https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_I#Engine_and_drive http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/30445-forward-vs-rear-wheel-drive/ One of the major flaws of German tank designs in WW2 was that ALL production models used a front drive system, which everyone abandoned either before or during WW2. The US made the last use of it in the M4 Sherman, while the Brits and Soviets did not use it at all during the war. While there were some advantages like the system helping clean the track and it providing the best possible motive power due to pulling rather than pushing the tank, it had a massive flaw, illustrated above, that it required a lot of extra weight due to the drive train running under the crew compartment to the front due to the engine and final drive being on opposite ends of the tank. Compared above is the T-44, which had the final drive in a discrete combined unit at the rear of the tank, which enabled it to be substantially shorter, require less materials and automative complexity, and lighter due to having less moving parts and no need for a drive train compartment underneath the crew. The Panther in contrast was probably 10 tons heavier unnecessarily due to being substantially taller to make room for the drive train. The competitor to the OTL Panther, the VK3002DB, copied the T-34 in having a rear drive, which meant it stuck to the 35 ton weight limit placed on it, while the MAN design that became the Panther was then 10 tons heavier, much more technologically complex, and less reliable. Here is a comparison in layout: So what if the Germans recognized in the early 1930s that the rear drive just made more sense, leaving their tanks much less heavier, shorter, cheaper, less complex, and potentially with greater room for weight increases? The results for the Panzer III and IV would probably look somewhat similar to the British style tank layout before the adoption of sloped armor: Later designs with sloped armor would probably resemble the VK3002DB than the OTL Panther and weigh no more than 35 tons thanks to being a smaller tank overall, but with similar armor protection and gun. What sort of difference would making smaller, cheaper, less complex, more reliable, potentially more upgradable, but less capable of climbing tanks have made to German AFV production and combat potential?