Lucky13
Forum Mascot
How would the Sherman do against the T-34?
Sherman V T-34 V Panzer IV.....?
- Thread starter Lucky13
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Which model of Sherman vs which model of T-34? There were big differences.
Well it's a toughie as all three tanks were very reliable, and depending on the type they could all knock each other out at normal combat ranges.
But to sum up the plusses minuses of the tanks:
T-34/85
+ Very reliable
+ Good armour protection
+ Decent gun
+ Diesel engine
+ Simple cheap
- Poor optics
- Rough ride
- Exhausting to drive
- Poor consideration to crew comfort
Pzkpfw. IV Ausf.G
+ Very reliable
+ Excellent optics
+ Very good gun
+ Comfortable ride
+ Great crew comfort
+ Excellent radio communication equipment
- Complex expensive
- Gasoline engine
- Insufficient armour protection in certain areas
Sherman EasyEight
+ Very reliable
+ Very good gun
+ Rather simple cheap
+ Good radio communication equipment
- Exhausting to drive
- Insufficient armour protection in certain areas
- Gasoline engine
But to sum up the plusses minuses of the tanks:
T-34/85
+ Very reliable
+ Good armour protection
+ Decent gun
+ Diesel engine
+ Simple cheap
- Poor optics
- Rough ride
- Exhausting to drive
- Poor consideration to crew comfort
Pzkpfw. IV Ausf.G
+ Very reliable
+ Excellent optics
+ Very good gun
+ Comfortable ride
+ Great crew comfort
+ Excellent radio communication equipment
- Complex expensive
- Gasoline engine
- Insufficient armour protection in certain areas
Sherman EasyEight
+ Very reliable
+ Very good gun
+ Rather simple cheap
+ Good radio communication equipment
- Exhausting to drive
- Insufficient armour protection in certain areas
- Gasoline engine
parsifal
Colonel
Its going to depend on which mark of PzIV and T-34. Even the Shermans were developed over time.
To look at the Mk Iv for a second. It started life with a short 75mm gun and very thin armour. By the time it got to the G it had been altered almost beyond recognition.
Similar story with the T-34. The examples in 1941 were pretty hopeless, particulalry in the transmission. By the time the Pz MkIV (G) was out, the Russians were beginning to introduce the T-34/85, which in my view was superior to the Mk IV in gun power. Then of course you have the Firefly and the Shermans equipped with the 76mm gun.
If you wanted to assume the best models for each type, then I think it would be
1) T-34/85
2) Sherman Firefly
3) MkIV G
But you could just as easily turn that completely around, its that close
To look at the Mk Iv for a second. It started life with a short 75mm gun and very thin armour. By the time it got to the G it had been altered almost beyond recognition.
Similar story with the T-34. The examples in 1941 were pretty hopeless, particulalry in the transmission. By the time the Pz MkIV (G) was out, the Russians were beginning to introduce the T-34/85, which in my view was superior to the Mk IV in gun power. Then of course you have the Firefly and the Shermans equipped with the 76mm gun.
If you wanted to assume the best models for each type, then I think it would be
1) T-34/85
2) Sherman Firefly
3) MkIV G
But you could just as easily turn that completely around, its that close
In my opinion the T-34/85 was too crudely made to get first place, and the 85mm gun was a pretty huge dissappointment to put it mildly. And as for the Sherman FireFly, well, eventhough it features by far the most powerful gun of the three tanks, it's just too weakly armoured and features less mobility than the EasyEight.
The Sherman EasyEight should get first place IMO because it was cheap, simple and well made, plus it featured a very good gun and better armour protection than any other type of Sherman except for the Jumbo.
2nd place should go to the Pzkpfw.IV Ausf.G IMO, as it features by far the best optics crew comfort plus a great gun.
The Sherman EasyEight should get first place IMO because it was cheap, simple and well made, plus it featured a very good gun and better armour protection than any other type of Sherman except for the Jumbo.
2nd place should go to the Pzkpfw.IV Ausf.G IMO, as it features by far the best optics crew comfort plus a great gun.
- Thread starter
- #6
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
"Jumbo", Soren....?
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
I think Soren mean this bad boy. M4A3E2 Sherman Jumbo Assault Tank - History, Specifications and Picture - Military Tanks, Vehicles, and Artillery
- Thread starter
- #8
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Thanks VZ! I found this one as well. Never heard of this one either! 
M4A3E2 Jumbo Cobra King
M4A3E2 Jumbo Cobra King- Thread starter
- #10
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Thought that it was weird, all that upgraded armor and still a '76....the Cobra King looks the business though! How common was that one?
- Thread starter
- #12
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
So the CK is a Korea machine then Soren? Yup, the "Easy Eight" sure looks like it has a severe attitude problem....
Oki did abit of research to refresh my memory:
The Jumbo was armed with the std. 75mm L/33 gun (Not the 105mm howitzer), however when fitted with the longer 76mm gun it was renamed the King Cobra. Wether the King Cobra saw action in WW2 I don't know, but the Jumbo did.
So the King Cobra might be a Korean war machine, but it might also be a WW2 one
The Jumbo was armed with the std. 75mm L/33 gun (Not the 105mm howitzer), however when fitted with the longer 76mm gun it was renamed the King Cobra. Wether the King Cobra saw action in WW2 I don't know, but the Jumbo did.
So the King Cobra might be a Korean war machine, but it might also be a WW2 one
- Thread starter
- #14
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Thank you very much Soren! Any idea where to look, to find which divisions that was issued them?
seesul
Senior Master Sergeant
ditto.
- Thread starter
- #16
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
What about the Panzer IV/H? Wouldn't that be better than the G?
- Thread starter
- #18
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Was it still the same '75?
parsifal
Colonel
I pretty much agree with you on most of the above, but there is something missing, which we have discussed before. Its the issue of unit cost, which I believe crippled the Panzerwaffe in the finish.
A Mk IV cost 2.7 times that of a Sherman to produce. I dont know the cost of a T-34 (in terms that I can directly compare to the german equipment) but it was cheap, reasonably reliable (at least later) and its simplicity actually served the Russians very well, given their very limited levels of mechanical support and technical tradesmen to maintain a more sophisticated piece of machinery. Given that Soviet and German economic potential in 1938 was about the same (very roughly), and that the the Russians lost fully 35% of their economic power due to German advances in 1941-2, and yet the Soviet AFV output was more than double that of Germany (again just very roughly) and that a significant proportion of that production was the T-34, I dont think it unreasonable to suggest that the Mark IV was about twice as expensive as the T-34.
I know you are very critical of the 85mm, and there is some justification for that, but it was adequate to deal with the thin armour of the Mark IV. For that matter the MkIV s gun was more than adequate to deal with the T-34 as well. But I dont think the MkIV was worth 2.7 Shermans and neither do I believe it was worth more than two T-34/85s. The quality of the german crews manning might make a difference, but if the crews were of equal competence, I would rather have 2-3 Shermans for one MkIV, or I would rather have 2 T-34s for every one MkIV
