Tanks - how did they develop so quickly between the two world wars?

[Sleight of Hand]

Eurasia and Oceania, assuming you mean 1984.

 

[Graf Zeppelin]

Lol, no.
It was the soviet Union, not Oceania. (Permanently at war with Eurasia. Or was it Eastasia?)

Well to be fair much of the stuff happening in the Soviet Union was the inspiration for Orwell. Nazi Germany and the UK too of course.

 

[pithorr]

IIRC, the price of a PzIV and a Panther were about the same.

When it came to the Totalkrieg the price value in RM (BTW: evaluated in different timeline terms I suppose) became rather irrelevant comparing to the amount of resources needed to build both vehicles. As the most obvious part you have 44t vs. 25t of steel.

Moreover, the costs of the usage and maintenance was even more important IMHO. Absolutely substancial question for the late WW2: which vehicle's engine had bigger fuel consuption: PzIV's 300HP or Panther's 700HP one?

 

[nwinther]

Not when you count ongoing development costs, remodeling, etc.
And IIRC, there were some very expensive/difficult to manufacture parts in the Panther.

I don't know about that. I just remember seing a table where a PzIV cost, say, 214.000 RM, and a Panther 230.000 RM or something along those lines (you get the difference in scale) with a Tiger I being considerably more expensive.

 

[nwinther]

When it came to the Totalkrieg the price value in RM (BTW: evaluated in different timeline terms I suppose) became rather irrelevant comparing to the amount of resources needed to build both vehicles. As the most obvious part you have 44t vs. 25t of steel.

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I get your point.

Moreover, the costs of the usage and maintenance was even more important IMHO. Absolutely substancial question for the late WW2: which vehicle's engine had bigger fuel consuption: PzIV's 300HP or Panther's 700HP one?

The Panther engine consumed more fuel. However, it developed more than 100% HP at a 50% higher fuel consumption (according to wikipedia numbers - actual consumption/HO output may be different.).

But while the question on fuel consumption is important it's not decisive. If the Panther performs twice as good as the IV, difference in fuel consumption is negated. Or put another way: Fuel consumption is only an issue, if performance is on par.

 

[Graf Zeppelin]

When it came to the Totalkrieg the price value in RM (BTW: evaluated in different timeline terms I suppose) became rather irrelevant comparing to the amount of resources needed to build both vehicles. As the most obvious part you have 44t vs. 25t of steel.

Moreover, the costs of the usage and maintenance was even more important IMHO. Absolutely substancial question for the late WW2: which vehicle's engine had bigger fuel consuption: PzIV's 300HP or Panther's 700HP one?

Workhours are also very important.

 

[unmerged(31881)]

When it came to the Totalkrieg the price value in RM (BTW: evaluated in different timeline terms I suppose) became rather irrelevant comparing to the amount of resources needed to build both vehicles. As the most obvious part you have 44t vs. 25t of steel.

Moreover, the costs of the usage and maintenance was even more important IMHO. Absolutely substancial question for the late WW2: which vehicle's engine had bigger fuel consuption: PzIV's 300HP or Panther's 700HP one?

The operational range of the Panther was determined more by its flawed design more than its fuel efficiency.

i.e. Theoretically the PzV could travel 250 kilometres due to its 720 litres of fuel but in practice they broke down like bad clockwork.

Due to the weakness of the final drives their average fatigue life was only 150 km. In Normandy, about half of the abandoned Panthers were found by the French to have broken final drives. The final gear housing was eventually replaced with stronger one, while final gear problem was never solved.

The Panzer IV's range was 200km on 470L was therefore far better, imho.