Jump to content


Price of ww2 tanks in todays money


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

Zmago5000 #1 Posted 04 December 2018 - 03:51 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 3191 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    11-24-2018
I know that the ww2  calculation was done with man hours and materials spent....but it would be interesting to know how much would Tiger 1 or T34 cost in todays money - eur? 

cro001 #2 Posted 04 December 2018 - 04:11 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30905 battles
  • 2,488
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

I did like quick google on the topic. Looked up Tiger 1 for example:

Unit cost was: ~250,800 RM

Put that in inflation calculator: Sadly, closest date I found was Jan 1949.

Today's approximate cost: ~450 000,00€

 

Numbers may be off because I can't be bothered to search proper inflation values and listed prices for tanks. But basically, find inflation calculator online and crunch some numbers.



Nethraniel #3 Posted 04 December 2018 - 04:18 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 13535 battles
  • 2,239
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012

Found this:

 
1$ in 1940 is worth 17-18$ nowadays. Tiger I is listed with 120.000$ ... That would be 2m$ today. 

Edited by Nethraniel, 04 December 2018 - 04:39 PM.


Geno1isme #4 Posted 04 December 2018 - 04:46 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 44661 battles
  • 8,754
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostZmago5000, on 04 December 2018 - 04:51 PM, said:

I know that the ww2  calculation was done with man hours and materials spent....but it would be interesting to know how much would Tiger 1 or T34 cost in todays money - eur? 

 

Such "calculations" are completely bogus.

The tanks would be produced in very different ways today (assuming mass production), and you can't scale cost of work and materials the same either.

 

You can make somewhat realistic inflation comparisons for timeframes of 10, 20, maybe up to 50 years as you stay in somewhat comparable environments. Beyond that it becomes very blurry. Esp. raw materials fluctuate greatly, the cost can vary by several orders of magnitude within a single decade. Like Oil was below $30 as well as above $100 just within the last five years, and metals aren't much more stable either.



250swb #5 Posted 04 December 2018 - 06:42 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 23165 battles
  • 5,326
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015
Do your calculations take into account slave labour or wartime wage cuts? 

SiliconSidewinder #6 Posted 04 December 2018 - 07:39 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 28044 battles
  • 5,329
  • Member since:
    09-16-2012

well assuming you would redesign the tank for modern production methods and mass produce it. It's safe to say it would be very, very cheap.

But.. it would also be terribly bad compared to anything you can get today.

a tiger, if memory serves correct, had to refuel every thirty kilometers just to pick one random stat.

and offcourse you would have to be still cheaper than your budged cold war tank that's still available for sale.

I seriously researched the thing for fun a while back and you could get soviet area tanks for some 50k Dollars, talking about T 62s here.

 

Edit: and with "get" I mean fully operational, (though not with operational gun for you and me :P)


Edited by SiliconSidewinder, 04 December 2018 - 07:41 PM.


Zmago5000 #7 Posted 05 December 2018 - 08:51 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 3191 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    11-24-2018

View PostNethraniel, on 04 December 2018 - 04:18 PM, said:

 
1$ in 1940 is worth 17-18$ nowadays. Tiger I is listed with 120.000$ ... That would be 2m$ today. 

 

I found this amount ( 2m $ ) rather too small. Since price of armoured 8x8 Boxer is today 5m$, Russian T90 5m$ , M1 abrams 9m$  Leopard around 15m$ and the most expensive AMX Leclerc 27 m$ (aprox. figures). 

250swb #8 Posted 05 December 2018 - 09:25 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 23165 battles
  • 5,326
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015

I found this for you on Wikipedia :facepalm:

 

A T-34-85 initially cost about 30 percent more to produce than a Model 1943, at 164,000 rubles; by 1945 this had been reduced to 142,000 rubles.[105] During the course of the World War II, the cost of a T-34 tank was reduced by almost half, from 270,000 rubles in 1941,

 

and which highlights an important principle of manufacturing, the more things you make the cheaper they get. The Germans made very few Tiger 1's compared with the Russian T-34, so all the development and tooling costs would be shared among only a few tanks. On the other hand they made thousands of T-34's so tooling costs became insignificant in the final cost of the tank. Unless you factor these in you are going to get a distorted picture and not the true costs of building a tank.

 

By way of comparison Wiki says the Tiger cost 250,800 Reichsmark to build and that is over twice the amount for a Pz.IV and four times more than a Stug III. The Tiger II cost over 800,000 Reichsmark which was equivalent to $300,000 in 1945 and adjusted for inflation that is $4,154,898 today so you do the sums for the Tiger 1 because I'm bored with looking up things on Wikipedia for you.


Edited by 250swb, 05 December 2018 - 09:45 AM.


Laatikkomafia #9 Posted 05 December 2018 - 12:06 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 22473 battles
  • 4,574
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010

View PostGeno1isme, on 04 December 2018 - 05:46 PM, said:

 

Such "calculations" are completely bogus.

The tanks would be produced in very different ways today (assuming mass production), and you can't scale cost of work and materials the same either.

 

You can make somewhat realistic inflation comparisons for timeframes of 10, 20, maybe up to 50 years as you stay in somewhat comparable environments. Beyond that it becomes very blurry. Esp. raw materials fluctuate greatly, the cost can vary by several orders of magnitude within a single decade. Like Oil was below $30 as well as above $100 just within the last five years, and metals aren't much more stable either.

 

Emmm.. What?

 

It isn't about manufacturing methods, but the prices they had. We aren't comparing the price of making a Tiger in the 40's and in the 21st century - we are simply converting the cost to today's money, to better understand the scale of the war.



Zmago5000 #10 Posted 05 December 2018 - 01:40 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 3191 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    11-24-2018
More i play Tiger and research it on history sites, more I found it dificult to understand its 90 deg armor??? Why didnt they use angled -sloped armor on it??

Edited by Zmago5000, 05 December 2018 - 01:55 PM.


vuque #11 Posted 05 December 2018 - 03:20 PM

    Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 17899 battles
  • 3,063
  • [YOQ] YOQ
  • Member since:
    08-05-2010

View PostZmago5000, on 05 December 2018 - 01:40 PM, said:

More i play Tiger and research it on history sites, more I found it dificult to understand its 90 deg armor??? Why didnt they use angled -sloped armor on it??

 

- First of all German production line at that time was designed to produce boxy tanks instead of the sloped ones. 

- They knew that sloped armor provides better protection but at that time, they didn't feel the need to switch their production lines to produce sloped armor tanks due to the high cost of that conversion of the production line. They simply said, ah 100mm of frontal armor is enough for anything at that time.

- On top of everything, sloped armor brings ergonomic problems such as the less space inside the tank and that was a real concern for the Germans at that time because they wanted to have more space inside the tank for the radio operator, extra ammo etc.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users