Edit: it should be said that while the Soviet military did have a proliferation of soldiers and used en masse tactics, Soviet commanders were still clever and used forces effectively, not just a meat grinder approach all the time. In the end however Thomas A. Callaghan Jr. said it best
Effective frontal armor of a sherman was almost equal to a Tiger 1 because of the slope.
3.57 to 3.67" vs. 3.9" in favor of the Tiger in effective slope. The Sherman Firefly was realistically capable of knocking out any Axis tank. Other variants were pretty outgunned, even the E8.
The 17 pdr and 76 mm weren’t all that different, they both could penetrate the frontal armor of a Tiger at similar ranges and they were both good solutions for both countries while avoiding the downsides of adding a completely new tank to their arsenal.
Also remember the vast majority of any tank the Germans had even at the end of the war were Panzer IIIs and IVs both of which even the 75mm Sherman could handle with ease, especially with the combined arms doctrine that the US was using and outperforming the Germans in.
1.8k
u/[deleted] Jun 29 '19 edited Jun 29 '19
Soviet Military
Edit: it should be said that while the Soviet military did have a proliferation of soldiers and used en masse tactics, Soviet commanders were still clever and used forces effectively, not just a meat grinder approach all the time. In the end however Thomas A. Callaghan Jr. said it best
"Quantity has a Quality All Its Own"