M26 vs IS-2

Discussion on the tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, which participated in World War 2.
User avatar
jeaguer
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
Posts: 343
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:32 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: M26 vs IS-2

Postby jeaguer » Mon Dec 22, 2014 9:41 pm

.
For the IS , shell penetration was good , but the sheer violence of the round was often enough to knock out its target
It was designed primarily as a breakthrough tank and must rank as the worst vehicle ever for the crew
the M26 was gorgeous ,still fresh with some initial troubles , but that was the same for all the newly developed tanks , there is no reality check like the battleground
it is an abiding shame on the US brass that it didn't came on line one year earlier

User avatar
Constankane
Recruit
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2015 6:28 am
Location: 123 street
Contact:

Re: M26 vs IS-2

Postby Constankane » Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:00 am

They're really different classes of tank. The KT was "heavy" in every sense of the word, while M26 and IS2 were lighter significantly and would have rated as mediums in German service. They were more in Panther's weight class.

Gunpower was similar with the IS2 having an edge in HE and lagging in the AT role. All in all I'd say M26 was the most balanced design out of the three, especially when taking into account the two piece ammo, slow rate of fire, and limited ammo stowage on the IS2. As pointed out earlier KT had no peers in tank to tank, and was a fine defensive system, but I think M26 was, overall, the one I'd choose. KT was just too immobile and prone to breakdown.

dutchman
Technical Sergeant
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 242
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:09 pm

Re: M26 vs IS-2

Postby dutchman » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:58 am

Carrylim, I'm glad too see your opinion, I'm not saying anyone is wrong or right because we are talking about something that really can't be proved, but can you share your thoughts as too why. Perhaps you've seen something I didn't. At first glance both tanks have guns that can defeat each others armor at reasonable ranges.. Both having crews or equal experience this being the only fair comparison. I think the 90mm in the M-26 has a faster rate of fire, which might be advantageous. Perhaps the JS-2 is faster or has better cross country ability?

Again remember, we are here to discuss, it's not about wrong or right. So feel free to share your thoughts.


Return to “Tanks in World War 2”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest