Now this is more of a poll but if you were in the neutral side of WW2 which would you rather prefer. The shermans' greater numbers and speed or the Tigers' greater firepower. Now this can be a tough one to decide because if you put it this way they can seem even, but what do you think?

The Tiger!!! ...and then straight to a "custom car workshop" for a powerpack tune up.

Erik

Hi Clayton ...I was watching the Military Channel the other day and there was a program that made the comparison between the Tiger and Sherman ...Yes it is true that if you look at how the war turned out ..the Sherman did come out on top ,but when they asked vetrans which tank they would rather have been in ,they all answered the Tiger ..

Rick

Definitely tiger! I mean shermans did won the war but I would't want to be in a sherman advancing on a tiger, even if there would be 10 more shermies and only one tiger... I think this would be the crew members choice, exactly as the Veterans choose.

Cheers
Pedro

For me it would depend on what type of Sherman. If it was a Sherman Firefly or 105, I'd prefer the Sherman. If it was a Sherman with the normal 75mm gun I'd prefer the Tiger.

Dave, isn't the 105 a howitzer? Either way it's short barreled and so I dont think it could stand up against tiger...

Pedro

They were designed for different missions. The Sherman was an infantry support tank and the Tiger was a main battle tank. The US equivalent to the Tiger would have been the Pershing. The Sherman's counterpart would have been the Pz III and IV.

HI, I agree with Sabot here. These vehicles were designed for different missions so it's kind of hard to compare them in a tank vs. tank encounter. The Tiger was mainly designed as a counter to the T-34 and KV tanks on the Eastern Front where it's longer 'reach' was vitally important. As so the Panther as well. And we have to remember that the armor race on the Eastern Front, due to the geography the war was fought over, was in something of a whole different dimension compared to the Western front.

I can remember my father-in-law, who was in the 28th Inf. Div., said that when they ran up against a Tiger in the field you had to look pretty darn hard to find any Allied armor anywhere in the immediate neighborhood for support. They tended to make themselves very scarce, very quckily, if at all possible, allowing the Air Force in their figher bombers come in and do the job. And this isn't a slur against the boys in the Shermans, it's just using good old common sense to stay alive a little longer. Which THE most important thing in any combat experience, in any time frame.

As a modeler, even though I build mostly German stuff, I find that both vehicles have certain neet qualities about them. So for me, I choose neither one over the other. I just take them as they are.

Take care, Sgirty

as has already been said, it is some what misleading to compare the two 'head on'

perhaps a better comparison would be:

Tiger 1 v. Pershing/Comet/JS2

comet/JS2 win on firepower.
pershing/comet/JS2 win by a long shot on mobility and reliabilty

Sherman v. Pz1V

early models, sherman loads better, later models armour remains about the same but sherman gets better guns.

these are more comparable in terms of role and size etc

regards

Joe

Great points guys: the Sherman vs. Tiger I isn't a fair comparison.

Along those veins how about this?

T-34 vs Pz II
Pz IV vs. Matilda I
IJA Type 97 light tank vs. Sherman
Char B1 Bis vs. Pz 38 (t)
British Mk VI light vs. Pz IV

Seem ludicrous? Yep. Just like the Sherman vs. Tiger I.

Did these encounters happen. Yes. Which one would you rather be in if you were in this circumstance. No doubt which one.

Clayton,
First, Howdy and welcome .
Not to be a smart Alec, but if I "were in the neutral side of WW2 ", why would I need or prefer either?
Actually, I'm going to swim against the tide. Since the Sherman with greater numbers and speed, did defeat the Tiger, I'd have to go with the Sherman.
To me it's similar to having to contend with one alligator or a swarm of thousands of hornets.
Joe

The tiger was certainly ahead of its time back in WWII so if i was caught in the middle of the battle field, i would certainly prefer to be in a Tiger however having said that, there is still something about the look of the sherman that draws me to it. The fact that it was cheaper to build and faster in terms of mobility, the saying of "strength in numbers" certainly holds true.

One on one it i obvious that the Tiger would be superior over the Sherman. However the goal is to win the war so the decision to mass produce the Sherman was definitely the correct design decision.

One on one you have got to pick the Tiger. I read posts where people said that it was invalid to match the Tiger head to head with the Sherman. How can that be true when in real life they DID fight each other head on? I saw the same show where they gave an example on how to fight the Tiger with either 3 or 4 Shermans (I forget which it was) and the Sherman "won" when the last of the group snuck up on the Tiger and knocked it out. Who of us would have wanted to be in the first 3 Shermans that were knocked out? I think just seeing a Tiger would scare the [auto-censored] out of me. I saw the King Tiger at the Patton Museum and it is a scary thing just sitting there!

My favorite Tiger story cames from the Panzer Aces books, Hans Bolter, I think. A tank alert had sounded. 49 T-34's had broken through! Bolter moved with two Tigers to fill the gap. He moved out "confidently", his words, against 49 T-34's!
That day 17 T-34's met their fate a few more were immobilized and the rest retreated. The two Tigers never took a hit!
Sherman vs, Tiger? I'll chance it in a Tiger

Umm, when it takes atleast 6 shermans to take a tiger out. I think we all know the choice. Ive heard stories of 1 Tiger knocking brigades of tanks out. Now thats just scary... :-) :-)

But yeah, definatly Tiger.

Well if I was a neutral party, I'd have to take into consideration the practicalities of each tank.
The Tiger might have the looks and a nice fat stowage bin on the back of the turret, plus a big motor and a noise that would definitely make you look cool as you schlepp up the motorway in your Raybans, but the Sherman would probably be more likely to get you there, and would be a lot easier to get it into Tesco's car park. If it was a British one, it too would have a nice stowage bin on the turret, but anyway, Shermans always look cool with lots of baggage on the deck. it would also HAVE to be a diesel.
Not much room to hang the furry dice though...

In perspective.......... a neutral party like say Portugal during the war has the opportuity to purchase either of these type of tanks for its own Army. The tiger costs say 4 times as much as a Sherman (this is the ratio given for a tank vs tank encounter earlier). As defense minister having made studies of the tanks, I would chose the Tiger. based on survivability Generally, when the Sherman lost everybody dies, when the Tiger lost most or all the crewmen usually survived to walk away from destroyed tank.

I would have to agree with most of you. The Tiger would be the best choice. What other tank could be knocked out and you have a 90% chance of surviving. The only thing was...after you survived, you prolly got assigned to a sub par tank.....but thats another topic.

Brian

I still say that the question has to be better defined.

If you are talking killing power/survivability then it's the Tiger hands down

If you were a tank crewman and looking to survive than again it's the Tiger.

If you're asking a field commander if he would want 10 Tigers or 200 Shermans then you would be talking tactics over technical superiority. Obviously the strategy of 200 vs 10 was better.

If you were in charge of building tanks then the Sherman was much easier to mass produce than a Tiger.

If you ask which tank was more crucial for winning the war than that would be the Sherman because as many kills as the Tigers were able to make, it was not enough to win the war.

To simply say which tank is better is too open to a variety of interpretations.

I would defenitively choose the Sherman Firefly!
Cheers and happy modelling!
Prato

I would choose the Tiger, but hey, its just me...

Mirko

I think each tank was best for the army it served in.

Kar98k that seems to be the best answer I've seen to the Sherman vs Tiger debate