The T-34 tank

Ju-Ju

Just Hatched
Registered Member
As I understand it, the final result was Soviets 1, Germany...0. And a major contributing factor to this was the... T-34, in all it's various guises & it's close sister, the T-44.
 

montyp165

Junior Member
The Shermans were well regarded by the Soviet crews that used them, more so than the American crews. The Fireflies had they been used by the Americans would have changed their minds on the Sherman's effectiveness. The biggest advantages of the T-34 compared to the M4 was lower ground pressure from wider treads, better armor sloping and lower profile.
 

wdl1976

New Member
The Shermans were well regarded by the Soviet crews that used them, more so than the American crews. The Fireflies had they been used by the Americans would have changed their minds on the Sherman's effectiveness. The biggest advantages of the T-34 compared to the M4 was lower ground pressure from wider treads, better armor sloping and lower profile.

The only reason why the Soviet appreciated the Sherman because it is more comfortable and roomy.

In regards to fighting capabilities, comparing Pz IV, T34 and M4 (same class tanks) M4 is the last.
 

batskcab

New Member
The Germans were defeated by their own over engineering and complexity. They lost as many tanks from mechanical failure as they did with actual combat. In one of those programs, they were showing a Panther tank being restored. The restorers were amazed that many of the parts were of amazing strength and quality. The problem is, they were meant to last for months and years, when the average lifespan for a tank that time was probably in weeks.

imho, i belive hitler did not switch germany to maxium war production rates which might double or tripple weapons production, which lead to low numbers more so than factories being able to churn them out. ofcource many things such as politics and ecnonomy benefit more from having fewer tanks produced. anyhow, the german tank battalions will always check and maintain their tanks throughly for 1 hour in the assembly area before combat, which will ensure minimum mechnical problems arising in combat. complex tanks does more efficently if they are given proper care, but its achillies heel is ofcource if they're not given the chance to be properly maintained.

T34 actually has the BEST overall performance of any other medium tank in the war, in addition to that, it was easy to produce. it however did lack penetration power of german heavy tanks later in the war, even the 85 model. however it is less strategically relavent since allies have air superiority.
 

pendragon

Junior Member
Sorry guys ... hate to interrupt your western superior thinking but western tanks were accepted only as a stopgap until enough Russien made material was available. British Matilda's were slow and undergunned, Valentines and cruisertanks were fast bur underarmoured en undergunned, and American tanks, Lee's and Shermans, had the awkward property of bursting into flames when hit, killing all the crew; Sherman was nicknamed "a grave for five brothers".
Once enough T34's became available, the British and American lend-lease tanks were rerouted to training and third rate units! So having all that supposedly superior western technology at their hands and not copying it, stems from bad (DEADLY) experience with it in the field; unreliable extensive need for specialised servicing. Two things you can do without when facing an enemy!
On the other hand, the jeeps and trucks were in high regard, specially the White scout car and the US halftrack were a great improvement for soldiers used to ride into battle on top of a tank!
And Yes you are right to say we are being brainwashed by our governments and their subsidised (not so)free press.
Only in searching deeper and further than the first book or article you my catch a glare of the truth.
 

Soviet General

New Member
The only reason why the Soviet appreciated the Sherman because it is more comfortable and roomy.

In regards to fighting capabilities, comparing Pz IV, T34 and M4 (same class tanks) M4 is the last.

As any Soviet made armor less thought was spent on the crew.:coffee:
 

Costas 240GD

Junior Member
In regards to fighting capabilities, comparing Pz IV, T34 and M4 (same class tanks) M4 is the last.
I'd say that the PzIV and the M4 were fairly evenly matched, the M4 (75mm) clearly being superior to earlier Pz IVs (up to about Ausf F1 - the F2 matching the M4's firepower) and the 76mm Shermans about were as good as the Pz IV Ausf H-J in terms of firepower, and equal or superior in armor protection. Of course the M4A3, especially the HVSS models were superior in mobility to the Pz IV.
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
My impression was that the PZ Mk IVs from F1 and above were superior in range and accuracy over the Shermans thanks to the longer guns.
 

Costas 240GD

Junior Member
The F1 still had the "stump" (Short 75mm KwK L/24). The F2 restored the balance with the L/43 KwK, and the G-H-J with the L/48 KwK were even better. But the 76mm M1A1/A2 gun on the Sherman brought it on par, especially when firing HVAP ammunition.
 

Soviet General

New Member
The F1 still had the "stump" (Short 75mm KwK L/24). The F2 restored the balance with the L/43 KwK, and the G-H-J with the L/48 KwK were even better. But the 76mm M1A1/A2 gun on the Sherman brought it on par, especially when firing HVAP ammunition.

True about the F2 change in balance made it better and the M1A1/A2 HVAP ammunition brought it on par, but the Sherman 76mm gun was big but lack when it came to vilocity or big punch that it need to be to a 100 yards to be afected against better German armor like the Panzer V and so on. The Americans gamble on number and it worked since the Germans were more on making realy good things but not much on numbers and were overwelhm. Later on when the Americans were assultting Achen on the German border the new Heavy Pershin was in action.:coffee:
 
Top