How reliable was the Tiger 2?

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Erik1
Member
Posts: 104
Joined: 20 Aug 2022, 15:41
Location: sweden

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#46

Post by Erik1 » 07 Jan 2023, 13:31

Someone who owns the book where Newsome talks about the 5000 km figure between overhauls for the Tiger 1 was kind enough to take this picture of the page for me.

https://www.tanknet.org/uploads/monthly ... 5689b1.jpg

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#47

Post by Michael Kenny » 07 Jan 2023, 15:58

The Carius quote (from the 'Portrait Of A Tiger' chapter of Tigers In The Mud) that a 'regularly cleaned filter' could make an engine last 5000 km is cited to confirm the Tigerfibel claim when in fact it is Caruis simply repeating the Tigerfibel claim. The use of a lot of 'supposed'/'suggest'/sounds like' words illustrate the lack of any hard facts and Newsome appears to be unaware of the movements, actions and losses in 502 up to March 1943. I would love to know how many 'old' 3000 km Tigers were in 502 in March 1943 since the losses/transfers seem to indicate very few of the original issue (if any) were left by that date.


Erik1
Member
Posts: 104
Joined: 20 Aug 2022, 15:41
Location: sweden

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#48

Post by Erik1 » 07 Jan 2023, 16:11

Michael Kenny wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 15:58
The Carius quote (from the 'Portrait Of A Tiger' chapter of Tigers In The Mud) that a 'regularly cleaned filter' could make an engine last 5000 km is cited to confirm the Tigerfibel claim when in fact it is Caruis simply repeating the Tigerfibel claim. The use of a lot of 'supposed'/'suggest'/sounds like' words illustrate the lack of any hard facts and Newsome appears to be unaware of the movements, actions and losses in 502 up to March 1943. I would love to know how many 'old' 3000 km Tigers were in 502 in March 1943 since the losses/transfers seem to indicate very few of the original issue (if any) were left by that date.
I just checked my copy and nowhere does it say that he is quoting the Tigerfibel and not talking about his own experiences with the engine...

In this thread I shared a part of a combat report that says that some of their Tiger's motors had reached 3000 km without essential failures, giving a clear example of Tigers that old existed.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#49

Post by Michael Kenny » 07 Jan 2023, 16:28

Erik1 wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 16:11


I just checked my copy and nowhere does it say that he is quoting the Tigerfibel and not talking about his own experiences with the engine.
Caurius is saying the exact same thing as the Tigerfibel

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#50

Post by Michael Kenny » 07 Jan 2023, 16:30

Erik1 wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 16:11


In this thread I shared a part of a combat report that says that some of their Tiger's motors had reached 3000 km without essential failures, giving a clear example of Tigers that old existed.
Can you possibly share the information that would confirm 502 had Tigers that Newsome claimed had travelled '3000 km' in March 1943?
Did you bother checking the movements and losses in 502 before posting the claims of Newsome?

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#51

Post by Michael Kenny » 07 Jan 2023, 19:35

Could you please source these quotes. Giving at least the book would save an enormous amount of checking.
Erik1 wrote:
07 Dec 2022, 11:13


About it being reliable in the Tiger, Jentz writes:

"The first production series Tiger Fgst Nr 250001 with Motor Nr 46052 was only run-in for 25 km by Henschel before being sent to Kummersdorf for testing. During a test drive on 28 May 1942, with only 52 km on the odometer, a blockage occurred in the steering gear. This Tiger quickly went through the original and two replacement engines (Motor Nr 46051 from July lst to 3rd, Motor Nr 46065 from 6 to 8 July) and was fitted with a fourth motor, Nr 46066, after 13 July. By 3 August 1942, this Tiger had covered a total of 1046 km; by 31 March 1943 a total of 5623 km; and by 31 July 1943 a total of 7736 km.These figures clearly demonstrate that once the Tiger had overcome its teething troubles, it could withstand a lot of purposefully administered abuse during test programmes."

From a combat report:
"Regarding the overheating engines, the HL 210 engine caused no troubles during the recent time. All occurring breakdowns resulted from the low quality of driver training. In several cases engine failures have to be put down to the missing remote engine thermometer. Five engines have reached more than 3,000 km without essential failures."


Erik1
Member
Posts: 104
Joined: 20 Aug 2022, 15:41
Location: sweden

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#52

Post by Erik1 » 07 Jan 2023, 19:42

Michael Kenny wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 16:30
Erik1 wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 16:11


In this thread I shared a part of a combat report that says that some of their Tiger's motors had reached 3000 km without essential failures, giving a clear example of Tigers that old existed.
Can you possibly share the information that would confirm 502 had Tigers that Newsome claimed had travelled '3000 km' in March 1943?
Did you bother checking the movements and losses in 502 before posting the claims of Newsome?
It was May 1943, and the way he says it as if he knows for sure that some Tigers had reached 3000 km with few mechanical issues suggests to me at least that he's seen this clearly stated in some combat report or something. He speculated that there were Tigers that had reached 3000 km earlier, in March.

About Carius, you could indeed be right that he is repeating that the Tigerfibel says, but I think that's up for debate. I could argue that it would be odd that he repeats things from the Tigerfibel so that it sounds like his own experiences, though that doesn't mean it's not what he did. In the next sentence he talks about that if proper maintance was not made, "we couldn't drive for 500 km." Is that also from the Tigerfibel?

The quote about the test is from Tiger 1 Heavy Tank 1942–45 by Jentz, the combat report is from Tiger by Thomas Anderson.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#53

Post by Michael Kenny » 07 Jan 2023, 20:02

Erik1 wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 19:42
the way he says it as if he knows for sure that some Tigers had reached 3000 km with few mechanical issues suggests to me at least that he's seen this clearly stated in some combat report or something. He speculated that there were Tigers that had reached 3000 km earlier, in March.

If maybe, but. In short you think he must have the source therefore you are going to assume he has a source.
I do not share your faith.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#54

Post by Michael Kenny » 07 Jan 2023, 20:07

this Tiger had covered a total of 1046 km; by 31 March 1943 a total of 5623 km; and by 31 July 1943 a total of 7736 km.These figures clearly demonstrate that once the Tiger had overcome its teething troubles, it could withstand a lot of purposefully administered abuse during test programmes."
This Tiger never left the dealership. It had constant highly-skilled maintenance support until the day the war ended. In no way can it be used as an example of use on the battlefield. I compare it to MPG figures dealers use when trying to sell you a new car.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#55

Post by Michael Kenny » 08 Jan 2023, 02:50

Anderson (page 216 'Tiger') has a list of spares 'consumed' June 22 to Aug 10 1943 (7 weeks) by sPz Abt 502 in Russia. The had 45 Tigers at the start and 43 at the end.

In 7 weeks they they used up:
4 Engines HL 230
9 Engines HL 210
11 Transmissions
47 Sprockets
93 double running wheels
220 single running wheels
290 Rubber tyres

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#56

Post by Michael Kenny » 09 Jan 2023, 19:14

Erik1 wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 19:42



It was May 1943, and the way he says it as if he knows for sure that some Tigers had reached 3000 km with few mechanical issues suggests to me at least that he's seen this clearly stated in some combat report or something. He speculated that there were Tigers that had reached 3000 km earlier, in March.

My point is that the first issue of Tigers were gone by March and thus had little chance to clock up 3000 km. The Tigers issued after that certainly had no possibility of reaching 3000 km by May

User avatar
Don Juan
Member
Posts: 623
Joined: 23 Sep 2013, 11:12

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#57

Post by Don Juan » 11 Jan 2023, 21:47

Michael Kenny wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 20:07
this Tiger had covered a total of 1046 km; by 31 March 1943 a total of 5623 km; and by 31 July 1943 a total of 7736 km.These figures clearly demonstrate that once the Tiger had overcome its teething troubles, it could withstand a lot of purposefully administered abuse during test programmes."
This Tiger never left the dealership. It had constant highly-skilled maintenance support until the day the war ended. In no way can it be used as an example of use on the battlefield. I compare it to MPG figures dealers use when trying to sell you a new car.
The interesting thing here is that the Tiger in question accumulated this mileage (approx. 4800) over the course of a year, while Cromwells on 3000 mile trials generally completed them in just over two weeks. For example I've got a field trial report on two Cromwells pulled off the production line at Leyland Motors in May 1944 and sent to the FVPE for a 3000 mile reliability test that was completed in 21 days. So the Tiger in question was obviously on a development trial and not a reliability trial, which means that its engine may have been taken out of the vehicle on any number of occasions. You would need to see a log of the trial to really assess what had been going on over this mileage.
"The demonstration, as a demonstration, was a failure. The sunshield would not fit the tank. Altogether it was rather typically Middle Easty."
- 7th Armoured Brigade War Diary, 30th August 1941

User avatar
Don Juan
Member
Posts: 623
Joined: 23 Sep 2013, 11:12

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#58

Post by Don Juan » 11 Jan 2023, 22:25

Michael Kenny wrote:
09 Jan 2023, 19:14
Erik1 wrote:
07 Jan 2023, 19:42



It was May 1943, and the way he says it as if he knows for sure that some Tigers had reached 3000 km with few mechanical issues suggests to me at least that he's seen this clearly stated in some combat report or something. He speculated that there were Tigers that had reached 3000 km earlier, in March.

My point is that the first issue of Tigers were gone by March and thus had little chance to clock up 3000 km. The Tigers issued after that certainly had no possibility of reaching 3000 km by May
The original quote, which is apparently from here but is also in the Wikipedia article on the Tiger I, refers to engines rather than complete tanks, lasting for 3000 km. Which suggests either engines being swapped about, or tanks having run a large mileage in training in Germany. But even in this case the mileage does not suggest that the engines had not been reconditioned in some way (e.g. replacement cylinder linings, valve seats etc.) over the quoted mileage, just that they hadn't suffered "essential failures".

But Newsome's assertion that Allied tanks landed in Algeria which had to take a "long drive" into Tunisia only accumulated a third of the mileage of Tigers landed directly into Tunisia over the same period is obviously questionable. He also doesn't seem to understand Allied policy, which was to develop tanks to achieve 3000 mile overhaul lives and prove it in testing, Whether they were overhauled over shorter mileages in the field was more to do with having the resources available during lulls in the fighting. For example the British overhauled a large proportion of their tanks prior to Operation Plunder not because they needed to, but because they could.
"The demonstration, as a demonstration, was a failure. The sunshield would not fit the tank. Altogether it was rather typically Middle Easty."
- 7th Armoured Brigade War Diary, 30th August 1941

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#59

Post by Michael Kenny » 11 Jan 2023, 22:58

Don Juan wrote:
11 Jan 2023, 22:25


But Newsome's assertion that Allied tanks landed in Algeria which had to take a "long drive" into Tunisia only accumulated a third of the mileage of Tigers landed directly into Tunisia over the same period is obviously questionable. He also doesn't seem to understand Allied policy, which was to develop tanks to achieve 3000 mile overhaul lives and prove it in testing, Whether they were overhauled over shorter mileages in the field was more to do with having the resources available during lulls in the fighting. For example the British overhauled a large proportion of their tanks prior to Operation Plunder not because they needed to, but because they could.
Newsome is a man with a series of book(s) to sell and a pay-to-view video channel and he should be seen first and foremost in that light. He deliberately misquotes and cherry picks those facts than endear him to the Tiger fan club. Not many of his followers can or care about checking his claims. Perhaps he should be seen as a less blatant Mark Felton?

Woody Wetter
Member
Posts: 19
Joined: 02 Apr 2020, 06:38
Location: Estonia

Re: How reliable was the Tiger 2?

#60

Post by Woody Wetter » 30 Jan 2023, 19:02

Michael Kenny wrote:
08 Jan 2023, 02:50
Anderson (page 216 'Tiger') has a list of spares 'consumed' June 22 to Aug 10 1943 (7 weeks) by sPz Abt 502 in Russia. The had 45 Tigers at the start and 43 at the end.

In 7 weeks they they used up:
4 Engines HL 230
9 Engines HL 210
11 Transmissions
47 Sprockets
93 double running wheels
220 single running wheels
290 Rubber tyres
Using spare parts delivery list to determine reliability is very problematic.

Because :

*There is no way to separate mechanical failures and battle damage -Mine and artillery damage was very frequent. It did rarely penetrate main armor but it damaged anything else.
*Whole time during WW2 Germans had problem to produce enough replacement engine for Tiger and Panther. So they had to relay on overhauled engines. Overhauled engines quality was very fluctuating. It could be good as factory overhaul or be simply thrown together with what ever spare parts were available.

As was progressed worse these overhauls got - it did not reflect new factory engine reliability.

*Transmission can be gearbox , steering unit or final drives . And final drives can receive battle damage. Also we need data how many new units were produced. Then we can make some kind assumption to what extend Germans had to use overhauls.

Post Reply

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”