What were the best Panzer divisions?

Hohenstaufen was still active in May 1945: it was moved to Steyr-Amstetten to stop the US advance.

It had some great officers too: Stadler, Bock, Harzer, Splindler and Otto Meyer, to name a few...

And I agree with Za, it did have a cool insignia!

 

There you go then, thats the one for me,
Rob.

 

16th July.
At 19.30 Hrs the regiment opened fire on the positions of the German 276th and 277th Infantry Divisions and elements of the 9th (Hohenstaufen) SS Panzer Division that were opposing XXX and X11 Corps attack.

Extract from the War-Diaries 10th Med Regt - Op "POMEGRANATE"

Rob

 

Thanks for that.

 

I'm at a loss. Lauteris, no offence, but how old are you?

 

This talking about the best panzer division in ww2 is quite ridiculous. How anybody can say that this division is better then that just because its fought here and that other didn't. You first have to know combat history of every panzer division to can say that some of them if definitively the best. There also must be some criteria how will we rank them (according to battles, years of service or something else).

For me it's the 9th SS-Panzer Division Hohenstaufen... Normandy, Falaise, Arnhem, Hungary, Ardennes and all that.

Yes 9th SS PD Hohenstaufen saw much combat but not even close like any of Wehrmacht's early panzer divisions which fought almost constantly from the start of ww2, or first five SS panzer and panzer-grenadier divisions. Every of them had distinguished it self in some battle: 7th in France in 1940, 21st in Africa during 1941 and 1942, 1st LSSAH at Kharkov in 1943, 5th SS Wiking at Korsun Pocket and Kovel end so on ... And don't forget that from 1943 many divisions were much understrength and that loses were, more often then not, replaced with inexperience or not fully trained men. Perhaps better name for this thread will be "What is your favorite Panzer Division?"

 

Ah, yes, another pointless pissing contest à la Discovery or Whatever Channel.

 

This talking about the best panzer division in ww2 is quite ridiculous.
Amen! I'm glad some people do realize that

 

I'm at a loss. Lauteris, no offence, but how old are you?

How could I possibly be offended by that?

 

Sorry, this forum has not been very comfortable with the confrontational style, it just doesn't come across here very well.

 

I'm always gobsmacked at these threads asking "which was the best". In truth most of the Panzer Divisions were quite good at what they were asked to do. There was no "Super Panzer" division. Post-War writings have tended to Mythologise the Panzerwaffe, inferring almost that they were almost super-human. Fact is that they were at their peak in 1939-1940. Forget the propaganda pictures of all those sexy photos of Panthers and Tigers containing men raising their "steely eyes towards the front", in terms of manpower and well-trained troops, in terms of Tanks per division, the Panzer division's complements were never as strong as in 1939-40. For Barbarossa the number of divisions increased but the number of tanks per division decreased in order to accommodate the increased number of units into the order of battle.

The German Panzer units were good fighting troops but as to which one is the best, how do you compare the 1944 Hohenstaufen with the 1940 7th Panzer? Please bear in mind that most of these Panzer Divisions were destroyed and reconstituted so you can talk all you want about individual units, but trying to compare them is ridiculous.

 

I'm always gobsmacked at these threads asking "which was the best". In truth most of the Panzer Divisions were quite good at what they were asked to do. There was no "Super Panzer" division. Post-War writings have tended to Mythologise the Panzerwaffe, inferring almost that they were almost super-human. Fact is that they were at their peak in 1939-1940. Forget the propaganda pictures of all those sexy photos of Panthers and Tigers containing men raising their "steely eyes towards the front", in terms of manpower and well-trained troops, in terms of Tanks per division, the Panzer division's complements were never as strong as in 1939-40. For Barbarossa the number of divisions increased but the number of tanks per division decreased in order to accommodate the increased number of units into the order of battle.

The German Panzer units were good fighting troops but as to which one is the best, how do you compare the 1944 Hohenstaufen with the 1940 7th Panzer? Please bear in mind that most of these Panzer Divisions were destroyed and reconstituted so you can talk all you want about individual units, but trying to compare them is ridiculous.

Gotthard,

I agree with your sentiments. It is impossible to compare and I think that it is wrong to think of comparing units in differing time scales.

It reminds me of a friends father who was a Tank Commander in the 14th Panzer Division.

His rank was a Major and was a Ritter Kreuz holder and his unit was decimated to the last tank trying to relieve the siege at stalingrad from the North West.

The unit had only Mk IV's with short 7,5 cm canon and was a sitting duck at range to a new T34. This meant new tactics to lure the T34's into positions where the advantage was not good for the Russian Tanks.

They fought to the last round and the last tank and my friends father was taken into captivity until 1949 and he was lucky to survive the Siberian experience.

Regards
Tom

 

I just read this in another forum:

'People forget how good the Germans actually were, and consequently forget how much better we were in order to beat them'.

 

Indeed, that's why I asked with the "no offense" addition. Good to know that you're not offended by that question...so how old are you?

 

Remember when you join this forum you agree to abide by rules; one of those is respect for other members. You might not like this thread, or choice of terms, but you don't need to be rude, or ask the same inane question more than once. If you have constructive criticism, fine, but insults are not accepted.

 

I think a sensible answer to this would be one that involved the panzer units that were considered the elite and which were used as "Fire Brigades" by the German Army. The answer therefor has to be any of the Schwere Panzer Units numbered 501 to 509. These were the Tiger Units who were always in the thickest of fighting and often managed to hold entire battlefields with just one or two tanks.

For example; Schwere Panzer Abteilung 503 lost 252 tanks in its 3 year existence but destroyed 1 700 allied tanks.

I can get more information for you if required?

 

Tiger AusFe,

You have to be careful when comparing loss rates to recorded victories.

I believe that the German Tankers counted most tank hits as a kill when the tank was put out of action.
But several tanks sometimes hit the same target, sometimes as many as five or more and these were all recorded as a tank destroyed.

You can see how this distorts the figures.

I agree that the Heavy Tiger units inflicted a lot of damage and the Allies had a very healthy respect for them.

Regards
Tom

 

Tiger AusFe,

You have to be careful when comparing loss rates to recorded victories.


...as well as when it comes to stereotypes which stem from contemporary (German) propaganda. Terms like 'elite' and 'fire brigade' are - probably more of than not - used in a nonreflective way.

 

Tiger AusFe,

You have to be careful when comparing loss rates to recorded victories.

I believe that the German Tankers counted most tank hits as a kill when the tank was put out of action.
But several tanks sometimes hit the same target, sometimes as many as five or more and these were all recorded as a tank destroyed.

You can see how this distorts the figures.

I agree that the Heavy Tiger units inflicted a lot of damage and the Allies had a very healthy respect for them.

Regards
Tom

Hi Tom,

Agree with you to an extent, even the RAF exagerated figures of kills during the battle of Britian and it is human nature aswell to make things out better or worse than they actually were you also have to look at the other side of the coin.

The OKH were very adamant that kills should not be exagerated or scores racked up to truly heroic status levels as this had a negative impact on intelligence gathering and planning. For example, after the battle of britain many luftwaffe pilots were reporting huge amounts of kills that actually misled the command, combine this with the information the British were putting out and you will see that it was very dangerous indeed to go over the top in what you say you have killed, as it does not give you an accurate picture of the attrition rates.

So yes, we have to be careful what we say, but I am not going to put up figures just out of the blue. Niether can we dismiss the Germans as Gung-Ho pirates, happily exagerating on the amount of enemy tanks they brewed up.

Regards

Richard

 

Niether can we dismiss the Germans as Gung-Ho pirates

:m1: ...uh, what?