Was there a good "british" British tank in WW2?

[gyrene81]

My own propaganda?

Ok then, in what way was the T-34 superior to the M4? Let's see if you have the brain power to back up your opinions with facts.

Main gun...armor configuration...armor thickness...speed...range...b attlefield profile...survivablility.

Any other questions?

[Die Hard]

Yes. Those are just your opinions, not facts. Give me the relevant armor statistics; the thickness and angle. Penetration data on the gun. Come on, you can do it.

[Die Hard]

Thought so... Let me provide the facts then.


T-34/76 Model 1943 (Kursk)

Speed off road: 24 mph
Range off road: 136 miles


Armor
Front hull: 45 mm @ 30° (theoretical 90 mm)
Front turret: 70 mm round
Gun mantlet: 40 mm @ 30-90°

76.2 mm F34 L42.5 gun, penetration against armor plate at 30°
BR-350(A) APHE at 500 yards: 69 mm



M4 Sherman (1943)

Speed off road: 25 mph
Range off road: 130 miles

Armor
Front hull: 51 mm @ 34° (theoretical 91 mm)
Front turret: 76 mm @ 60°
Gun mantlet: 89 mm @ 90°

75 mm Gun M3 L40 penetration, against armor plate at 30°
M72 AP at 500 yards: 76 mm


It’s the same when you compare the late 1944 T-34/85 and M4A3(76)W HVSS Sherman; they are virtually identical in performance.

[Karnak]

Die Hard is essentially correct.  The T-34/76 is just as weak, save speed, as the M-4 (75mm) against 1944 German armor and both would have been just as much of a shock to the Panzer III and Panzer IV D equipped Germans in 1941, but only one of them got to be there.  I do think the T-34/85 is better than any US gunned M-4, though clearly inferior to the M-26 Pershing and not so much better than the M-4E8 that better tactics couldn't compensate.  The Firefly VC is superior to any T-34 simply due to the gun.

It should be noted that the T-34's ground PSI is much lower and it would be at a major advantage over the M-4 in muddy enviornments.


Another curiosity, people have commented on the Churchill's slow speed, but it was actually the prefered tank for attacking uphill in North Africa because it was the fastest when going uphill due to its gearing.

[Die Hard]

The Soviet 85 mm ZiS-S-53 is actually slightly inferior to the U.S. 76 mm Gun M1A1.

[10001212]

Also remember....T-34/76 had a two (2) man turret. MUCH MUCH MUCH less efficient than the Ronson's.  The Russ got it right with the 3man turret on the /85. /76 never had the radios of the allied an Herman tanks....another minus there. as to the merican 76mm...........they should (hindsight is 20/20 after all) have abandoned that piece of junk an adopted the Brit 17lbr. My opinion only on that last.

[A8HatTrick]

Everything I know about Tanks in WWII I learned from Sgt. Odball

Kelly: Well Oddball, what do you think?
Oddball: It's a wasted trip baby. Nobody said nothing about locking horns with no Tigers.
Big Joe: Hey look, you just keep them Tigers busy and we'll take care of the rest.
Oddball: The only way I got to keep them Tigers busy is to LET THEM SHOOT HOLES IN ME!
Crapgame: Hey, Oddball, this is your hour of glory. And you're chickening out!
Oddball: To a New Yorker like you, a hero is some type of weird sandwich, not some nut who takes on three Tigers.
Kelly: Nobody's asking you to be a hero.
Oddball: No? Then YOU sit up in that turret baby.
Kelly: No, because you're gonna be up there, baby, and I'll be right outside showing you which way to go.
Oddball: Yeah?
Kelly: Yeah.
Oddball: Crazy... I mean like, so many positive waves... maybe we can't lose, you're on!

[10001212]

Gotta LOVE "Kelly's Heros"!

[68Wooley]

Although just too late for WW2, the British Centurion was probably the best tank of the immediate post-war era.

[Nemisis]

T-34 was about equivelant to the sherman. Sherman had a 75mm gun while the T-34 had a 76mm gun (about even). Not sure about armor, probably in the same ballpark. Hell, probably on the same base if what you guys are saying is true.


Just let the thread DIE!!!!!!

[Die Hard]

Why?

[A8HatTrick]

Although just too late for WW2, the British Centurion was probably the best tank of the immediate post-war era.

IS2 (Russian), King Tiger, Pershing M-26 (US) are all contenders as well.

[FireDrgn]

Die Hard do you have comparisons on all the Tanks we have in game?...I would like to see the Velocity of the differant shells....

<S>.

[Die Hard]

I do, but there are good online sources too.

www.onwar.com  is a great site for quick armor statistics.

<S>

[Squire]

Agree completely.  There is simply no data that shows the T-34 series is much different at all to a Sherman series, and vice-versa. The T-34/76 is very close to the 1942-43 versions of the Sherman, and the later T-34/85 is very close to the 1944-5 versions of the Sherman (the 76mm armed ones). Despite some of the extremely nationalistic bias in some posts, that are not based in fact, but what country we "dont like".

You can quibble about a few mm or armor, or maybe the crew ergonomics and radios, but past that, there isnt much there. Both tanks had their strong points and weak points, which have been endlessly discussed and pointed out. Almost none of the differences ammounted to much on the real battlefield.