WW2 Tanks and Ebikes.

Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,245
Location
Republic of Ireland.
Odd combination I agree.

I used to do a lot of reading about WW2 armour, the tanks of each army, their advantages and shortcomings. The Germans vs Soviets always intrigued me, the clash of engineering philosophies.

Little known fact- in 1941, when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union, the Reds actually had better tanks. The T-34 and KV-1 were superior and would remain largely so for the rest of the war. The reason the Germans made such fantastic inroads was because they had superior tactics and superior {at that time} leadership. Some Soviet tanks didn't even leave the factory with paint on them. Their welds were like hideous stretch marks. But the Soviets churned them out.

In 1944, The Germans introduced a machine called the Konigstiger, erroneously called the "King Tiger" by the Allies {Konigstiger is actually the German for Bengal Tiger}. Hitler had insisted on heavier and heavier tanks to try and turn the tide of the war. The Kingtiger was the answer. It was largely unstoppable by ANY Allied or Soviet tank.

The only thing that could stop it was, well, itself. They kept breaking down. The transmission and engine had been designed for use in a smaller lighter tank, the Panther.

Hitlers fascination with heavier and heavier tanks, and the fascination of his engineers with over-engineering meant that the Germans produced fewer and fewer tanks as the War dragged on, and what they did produce deviated further and further from their original simple tenet of fast-moving, reliable vehicles with adequate firepower, adequate armour and superb tactics.

I have encountered a similar experience both with my own bike and with other peoples builds. When I first came on this scene in 2009, the X5300 was the absolute peak of hub motor technology. It was the biggest heaviest hubbie here. Some people had cyclones, I don't think I encountered anyone running an Agni. The odd Perm here and there {remember them?}

72v and an infineon controller represented the peak for most. The preponderance ran 36v or 48v cammy_cc or ping LiFe batteries. A123 round cells were a big thing. I don't even know if you can buy them anymore. 30c is so like 2007. There was a huge thread for making home-made spot welders, for welding these cells. That attracted the finest minds on this forum. Does anyone even think about how they are going to spotweld their cells when thinking about a build? We've gone from A123 rounds to A123 20Ah pouches.

This is a steep curve.

Now the Cromotor dwarves the old X5. And that doesn't even begin to take into account the Crowns, HT-40, HT-25, X5400 range, etc etc.

But our bikes are getting more complicated. Some peoples bikes are catching fire. Torque arms have "evolved" from small bits of metal to absolutely massive epoxied lumps. Dropouts are being stretched to accommodate the new hubs.

Is this all "Better" or are we getting away from the original premise of stealth, lightweight, affordability and reliability?

I ask this as I got into this to try and build a bike that would take the stress out of cycling. Now I want a beast. I don't know if my X5304 is good enough any more. I have taken the LiPo plunge and I think anything under 2000 w/h is a small battery. Bikes look more and more like Ebikes and less and less like bicycles. It used to be if a bike got stolen, you lost maybe $750. Now its like $2500 :(

When I read about people going to their local motorcycle place to have their wheels laced to special rims with special spokes that can take the weight....I do think we have started to get away from first principles. Not saying it is a bad thing, its just a radical departure.

1939
panzer_ii_ausf_c_7_of_8.jpg


1944
images



2007
lht-bionx.jpg


2014
images
 
At the beginning of WWII the Russians possessed more than half the world's tanks. This included a lot of near useless junk, failed experiments that went into production, a fully amphibious tank that the U.S. decided not to build but Roosevelt Administration spies got hold of so much info and sent it over, etc. Russia was historically a disorganized society and sure showed it in WWII.

Germany did so many interesting things, such as having a lot of tanks that ran on gasoline instead of diesel so they could pull up to gasstations rather than wait to tankers to refuel as they crossed Europe. They also had allies within the countries they invaded - Note the Ukraine invasion right now, with Ukrainians turncoats operating checkpoints and controlling their region BEFORE the Russians arrive. What Germany did best in the 1930's was organizing the socialists across the continent.

Another problem the Russians had was a lack of serious testing. The best example of that was in the RussoJapanese war, the infantry using rifles that lasted less than 100 rounds illustrating the lack of even regular target practice. They found out the hard way they had a lot of problems with their tanks. The war provided the opportunity to see what went wrong in action.

The Tiger II had some initial problems with seals and gaskets, which the field mechanics unfamiliar with the new technology initially had problems fixing, but it proved fairly reliable. The reputation for unreliability comes from the Russians capaturing a few and having problems of their own with tanks that were already in need of service. Both the Tiger I and II are considered overengineered and to be using materials too expensive for the job, the II was considered amazingly manueverable for the size. That 88mm antiaircraft gun that Rommel used for tank battles in Africa proved to be one hell of a tank gun.
 
The Russian T34 was a solid , reliable , and importantly... quick and easy to produce , tank.
The Russians massively outnumbered the Germans in tanks and troops.
Germany's tanks biggest problem was the dry dusty Russian Tundra and huge distances they had to travel. The Tigers did not have the correct desert spec dust filters for the engine intakes and consequently many destroyed their motors before they got into battle.
Apart from tanks , Russia had a highly "motivated" force of front line troops !.. thanks to their use of "blocking units" behind their own front line, to force the front line troops to keep moving forward ...marching into mine fields and German machine gun units.
..and to shoot any of their own troops who refused to keep moving forward.
 
A rarely told story is the secret Soviet tank development school in Kazan, started by the Germans in 1929. The Treaty of Versailles (France 1918?) forbid Germany from developing tanks. The Germans and Soviets were distrustful of each other, but a secret treaty was negotiated by the German genius, General Hans von Seekt. The Germans (notably Heinz Guderian) developed new tank designs and tactics in private (hidden from the French and British inspectors). What did the Soviets get out of the deal? Promises from the Germans (that the Germans never intended to honor, but the Soviets knew that). What the Soviets ACTUALLY got was...a front row seat to watch the cutting edge modern tank designs and tactics evolving.

After the Germans left in 1933, the Soviets used that info between 1933 and 1939 to develop the T-34. A very simple, but very rugged tank that was the equal to the famous mid-sized Panzer IV's. The Soviet philosophy was to stick to one basic design, and make as many as possible...while keeping their mere existence a highly classified secret from everyone. Workers came into Kazan, but they never LEFT...if they died, they were buried there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kama_tank_school
_____________________________________________

Another story is that there were only two bridges leading into Russia that would support the weight of a Tiger. The very first move in "Operation Barbarossa" (Red Beard, the nickname of a German Emperor from centuries before who had conquered Russia), was for German Kommandos to take those two bridges at the same time, by a group of Kommandos acting like captured prisoners being walked across the bridge by more Kommados dressed as Soviet soldiers. These two bridges had been salted with explosives for this exact reason. If the Soviet bridge guards had not been killed by the Germans, they would have been killed by Stalins order for their failure to follow orders, and being fooled.
_____________________________________________

You'd think after reading the specs of the Tiger (and Konigs-Tiger) that the Generals would want only them, but...they got horrible fuel mileage. Not only that, but they were very expensive and resource-hungry to make. There were two occasions when Rommels tank forces could have been taken by the Allied forces simply showing up, because...he was out of fuel. The time and cost of building turretted tanks and the pressing need for a larger gun to face the T-34 led them to make the JagdPanzers. A tank with no turret, which had to be turned to face the target. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdpanther
_____________________________________________

Who invented the new "blitzkreig" tactics? A British officer named Boney Fuller. His strategy proposal papers were ignored by the Allied armies, and carefully considered by...Heinz Guderian. Who'd a thunk it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._F._C._Fuller
_____________________________________________

The US started to develop a "Tank Killer" when they ran up against the Panzers, the M-36 Jackson. This is why the M4 Sherman got its ass kicked. It was envisioned as an infantry support weapon to subdue villages. The Panzers traveled in wolf packs, often with their unit commander in a Tiger. Once the M-36 Jacksons arrived late in the war, the Germans stubbornly avoided them (those bastards!) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M36_tank_destroyer
_____________________________________________

The British had been taking the M4's loaned to them by the US and up-gunning them, re-naming them the "Firefly". It was Major George Brighty who began up-gunning the newly arriving Shermans AGAINST ORDERS!. The bigger gun made exiting the Firefly very difficult. The Americans could have done this, but...it wasn't their idea, so it was wrong (obviously). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Firefly

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Concerning E-bikes:

I don't see the Crystalyte 5X series surviving, the Cromotor and Crown have longer spokes, and if you don't mind shorter spokes, the Cromotor/Crown can fit in smaller rims. If you need an extreme amount of power, a left-side-drive system like Lukes Deathbike is much better than a 540X/530X.

Direct drive hubs continue to be the cheapest option, so they will survive in some form simply because of their price.

Geared hubs are a great all-around solution for 80% of new E-bikers. The MAC/eZee/BMC can take 1500W before any cooling mods, and there's a dozen smaller and affordable geared hubs around.

Non-hubs that give the motor some gears (for street and off-road) are the big story for 2014, but they are more complex and expensive, and require occasional shifting. Most customers are happy with a one-speed so they actually have a moped (see MAC 10T @48V). Unless you run off-road or have super-steep hills on your streets, mid drives might end up being only half of new sales by 2015.
 
The Russian's military capabilities have been historically terrible. They only survived the German onslaught because Hitler was fighting everyone at once. Russia lost between 22 and 28 million people during WW2 up to four times as many as the Germans.

Add the Crimean and Soviet-Japanese wars together with the Mongol invasion and the failed Swedish invasion and you get the sense that Russia doesn't have the greatest warmongering credentials. In conventional warfare they would lose against the EU nations never-mind, the US. Nuclear weapons though is a different story.

I can't see mid-drives trumping hub-motors in the long term. Simplicity is what makes hub-motors so attractive. Batteries will continue to get both smaller and offer larger capacities.
 
Not all bike builds are getting heavier and more powerful.

I've moved from >100lbs and >70hp to a <40lbs roadbike with 300w. :)

The singular part that matters in your ebike experience is enjoying what you're doing. If people are enjoying having 10-15hp rather than 0.5hp, more power to them. If people are enjoying making the lightest weight silent ebikes they can, more power to them as well.

There is no 'right way' to skin the cat. All the matters is enjoying the experiences you have with whatever approach you take.
 
You last two didn't say anything about Russian tanks. If that hub motor is the T-34, it's easily taken out by a molotov cocktail. Wait a minute, I bet it WOULD BE! Probably couldn't survive that 37mm round that took out T-34's but no other tanks, too. The T-34 influenced the building of better tanks, but it was a weakest link itself.

The Continuation War was Finnland, not Sweden.

Germany was learning of mechanized warfare from Sir Basil Henry Liddell-Hart, who was mentored by Fuller. After the war the German survivors were saying 'Hart Hart Hart,' the British were responding 'No no no.' The British had never taken hart seriously. The actual lightning war part was from the Japanese, who overran German colonies in Asia in that manner in WWI. Historian Jay Luvaas was asked whether Rommel ever mentioned Liddell-Hart in his presence. "Oh yes, many times. He had a good opinion of his writings." Guderian is also known to have spoken often of Liddell-Hart, offering a paper by him to Hitler in their first meeting. Another paper Liddell-Hart wrote speculating on problems that would occur in the upcoming DDay invasions led the British to suspect he'd been leaked a copy of the invasion plans--Did he REALLY speculate with such incredible foresight for what they'd be planning?

Much of what the Germans learned was from their defeats in WWI. In addition to being overwhelmed by the Japanese, they'd watched their infantry in Europe panic at the mere sight of French tanks. Even though the antitank gun was winning these altercations with tanks. In WWII the roles were reversed, French antitank gunners panicked and ran from German tanks, even tanks with mere machine guns that couldn't hit the antitank guns before the antitank guns could hit them.
 
I agree with everyone, and wish to throw in my 2c to the discussion. :D

Me: Self-styled "E-bike mechanic" in Melb Australia, running Frankencycle Australia Pty Ltd e-bike n small EV workshop... see my signature, blah blah blah.

I am lucky to work on a huge range of builds, from granny-worthy street legal "commercial" builds, cheap chinese "one-offs", Home builds, bespoke builds and a couple of High powered monsters and Monster components.

I also get to work with a range of customers and types... I've got baby-boomer recumbent freaks, trying to squeeze the last watt hour out of anything handy, including the sweat from their socks, Hi-energy gen-exer Master level athletes wanting high speed low weight, and a wealth of owners looking for alternate transport options to pure human power or car or public transport.

AND, the guys that got me where I am at now, the mid to high powered freaks that want the most they can get with at least some form of reliability, building around high quality but heavy old school down Hill type frames or purpose built custom frames, running something robust motor-wise in the 2KW+ range, Good Brakes, good range, 50+km/h capable...tanks :D... Sweet when powered, absolute pigs to get home if the electric drive train fails :D

LFP put it as I'd like to say it
There is no 'right way' to skin the cat. All the matters is enjoying the experiences you have with whatever approach you take.

The majority of work I do is with Hub motors, geared or DD, I have SOME mid drive experience but in terms of having an informed opinion on "tankifying" based on mid-drives... I dont have one :D
The following opinions/info are from my own experience, doing what I do.

Lighter Builds

Recently I've been getting a lot of traction with lighter weight, road or cycle infrastructure oriented builds, based on geared minihubmotors, converting 700c Light road-bikes Top speed 60+ km/h, and quality 70's vintage road bikes I've also had some pretty good success with the same motors laced into 26" wheels in steel dual suspension frames set up as comfort style commuter cruisers.

To me though, these "lighter builds" are just a branch of the tree that is "e-vehicle".
I promote them as not for serious off roading and I even do not recommended for a quick bit of bush bashing, just for longevity reasons... but they sure make for awesome commuters and charge about town bikes, and even long range touring machines.

Heavier builds and tankifying

For an SUV style purpose, some on road, some off road, robust as Jeep kinda thing, I am all for the heavier hardtail style MTB or Quality Dual suspension MTB running a DD Hub... cohnis/magic Pie/9c/... 1 to 5 kw range.

Once you have such a robust frame and an equivalently robust motor and electrics, there are so many options to refine, be it for weight, comfort, range, power or reliability.

I personally beleive that power and the speed that comes with it in the multi-kilowatt level on an e-bike or small EV requires significant upgrade to components such as frame brakes and suspension (including wheels and tyres). This upgrade often comes with weight and tank-like characteristics. I beleive in most cases tankiness is the easiest and perhaps best way to control the power without breaking the bike.

Not everyone upgrades their Robust MTB DD Hub driven Base Bike, though, and from the first post, there are still plenty of new versions of the 2017 example hitting the streets...

Joe
 
Germany stretched it"s limited potential too far east.
Talking about deja-vu.
DD-hubbie sure feels like a tank after the 1kg standard bicycle wheel. Serious penetrating capability :wink:
DD-hub is pretty unbeatable for the masses. Cheap, silent, powerful, low service need, easy to install. Looks good too.
 
Dauntless said:
The Continuation War was Finnland, not Sweden.

Who said anything about a battle during WWII?

The Russians unsuccessfully invaded Sweden in the Russo-Swedish War 150 years before the second world war began.
 
Imagine how much better off the world would be if people chose to spend the same efforts/resources on making clean renewable energy generation equipment and EV's rather than harm-causing devices.

Imagine how much good could happen in just a single year of resources being spent to cause harms being spent to do good.
 
As we speak, it looks like Russia is beginning another cycle. Economic recovery followed by expansion. With some hope, this expansion will include better civil rights. With some hope, this will be more economic war than gun war.

We sure had enough gun war in the last ten years. Indeed, just imagine if all that effort could have been spent better. Don't get me wrong, we had to react, but Iraq was an over react.

On the tanks, British and American ability to improvise, adapt and overcome made the weak Sherman survive the battle better. Tactics changes helped a lot, as well as sheer numbers and the redball express getting the gas there.
Tiger kills Sherman, so Sherman calls in a B 24 while hauling ass away. The tank war was very much a part of the air war. By a certain date, just try to get fuel to the german tank.

On the Russian side, the T34 did kick some ass. And again like the Sherman, they kept on making them faster and faster.

Re bikes. There are indeed many ways to skin a cat. One way is the progression motorcycles went through. Look at a really early Curtis, and you see the same thing. Starts out as a crazy fast bike, then over time you want wheels that can stand it, etc. But the bike never went away, and the moped size version of the motorcycle keeps coming back periodically. And the bike, rather than disappearing continues to refine to this day.

The result is just refinement of tools to do slightly different tasks better. My stable of bikes is not a bad example. I have a pretty light bike I like to pedal a lot, a tank that can cover a continent carrying camping gear or carry anything back from the store, and a few of the middle road basic ebikes. I use each one for different jobs, just like when working construction I had six kinds of saws, and six kinds of hammers.
 
What finally stopped the KoenigsTiger was the shift in the allied bombing strategy from industrial targets to transportation ones. This came to light when Truman sent bomb damage assessment teams to Germany post VE day. They found hundreds of factory fresh Koenig's on railcars in rail yards. They could not be deployed to battle because the tracks out of industrial centers no longer existed. So industrial capacity itself was not terribly hindered by incessant bombing.
Similar BDA teams were also sent to Japan, where they determined that Japanese surrender would have occurred in less than 6 months even prior to A-bombing population centers.
These BDA teams were made up of mostly academic types, accountants, physicists, and economists including a young John Kenneth Galbraith. They were chosen for their lack of knowledge about air power and military strategy. They published an oft cited but rarely read 3 volume set of their results circa 1951. (online @ Library of Congress) Results of their work gave rise to the Strategic Air Command and Gen. Curtis Lemay.
TO: LiveforPhysics:
Just think what could have been accomplished if NSF devoted 1/10 of the funding spent on war since 1970 on alternative energy. We would not be in such dire straights, Not to mention the needless loss of life that ensued over the same time period. It boggled the mind. Sometimes I think the Creator must weep between naps. **Soapbox Mode OFF**
 
The Mighty Volt said:
I do think we have started to get away from first principles. Not saying it is a bad thing, its just a radical departure.

Simply a need for speed. That's all pure and simple. As we get older we want to take our own collections of bikes to newer and higher levels. We build/buy/drive the beasts. People see and stop us then ask questions, and we explain starter kits to them and the likes. One day they are bound to join endless-sphere sparking a new generation of commuters and hopefully more beats bikes.

Ended up here while searching if anybody was using the T-Motor U11 for anything on these forums. But you can't search for anything with hyphens it seems.
 
All this trying to compare bikes and tanks.

And trying to spend money on peace instead of war. The country of Liberia was founded by the United States mirroring a similar British effort to send all the black slaves home. $600,000 was budgeted, with some 3.9 million slaves to be 'Acquired' (Though not all were actually slaves anymore at the time) and sent 'Home.' The Civil War cost $2.3 billion, plus another $1.2 billion in interest on war bonds, as well as nearly $4 billion in veterans benefits. Ya gotta admit, the country of Liberia has lasted longer than the Civil War did.

It was Sweden who invaded Russia, trying to take advantage of the fact that Russia was again at war with the Ottoman Empire. Russia WON both wars, fighting simultaneously. They'd beat the Turks previously, too.

"Getting away from first principles." Everything does get bigger in this world, eh? Look how big the MINI Cooper has gotten.
 
http://cdn.silodrome.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/SdKfz-2-but-better-known-as-the-Kettenkrad-Motorcycle-Tank-Kleines-Kettenkraftrad-HK-101.jpg

But you forget the lightest tank of all - the Kettenkrad. I cannot believe they haven't put these back into production.
 
D-lo said:
http://cdn.silodrome.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/SdKfz-2-but-better-known-as-the-Kettenkrad-Motorcycle-Tank-Kleines-Kettenkraftrad-HK-101.jpg

But you forget the lightest tank of all - the Kettenkrad. I cannot believe they haven't put these back into production.
Ahh! But not actually a "tank" is it ? ....just a small tracked vehicle built to cope with the terrible condition of warzone roads.....a bit like an early Snowmobile.
.....but yes, they could still be very appropriate in some areas ! :wink:
 
Back
Top