User blog comment:ProudAmerican1776/14 Years.../@comment-25584152-20150911191204/@comment-27822411-20150912151155

Hmm...well, I think that Yamato and Montana are at least equal to each other. Montana has the gun advantage with more guns of similar penetration. But Yamato has the better maximum range and slight better armour, as well as an insane turning circle. Both have roughly the same speed. And I assume he is not including radar in his comparison, which to him, and other ship comparers, would give Montana an unfair advantage.

Bismarck was based roughly around the WWI era Baden class, and his armouring scheme was not the best for her size. At 50000 tonnes, he had roughly 13 inches of belt armour. By comparison, the KGV class at 38000 tonnes had 15 inches of belt armour. Coup with not so good deck protection, poorly placed steering gear, triple screws instead of quadriple screws and the mix caliber secondary armament, it is kinda clear why he would think Bismarck was poorly design.

That being said, Bismarck had great water compartmenisation, like all German capital ship designs of WW1, and he did take a lot of damage in his last battle, though granted the 16inch guns were not really much superior to the 15 inches, and the 14 inches were plagued with problems. In the end, Bismarck was either sunk through scuttling, or taking a lot of torpedoes. Either way, his armouring is not the best, but at least it worked.