Post by Admin on Dec 22, 2019 1:06:03 GMT
The Sherman was a solid match for the vast majority of German tanks. This isn’t even going into the other advantages the Sherman enjoyed
Anything less than a Panzer 4 H model was noticeably outmatched by the Sherman tank in performance. Contrary to its reputation, the Sherman was a genuinely solid tank. Its 75 mm gun was more than capable of dealing with the vast majority of threats and it had comparable effective armor to that of a Tiger tank. The mobility was decidedly average however(a Tiger 1 was nearly as fast despite weighing nearly twice as much), although it wasn’t the worst.
The thing with tanks like the Tigers and the Panthers were that they were more extremities of tank design, that emphasised raw brute power over anything else. This meant that they heavily outmatched tanks like the Sherman but suffered badly in virtually every other department. This was where the Sherman really stood out compared to pretty much every single other tank in the war.
The Sherman was arguably the single most logistically friendly tank of the entire war. It was compact, cheap to build, easily shipped and transported, highly reliable and easy to quickly repair and maintain.
Repairs and maintenance on a Sherman tank. In this case the tracks.
In these regards, only really the Soviet T-34 came remotely close and even then fell short in several aspects (in its defense, a lot of it was intentional). The Sherman was a tank that offered incredibly solid and capable combat performance, whilst being the single most logistically friendly tank of the entire war, being churned out in frankly ridiculous numbers that allowed it to have a presence that few other tanks had.
That’s what the Sherman had going for it.
Anything less than a Panzer 4 H model was noticeably outmatched by the Sherman tank in performance. Contrary to its reputation, the Sherman was a genuinely solid tank. Its 75 mm gun was more than capable of dealing with the vast majority of threats and it had comparable effective armor to that of a Tiger tank. The mobility was decidedly average however(a Tiger 1 was nearly as fast despite weighing nearly twice as much), although it wasn’t the worst.
The thing with tanks like the Tigers and the Panthers were that they were more extremities of tank design, that emphasised raw brute power over anything else. This meant that they heavily outmatched tanks like the Sherman but suffered badly in virtually every other department. This was where the Sherman really stood out compared to pretty much every single other tank in the war.
The Sherman was arguably the single most logistically friendly tank of the entire war. It was compact, cheap to build, easily shipped and transported, highly reliable and easy to quickly repair and maintain.
In these regards, only really the Soviet T-34 came remotely close and even then fell short in several aspects (in its defense, a lot of it was intentional). The Sherman was a tank that offered incredibly solid and capable combat performance, whilst being the single most logistically friendly tank of the entire war, being churned out in frankly ridiculous numbers that allowed it to have a presence that few other tanks had.
That’s what the Sherman had going for it.
