Most suitable successor to the Panzer IV

[Count of Crisco]

I would think that if I had been in charge of the German AFV production the first thing I would have done would have been to get rid of the flimsy PIII and switch to only the PIV while pushing development of a successor similar to the Panther .
With the resultingly larger number of IVs in service the Soviets would have more pressure ,not enough to give the Wehrmacht a war winning advantage but enough to extend the war and leave more men to fight later .
Meanwhile the experience of fighting Soviet tanks would lead to something like the Panther ,only with sloped armor from the outset .Production would then switch from the IV to the new V tanks while the chassy of the IV would become the focus of development of tank Destroyers and self propelled artillery vehicles ,plus new airfcraft .
These changes would not win the war but would result in a better Wehrmacht with more ,better tanks and would extend the war to maybe 45 possibly 46 if Hitler did not get so paranoid and let his officers fight the war .

 

[CrimsonKing]

Except it had no turret ready with the gun Hitler wanted.

Well, I'd argue that the Germans didn't really need to introduce the new tank until 1944 when the T-34-85 came out. By then the new turret could have been designed and made reliable. Better to just go all out on Pz IVs in 1943.

Plus there is the case to be made that a copy of the T-34 was too close to the Soviet design and would have caused identification problems and friendly fire issues.

I would imagine that this is the kind of issue that could be worked out. Add some kind of bolt-on to the superstructure or something. If anything, given that German optics were superior to Soviet, this issue would be a net benefit to the former as the latter would probably mistake their own T-34s for enemy tanks more than the Germans would.

Also the design didn't really have a lot of stretch to it, as it would have required a major redesign to take the L70 75mm gun, a delay of about 1 year. There was no hope of putting an 88mm gun on it.

According to this post from World of Tanks news, the Soviet Union was able to successfully mount a 100mm gun on a T-34 chassis.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Well, I'd argue that the Germans didn't really need to introduce the new tank until 1944 when the T-34-85 came out. By then the new turret could have been designed and made reliable. Better to just go all out on Pz IVs in 1943.

The Daimler design also had serious issues with being nose heavy, which the long barrelled 75 did not help. The overhang of the gun of the chassis means it would get stuck on the ground if it dipped forward for crossing something.

I would imagine that this is the kind of issue that could be worked out. Add some kind of bolt-on to the superstructure or something. If anything, given that German optics were superior to Soviet, this issue would be a net benefit to the former as the latter would probably mistake their own T-34s for enemy tanks more than the Germans would.

Depends, in combat or in chance meetings soldiers tend to shoot first and ask questions later.

According to this post from World of Tanks news, the Soviet Union was able to successfully mount a 100mm gun on a T-34 chassis.

If you read the source the resulting tank was a mess. Not sure you really could call that a success.

It should also be noted that the Germans never would a way to successfully cram the 88mm L71 of the Tiger II into any version of the Panther, even though they tried.

 

[CrimsonKing]

The Daimler design also had serious issues with being nose heavy, which the long barrelled 75 did not help. The overhang of the gun of the chassis means it would get stuck on the ground if it dipped forward for crossing something.

I understand that, but the question is is it better than the alternative. It would seem to me that it is better than the MAN with its complexity, interleaved road wheels, etc.

Depends, in combat or in chance meetings soldiers tend to shoot first and ask questions later.

True, but I still think in the end it would at least cancel out.

If you read the source the resulting tank was a mess. Not sure you really could call that a success.

It should also be noted that the Germans never would a way to successfully cram the 88mm L71 of the Tiger II into any version of the Panther, even though they tried.

The first attempts were messes, but the last one wasn't. "At this point, in the Factory No.92 in Gorky by the end of 1944, a new 100mm gun LB-1 was developed with a reduced recoil and they mounted this gun on the T-34 as well. Generally, the gun was similiar to the D-10T and the ZIS-100. The gun of the tank with this gun reached 9150 mm, with the gun barrel being 3340 mm longer than the dimensions of the tank itself. Between 6th and 14th of April, 1945, the T-34/100 with the LB-1 gun was tested, with 1000 rounds fired and over 501 km driven with this tank. The practical rate of fire of this gun was between 5,2 and 5,8 rounds per minute, the accuracy of this gun was higher than its predecessors and the stress on the suspension was lower. The trials were a success and the army liked this vehicle as well, but in the end, the T-34/100 was never mass produced – the war was practically over, there was no need for it anymore and new, more modern tanks (T-44 and T-54) were being developed at this point as well."

 

[Deleted member 1487]

I understand that, but the question is is it better than the alternative. It would seem to me that it is better than the MAN with its complexity, interleaved road wheels, etc.

Most of that still existed with the DB model, it just weighed somewhat less than the MAN design.

True, but I still think in the end it would at least cancel out.

Maybe, maybe not. Not good to tempt fate there.

The first attempts were messes, but the last one wasn't. "At this point, in the Factory No.92 in Gorky by the end of 1944, a new 100mm gun LB-1 was developed with a reduced recoil and they mounted this gun on the T-34 as well. Generally, the gun was similiar to the D-10T and the ZIS-100. The gun of the tank with this gun reached 9150 mm, with the gun barrel being 3340 mm longer than the dimensions of the tank itself. Between 6th and 14th of April, 1945, the T-34/100 with the LB-1 gun was tested, with 1000 rounds fired and over 501 km driven with this tank. The practical rate of fire of this gun was between 5,2 and 5,8 rounds per minute, the accuracy of this gun was higher than its predecessors and the stress on the suspension was lower. The trials were a success and the army liked this vehicle as well, but in the end, the T-34/100 was never mass produced – the war was practically over, there was no need for it anymore and new, more modern tanks (T-44 and T-54) were being developed at this point as well."

Basically they only got it to work in a prototype as the war was ending. Not really going to help the Germans getting theirs to work.

 

[mirkoasdv]

Why they didn’t produced 2 things: vk3002Db for western front( this did not urgent as Panther )and fight alongside captured Soviet tanks, left ALL tiger/Panther tanks fight on east ; also why not turreted Elefant2/hintern Porsche / , instead of Maus, E100,Lowe ???
Basis existed for this . And hintern really looks Like scaled-Down Maus/ as T10m vs IS7 in Soviet inventory/

 

[phx1138]

How about a derivative of Panther IV but with sloped armour and Panther's engine

Word.

This has been my dream solution for a long time, now. I'd make the Ausf. J's skirts standard.

I'd only ask, could it also feature the 75mm L/70?

While you're at it, you can delete the hull MG & use the space for more 75mm ammo.