Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Poll: Less then beautiful Tank?
shermanfreak
Alberta, Canada
Joined: January 24, 2003
KitMaker: 380 posts
Armorama: 202 posts
Joined: January 24, 2003
KitMaker: 380 posts
Armorama: 202 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 03:27 PM UTC
For me it has to be the M3 Lee...it's like the designers said oops...need another gun....where can we stick it where it will be the most useless...hhmmmm....the sponson.
SS-74
Vatican City
Joined: May 13, 2002
KitMaker: 3,271 posts
Armorama: 2,388 posts
Joined: May 13, 2002
KitMaker: 3,271 posts
Armorama: 2,388 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 07:45 PM UTC
Gonna be the FT-17, the Somua, the Char B-1. And the AMX13/M24 Bastardization is very ugly too.
I actually like M3 Lee though.... call me weird. #:-)
I actually like M3 Lee though.... call me weird. #:-)
blaster76
Texas, United States
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 07:54 PM UTC
Those WW! monsters are pretty freakin'ugly as well as those French Char...of course anything French is pretty ugly to me right now I love's "Freedom" fries
Posted: Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 08:52 PM UTC
any american tank, 'til the M1A1.
Chris Panzer Schwein
Chris Panzer Schwein
Tanks46
New Jersey, United States
Joined: June 02, 2002
KitMaker: 113 posts
Armorama: 98 posts
Joined: June 02, 2002
KitMaker: 113 posts
Armorama: 98 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 09:19 PM UTC
My choice for the less "elegant" would be the Matilda 1 and all those tankettes - useless!
Butch Cassidy
Pig #3 Head Armorer
DSB
Quoted Text
If I come to a minefield my infantry attacks as though it was not there! Gen Zhukov
Butch Cassidy
Pig #3 Head Armorer
DSB
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 12:24 AM UTC
For me this is the most ugly tank in the world.
I still don`t know what kind of idea the british had when they launched this thing. Probably the main purpose was to let the Germans laugh themselfes to death
I still don`t know what kind of idea the british had when they launched this thing. Probably the main purpose was to let the Germans laugh themselfes to death
DRAGONWAGON
Noord-Brabant, Netherlands
Joined: February 05, 2003
KitMaker: 1,041 posts
Armorama: 501 posts
Joined: February 05, 2003
KitMaker: 1,041 posts
Armorama: 501 posts
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 01:12 AM UTC
What about the British Matilda, I know I don't like it!!!
John.
John.
yagdpanzer
Ohio, United States
Joined: August 21, 2002
KitMaker: 415 posts
Armorama: 231 posts
Joined: August 21, 2002
KitMaker: 415 posts
Armorama: 231 posts
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 02:35 AM UTC
My vote goes for the Matilda 1, ugliest little beastie I can think of. Looks like a rejected foundry billet with a tin can on top and tracks as an afterthought.
penpen
Hauts-de-Seine, France
Joined: April 11, 2002
KitMaker: 1,757 posts
Armorama: 929 posts
Joined: April 11, 2002
KitMaker: 1,757 posts
Armorama: 929 posts
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 02:45 AM UTC
Faust, I must agree with you, the Bishop realy looks ugly !
The AMX13+M24 turret doesn't look good either. It just looses the little good looks it had with it's long cannon (derived from the panther's cannon).
But the Char B1 doesn't look so bad to me ! It looks it's age... and in 1940 it was a bad surprise to the german. It's cannon was able to pierce everything the germans had then ! But evolution took a big leap forward between 1940 and 1945 !
The AMX13+M24 turret doesn't look good either. It just looses the little good looks it had with it's long cannon (derived from the panther's cannon).
But the Char B1 doesn't look so bad to me ! It looks it's age... and in 1940 it was a bad surprise to the german. It's cannon was able to pierce everything the germans had then ! But evolution took a big leap forward between 1940 and 1945 !
RufusLeeking
Ohio, United States
Joined: January 18, 2002
KitMaker: 330 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Joined: January 18, 2002
KitMaker: 330 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 08:16 AM UTC
I'll have to agree with Faust the Bishop Mk I, that is one ugly tank. Turret would make a great hot tub.
slodder
North Carolina, United States
Joined: February 22, 2002
KitMaker: 11,718 posts
Armorama: 7,138 posts
Joined: February 22, 2002
KitMaker: 11,718 posts
Armorama: 7,138 posts
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 12:18 PM UTC
I read this thread a few days ago and said self "What Tank is Ugly?????" DIdn't have an answer. So I had to break out the Janes Tank Recognition book.
After a bit research I came to the conclusion that while the previously posted tanks definitely qaulify for wearing a decorative sashe in an Ugly contest.
My ultimate vote for the wearing of the Most Ugly Tank Tiara is the PT-76 Light Amphibious Tank from Russia.
Long, Tall, small road wheel, funcky turret, long barel. I think they got in the ugly line twice.
After a bit research I came to the conclusion that while the previously posted tanks definitely qaulify for wearing a decorative sashe in an Ugly contest.
My ultimate vote for the wearing of the Most Ugly Tank Tiara is the PT-76 Light Amphibious Tank from Russia.
Long, Tall, small road wheel, funcky turret, long barel. I think they got in the ugly line twice.
blaster76
Texas, United States
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 07:55 PM UTC
Faust, I think you win the prize for the ugliest one at the dance. That one made me laugh. What kind of gun did they mount on that puppy?
ukgeoff
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: May 03, 2002
KitMaker: 1,007 posts
Armorama: 703 posts
Joined: May 03, 2002
KitMaker: 1,007 posts
Armorama: 703 posts
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 09:15 PM UTC
Blaster, technically the Bishop is motorized artillery (like the Priest or Sexton, which it pre-dates), and as such it carried the 25pdr field gun. I agree it aint pretty but it served its purpose untill the better designs came along.
ek
Israel
Joined: February 15, 2002
KitMaker: 17 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Joined: February 15, 2002
KitMaker: 17 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 10:10 PM UTC
any french tank ever.
some ppl just don't have the touch.......
some ppl just don't have the touch.......
Posted: Friday, March 21, 2003 - 11:18 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Actually, and I know some of you may disagree, I think the STRV 103 is really ugly.
Cheers,
CDT Reimund Manneck
U.S. Army ROTC
Here, here!! Thought that myself too...
brandydoguk
England - North, United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2002
KitMaker: 1,495 posts
Armorama: 234 posts
Joined: October 04, 2002
KitMaker: 1,495 posts
Armorama: 234 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 12:27 AM UTC
Here's one you may not know, the Conqueror heavy tank built by th British
in the 1950s. I think they took all of the bits left over when they designed the Centurian and hashed them together. I think the term today would be "aesthetically challenged."
in the 1950s. I think they took all of the bits left over when they designed the Centurian and hashed them together. I think the term today would be "aesthetically challenged."
M113
Istanbul, Turkey / Türkçe
Joined: March 02, 2003
KitMaker: 411 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Joined: March 02, 2003
KitMaker: 411 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 01:33 AM UTC
Speakin of uglyness...how bout British MkIV male tank ?
I may like the other one (cos its female) :-)
I may like the other one (cos its female) :-)
MichalBT
Województwo Kieleckie, Poland
Joined: July 03, 2002
KitMaker: 326 posts
Armorama: 275 posts
Joined: July 03, 2002
KitMaker: 326 posts
Armorama: 275 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 02:42 AM UTC
I vote for Conqueror, too. But the strangest AFV (not only tank) is Alkett Mineraumpanzer
Michal
Michal