we are going to compare a tank, wouldnt be more scientific if we base it from two equal economies where we base many things as constant since the larger production always wins on a production war rather basing too many variables like what the germans vs allied had? Because the Germans are not going to win vs the Alllies due to the Allied industrial difference even if we put a T34 produce by the Germans, which we think is a better overall tank into production by a weaker industrial Germany vs the whole Allied production line, which will produce more tanks whatever happens.

Knowing that you are weak on mass production, wouldnt it be more intuitive you go quality instead quantity?
 
During the war the T-34 was a good tank,but not the best,it was designate the best tank of the war after the war,but during the war it was just a good tank, maybe even an excellent one,but at the same time the German tanks where also good tanks.
And then there are the technical issues of building a the T-34
- Setting up the production lines takes time.
- Training the workers takes time.
- There is a chance that thinks will not go smoothly again will translate in time and during the war time is very expensive.
 

plenka

Banned
Although the T34 is good all around tank at the way you look at it, if memory serves right didnt the soviet loose around 40k+ of T34s or around 80%+ of the T34s by end of the war? More or less more tanks that the Germans ever produced?

So if you are going to use kill per death ratio, the T34 was aweful on that statistic. Of course that statistic has many factors into it besides the tank itself.

If we are going to compare a tank, wouldnt be more scientific if we base it from two equal economies where we base many things as constant since the larger production always wins on a production war rather basing too many variables like what the germans vs allied had? Because the Germans are not going to win vs the Alllies due to the Allied industrial difference even if we put a T34 produce by the Germans, which we think is a better overall tank into production by a weaker industrial Germany vs the whole Allied production line, which will produce more tanks whatever happens.

Knowing that you are weak on mass production, wouldnt it be more intuitive you go quality instead quantity?

Yes, the Soviets lost massive amounts of T-34, and I know that the T-34 is not a godlike vehicle, but what I am interested in is how longer the Germans can hold out. German tank production is frankly pathetic compared to any of its opponents, it was wasteful, produced tanks that were terrifying on battlefield but in many cases broke down before they got onto it! Whenever a fanboy screams about Panthers and Tigers (and Bears :D), I have an urge to slam my head against a wall.

Gas guzzling, overengineered, complicated and hard to produce vehicles which while terrifying to allied tank crews, brought on the end of the Third Reich much sooner.
In my personal opinion Germans could do better by just building Pz4, I am not sure if that is the right thing to do, but it is certanly better then early Panthers that had a host of problems including setting their engines on fire.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

The T-34 as it was could not be produced just the same in Germany due to the type of methods the Soviets used due to the availability of equipment and factory floor space the Germans lacked or were using for something else. They couldn't directly copy it for that reason and would have fallen behind in the arms race by just copying it; they were better off doing what they did IOTL, going for a technically superior, more advanced model to leapfrog the Soviets because the Germans couldn't compete on numbers (though they nearly did in 1944). If not for strategic bombing and the blockade their production would have been plenty in 1944-45 in terms of AFVs, especially of Panthers. The Panther was not a bad tank, it just didn't get the time to mature that it needed and was seriously deprived of the necessary spare parts due to strategic bombing; Germany's problem wasn't tanks, it was the war situation in general being that they were fighting the world's three greatest powers besides themselves with minor allied powers.

Had they fought the Soviets one-on-one the Panther would have done the job, though I know at least one poster on this forum vehemently disagrees with me.
 
There is an old story that one of the German Tank factory's was asked if they could just copy the T-34 for German service.

"No Sir." The factory manager responded. "Quality control would never let it out of the factory."

The aluminium alloy diesel engine was apparently not something the Germans could copy. After that there is the basic issue of why they didn't just copy it. The idea was around, which is where the story I started with came from.

They must have had a strong reason not to do it that we - or at least I - can't see. The simple fact that it was a design from Racial Inferiors might have been enough, it was NAZI German after all. But was there some other pragmatic reason not to do it?

Did they have a solid reason or was it prejudice? That is the issue.
Racial inferiors or not, surely everyone sees the problems that are gonna arise when two sides in a war end up copying and using what is visually the same tank right?
 
Maybe if the German Wehrmacht had more Mk IV tanks with the medium 75mm cannons available in June 1941...

and their tank crews are as well trained and experience as in OTL...

that might have given them the edge to hunt down and kill most of the KV-1s and T-34s that they had encountered and had slow down their initial thrusts when meet until they had ran out of fuel or were commanded not well and were hunted down by the German Engineers or their bombers...
 

marathag

Banned
Would it be put in production instead of Pz 3 and 4, and would it butterfly away completely the German Panther tank?

which T-34?

The 1941 with two man turret?

They really don't have a V12 diesel ready for that. It's not really spoken about, but that V-2 engine(with huge displacement, over 2347 cubic inches) had a short lifespan(well under 100 hours), as did the tracks, and the transmission, while slightly improved from the earlier 4sp model, still wasn't great. bad ergonomics, all around.

As pointed out, changes would have been done.

Problem is, where to stop? That's how the Panther came to be, kept trying to turn the dial to '11'

Want to know what a US T-34 looked like?

The M24, with half the armor, and half the HP, but still faster.

The M6 75mm gun was similar in power to the 76mm F-34 gun.

It just came out two years to late to be considered an awesome, but thinly armored tank.

The German, doing something like that, was slightly more possible, as it was more in tune with what they had been doing with the Mk III, torsion bar suspension, three man turret, front drive. the Turret Ring on the M24 was slightly smaller, as the US had developed the concentric hydrospring recoil assembly, allowing that 75mm to fit on a 60" Ring, 1.4" smaller than the Mk III.

Now what the Soviets did to fit their cannon with the standard recuperator
was to have that fitted ahead of the trunnions for space, thats what in the armored box ahead of the mantlet to fit on a turret ring 4" smaller than even the Chaffee.

They were really the only nation to do this, as it had some drawbacks with balance. The Israelis did this with their M50 Super Sherman to fit the 75mm gun that was derived from the Panther's gun postwar into the original small M4 75mm Turret
 
Last edited:

marathag

Banned
The aluminium alloy diesel engine was apparently not something the Germans could copy. After that there is the basic issue of why they didn't just copy it. The idea was around, which is where the story I started with came from.

Jumo 204 was an aluminum aircraft diesel of 1739 cubic inches and 740HP@1800 rpm It weighed 1653 pounds. It was lighter and narrower than the V-2, but taller and shorter in length.

Taller, as in 7" taller than a Wright R-975.

So the engine compartment would be humped, unless it was mounted at a angle, like Chryslers 'Slant Six' was to lower the hoodline. Transverse mount would also be possible

The British also has this engine, as it was licensed to Napier during the '30s.

They called it the Culverin

These were an opposed piston design, 6 cylinders, but pistons on both ends
320px-Jumo205_cutview.JPG
 
Last edited:
Yes, the Soviets lost massive amounts of T-34, and I know that the T-34 is not a godlike vehicle, but what I am interested in is how longer the Germans can hold out. German tank production is frankly pathetic compared to any of its opponents, it was wasteful, produced tanks that were terrifying on battlefield but in many cases broke down before they got onto it! Whenever a fanboy screams about Panthers and Tigers (and Bears :D), I have an urge to slam my head against a wall.

Gas guzzling, overengineered, complicated and hard to produce vehicles which while terrifying to allied tank crews, brought on the end of the Third Reich much sooner.
In my personal opinion Germans could do better by just building Pz4, I am not sure if that is the right thing to do, but it is certanly better then early Panthers that had a host of problems including setting their engines on fire.

The Germans ran out of trained panzer crews before the end of September 1944. With the need to fill more hulls, they will run out of crews and gasoline even faster. The comparatively weaker armor will lead to more combat losses as well, further exacerbating the crew problems.

They will also have no answer to the Soviet heavy tanks.
 
How much more could Panzer 4 be developed with long-barrel 75mm gun, sloped armor, etc.?
I am suggesting sloped armour instead of thicker armour. There is nothing to me gained by over-loading the chassis. Granted, the best-improved Pz4 would never have enough armour to fight toe-to-toe with KV tanks, but a long-barrelled 75 mm gun was good enough to defeat WALLIES.
Sure Pz 4 was not as over-powering as a Tiger, but Tiger never fought in Normandy in significant numbers. The bulk of WALLY casualties were caused by Pz 4, SP guns or artillery.
How would much longer could a Wehrmacht with more Super 4s defend compared with smaller numbers of Tigers?
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

How much more could Panzer 4 be developed with long-barrel 75mm gun, sloped armor, etc.?
Sure Pz 4 was not as over-powering as a Tiger, but Tiger never fought in Normandy in significant numbers. The bulk of WALLY casualties were caused by Pz 4, SP guns or artillery.
How would much longer could a Wehrmacht with more Super 4s defend compared with smaller numbers of Tigers?
The Pz IV was developed to the max. They were working on a VK28.01 that had sloped armor, but it was ready too late and too disruptive to production, same with the universal Pz III/IV chassis (that never really worked right anyway).
 
How much more could Panzer 4 be developed with long-barrel 75mm gun, sloped armor, etc.?
Sure Pz 4 was not as over-powering as a Tiger, but Tiger never fought in Normandy in significant numbers. The bulk of WALLY casualties were caused by Pz 4, SP guns or artillery.
How would much longer could a Wehrmacht with more Super 4s defend compared with smaller numbers of Tigers?


The panzerIV/70(v) had the long 7.5cm and 80mm frontal armor.
It was horribly overloaded and didn't have a turret.
 
To make a long complicated Story Short

The Wehrmacht consider T-34 not as a threat in begin, what change fast, after it pop up in mass.

So the Wehrmacht demanded better tank as T-34 and Hitler consider this by more firepower = bigger Gun
and tank constructors wanted something "superior" to that cheap T-34

in end the Wehrmacht got Panther, Tiger, Königstiger and also the infamous prototype MAUS
each one heavier, complexes and more boozing petrol, in less numbers as T-34 production
the Panther gear box got complexity of Swiss clockwork, while Königtiger range was only 120 km do it thirsty Maybach engine.
if the Königstiger got any petrol to drive at end of war.

yes there were some who say, they need something like German T-34 to counter that
but try to explain that the Führer and not get shot...
 

Deleted member 1487

the Panther gear box got complexity of Swiss clockwork, while Königtiger range was only 120 km do it thirsty Maybach engine.
if the Königstiger got any petrol to drive at end of war. QUOTE]

The Tiger had the problem with the gear box, but that was necessary due to its heavy size and role. The heavier Tiger was up armored by Hitler, who fell into the trap the US did with Airland battle in the 1980s: more Dakka to counter Soviet numbers.

There were German diesel developments, but by the time they were ready it was too late to put them into production without unacceptably lowering production temporarily.
 
Top