Sherman vs. T-34

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: Obsolete
I’m wondering if this was an over-exaggerated fear, or if there indeed was a large risk to that.

The weight of the Tiger made any kind of pivoting move in place dangerous to the treads due to the side torque such a move generated on the treads. The same can be said for any of the heavy tanks of the era.

Ground conditions would play a huge role in that though, soft ground would bury the treads, but be less likely to snap one. Hard packed earth, or a rock or tree trunk would have had a higher likelihood of breaking or just slipping a tread.

Jim

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

Sigh, I've already said regular ammo had no chance, so why would I quote that? My argument has always centered around HVAP ammo.

Yes yes. [:)] But 1) 76mm HVAP still lacked punch due to the small chamber size and due to the M1's poor performance, and 2) HVAP rounds were conspicuous by their general absence in the ETO.

Do you get my points now?. [:)]
Overrated, widely unavailable.

Cheers

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

The weight of the Tiger made any kind of pivoting move in place dangerous to the treads due to the side torque such a move generated on the treads. The same can be said for any of the heavy tanks of the era.

The same goes for Sherman tanks (and for quite some of the WW2 tanks) when crossing rough terrain. There was a silly incident where a group of tanks had to pass a certain part of the "Kall"-trail (during the Battle in the Huerthgen Forest) which wasn't exactly tank-friendly, at least 3 Sherman tanks threw their treads several times at the same spot, with these tanks holding up the entire reinforcement traffic meant to head for the battle zones immediately. I think it took a day or even 2, as the tankers refused (or did not even think about) to give up their tanks and ditch them. Engineers had to be brought forward to blow up some rocks so that the units could untangle the mess.
Tigers had a tendency to throw a tread on certain terrain. Experienced crews could fix or even exchange a tread within ~30 mins, though.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Decades after the other tanks being discussed here were TOTALLY obsolete, the Sherman was still an effective weapons platform:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M50_Super_Sherman

Whatever its shortcomings, it certainly proved to be more "upgradeable" than it's WW2-era competitors.

[fatruff3]

Personally i would choose the t-34 every time because it had superior armor and a diesel engine along with a bigger gun, in a fight the t-34 would win and even a Sherman Firefly would have some trouble because they were quite clumsy.