• We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days. For more updates please see here.

M4 Sherman VS. PzKpfw IV.

It also depends on the crew, surroundings, shell type etc. The Panzer iv was slightly better but there are too many variables to have a definate answer.
 
Ace said:
The Sherman was a death trap! It was under armoured and under gunned.

It was no worse in either respect then the Pz-IV, which was the Germans standard tank throughout the war. The M4A3 variant of the Sherman, which became the standard US tank in late 1944, fixed the armament problem, though the standard model Sherman's armour was never truely adequete.

The Sherman was so bad the Russians asked the allies not to send them anymore, and the ones they did receive were only used for training. They were not considered "good enough" for use on the eastern front.

Not true - the Russians used heaps of Shermans in combat, with many of their elite Guards Armored units using the tank at various times. The only western tanks the Russians recieved and didn't use in combat were the early model British 'cruiser' tanks.
 
Actually, IIRC the Russians specifically asked for only Diesel powered Shermans, as they didn't tend to burn as easily. Most Russians positively hated the Sherman. Before the wet ammo storage came along, they brewed up easily.

As for the 76mm never completely phasing out the 75mm, one reason is that HE ammo for the 76 didn't exist in the early stages-76's would have to be escorted by 75's in case of infantry.
 
That's not the only reason though, numbers where a problem also, there were still divisions full of 75mm shermans at the end of 1944 going into 1945 and they certainly weren't a rarity at the end of the war.
 
Back
Top Bottom