Only once they added the three-man turret with the 85mm gun. Before that it was average to slightly below average for it's time. It's just that the rest of Soviet armor was so much worse. But the early two-man turret was a pig to fight - having the TC be gunner is always a bad idea - and negated most of the advantages of the rest of the design.
Tanks post-2022: what now?
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
Thumpalumpacus
Colonel
Right, I should have specified that version, which hit a great balance of mobility, armor, and firepower.
Thumpalumpacus
Colonel
Sloped armor allowed for good protection without weighing it down. That allowed for good mobility, especially when combined with wide tracks and that 500hp aluminum-block diesel. Once the 85mm gun and 3-man turret came on, it carried a good gun that could be efficiently loaded and pointed. In short, it was a well-rounded tank.
Snautzer01
Marshal
- 46,292
- Mar 26, 2007
I see you added a bit . Now i see why you can think " best tank " take a look at
Thumpalumpacus
Colonel
Yeah, I didn't go into details my original opinion, but it really hits the trifecta.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I worked with a wheraboo many years ago. He asked me if I knew which was the best tank of WW II. Of course I answered T-34/85. He went ballistic. I'm not a good person.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
My reference to the T-34 was to piss someone off.
Jagdflieger
Senior Airman
- 580
- Mar 23, 2022
The T-34/76mm was a great tank too and overall better then the contemporary Panzer IV. You shouldn't just jump time-periods.
When the Russians fielded the T34/76 what did the Allies have? Valentines, Crusaders, Mathilda's, Grants. all inferior against Panzer IV or a T-34/76 if fielded in equal numbers.
Medium Tank M4 Sherman - Tank Encyclopedia
The M4 Sherman was the main Allied tank in WW2, mass-produced to an extent of 50,000 and used in countless conflicts through numerous decades.
tanks-encyclopedia.com
Tank Encyclopedia - The Online Tank Museum
All about the tactics, technologies, and evolution of the tank worldwide, from World War I to the Atomic and Digital Ages.
tanks-encyclopedia.com
Regards
Jagdflieger
No doubt you have caused some keyboard seeth in more than one location.
Snautzer01
Marshal
- 46,292
- Mar 26, 2007
sloped armour not ww2
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Before 1941, U.S. Army doctrine was to use tanks to support infantry.The T-34/76mm was a great tank too and overall better then the contemporary Panzer IV. You shouldn't just jump time-periods.
When the Russians fielded the T34/76 what did the Allies have? Valentines, Crusaders, Mathilda's, Grants. all inferior against Panzer IV or a T-34/76 if fielded in equal numbers.
Medium Tank M4 Sherman - Tank Encyclopedia
The M4 Sherman was the main Allied tank in WW2, mass-produced to an extent of 50,000 and used in countless conflicts through numerous decades.Tank Encyclopedia - The Online Tank Museum
All about the tactics, technologies, and evolution of the tank worldwide, from World War I to the Atomic and Digital Ages.
Regards
Jagdflieger
The M4 Sherman was also designed along those lines with the M10 designed to support the M4 if the encountered enemy armor.
The M3 Stuart was intended to be a form of "Cavalry", charging into enemy infantry ranks while the M3 Grant was to provide a form of "mobile artillery" to support infantry by knocking out enemy targets like pillboxes, machine gun nests and so on.
This philosophy changed quickly in the next few years, but this is where the U.S. was at in 1941/1942.
Admiral Beez
Major
The issue with the T-72 and similar is that the autoloading relies on the ammunition sitting in a turntable under the turret. There are smarter ways to do an autoloader that can protect the crew, like on France's Leclerc tank.
Hi,The T-34/76mm was a great tank too and overall better then the contemporary Panzer IV. You shouldn't just jump time-periods.
When the Russians fielded the T34/76 what did the Allies have? Valentines, Crusaders, Mathilda's, Grants. all inferior against Panzer IV or a T-34/76 if fielded in equal numbers.
Medium Tank M4 Sherman - Tank Encyclopedia
The M4 Sherman was the main Allied tank in WW2, mass-produced to an extent of 50,000 and used in countless conflicts through numerous decades.Tank Encyclopedia - The Online Tank Museum
All about the tactics, technologies, and evolution of the tank worldwide, from World War I to the Atomic and Digital Ages.
Regards
Jagdflieger
Interestingly enough, although I have always thought that the M3 Grant was an a fairly odd and ungainly beast I was actually surprised to find that for a period of time it actually was considered be some to be one of the better tanks in North Africa when it first arrived.
Specifically, accoring to Wikipedia the M3 first saw service with the British in North Africa in May 1942 and I read somewhere that the range of its 75mm gun came as a surprise to the Germans, and there is even a footnoted comment on its Wikipedia page ( that the author of the book "Panzer Commander" by a former German Army Colonel during the war (Hans von Luck) that he believed that the M3 was a better tank than the Panzer IV, prior to the F2 variant. Also according to the Panzerserra Bunker (Panzer IV Ausf F2 - Sd.Kfz. 161/1 - case report) site Rommel had only received 27 Aus F2 tanks by August 1942).
So, for a period of time at least I believe that the M3 may have held some advantage over the German tanks it was encountering in battle.
Pat
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
M-3 Grant/Lee tank is a favorite of mine. For all the wrong reasons. It was nice learning that, like the Buffalo, was better than most thought.
Unlike the P-GH.
Unlike the P-GH.
Jagdflieger
Senior Airman
- 580
- Mar 23, 2022
Taking the Africa-corps tank collection in numbers and Types into account - any Allied tank posed a danger to them - even a Valentine.
But in an equal number comparison I don't see a reason for a Panzer IV crew with the long 75mm cannon being intimidated by a Grant with a crew of 6-7 and a side mounted
75mm M2 gun. It was however most likely the best Western-Allied Tank in Africa.
IIRC once the Sherman came on in numbers the Grant's were immediately transferred to Australia and others deployed in South-East-Asia.
Regards
Jagdflieger
Last edited:
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The M3's main gun could traverse to the side, but the gun's "at rest" position was facing forward, like a StuG.
The advantage the M3 had, was that it had both the main gun and the 37mm upper turret (comparable to the PzKfw III armament) and it's crew may have been six, but the tank's weapon systems were fully manned, meaning all weapons could be active at the same time, instead of crewmen scrambling from one weapon to another during battle.
The advantage the M3 had, was that it had both the main gun and the 37mm upper turret (comparable to the PzKfw III armament) and it's crew may have been six, but the tank's weapon systems were fully manned, meaning all weapons could be active at the same time, instead of crewmen scrambling from one weapon to another during battle.
Admiral Beez
Major
It also helped that much of the opposition was operating the Italian M13/40 and the short barreled Pz.Kpfw. III. The M3 will have to work harder against the Pz.Kpfw. IV and especially the Pz.Kpfw. VI, but for the most part the M3 was the superlative high volume tank of North Africa, until the M4s arrived.
Hi,
I'm not trying to make the claim that the M3's were overall better tanks than the Panzer IVs, but rather the main point I was trying to show is that since the Panzer IV Auf F2's were not available in North Africa until later in 1942 (with only 27 having been delivered by August of that year), while the M3 Grants were in service and operational in North Africa from May of 1942 there was a period of time where the M3s were likely more powerful than any tank that the German's had available in North Africa for several months of that year, as appears to be borne out by the reference from the book by Hans von Luck.
As such, I am just trying to clarify that a statement along the lines that "Valentines, Crusaders, Mathilda's, Grants. all inferior against Panzer IV or a T-34/76 if fielded in equal numbers." is not necessarily 100% correct, as there was a discernable period of time during the battles in North Africa, where the Panzer IV was only available in its short barrel low velocity 75mm gun versions, while the M3 Grant was fielding its higher velocity 75mm gun and a 37mm gun as well.
Regards
Pat
PS. As for the M3's after the M4'sbecame available, I believe that they remained in service in North Africa for some time, with the similar M3 Lee also serving alongside the M4's in the US Army during Operation Torch (Nov 1942) and following battles in North Africa.
