Having an I <3 Shermans Day... -1 reply

Please wait...

emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#91 11 years ago

Saying the Panzer IV is better or worse than a Sherman is like saying a Ferrari is beter than a Porche.

Which model Ferrari and which model Porche?

In North Africa the Sherman was tall but the turret mounted 75mm gun model wa considered a better tank than anything the Germans were fielding save the Tiger I. The PzIV was the snub nose version and had very poor armor penetration. The PzIV-F2 reversed that and was a betetr tank than the Sherman 75mm and T-34/76 model 1941 and 1942.

The PzIV-G, H, and J long barrell cannon versions were better tank versus tank but the Sherman was better at infantry support due to its low velocity 75mm gun. Sherman and T-34 were also easier to maintain.

Later model PzIV's had spaced armor on front upper hull which was good at stripping the ballistic cap off the shell and made it much less effective at penetration. It didnt help that the Russians 76.2mm and US 75mm both had poor performing AP rounds til mid 1944.

The spaced armor on the front upper hull also limited the effectiveness of HEAT rounds. PzIV's achilles heel was its turret face.

Later model wet hull Shermans with the 76mm gun were every it as good as the "Lang Nasen" Pz4's. The E8 Shermans with the GAA V-8, new HVSS suspension, and the extra wide tracks were better than the PzIV models.

Now take a Sherman M4A3E2 "Jumbo" with a 76mm gun and the PzIV is deep trouble. Its 75mm gun is going to have very hard time penetrating the Jumbo anywhere on the front or front half of the vehicle and the Jumbo's turret is almost immune to penetrations from 75mm L/48 ammo.




Fuzzy Bunny

Luke, I am your mother.

50 XP

2nd May 2005

0 Uploads

6,274 Posts

0 Threads

#92 11 years ago
Meadow;3876768And to say the Sherman was equal to the Panzer IV is a rather Hollywoody/BF1942y thing to say.

Not when I'm driving it and am vaguely drunk and angry.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#93 11 years ago

It doesn't matter what tank you have.....put the right person in it and its a serious threat to ANY enemy tank/plane/infantry :).........I was having an I <3 daimlers day on WOLF one time, I was owning like every tank that dared to come past that ridge....




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#94 11 years ago

What I think will be funny is between North Africa and Normandy the most common Commonwealth tank was the Valentine with a 6lbr. It was decided the Cromwell should replace the Valentine as a front line tank due to its higher speed before Normandy so right before Normandy there was a rush to replace the Valentine units with Cromwells and get them up to operational speed in the Cromwell as it was felt to be a better tank.

What I think will be funny is to see Valentines in combat in Italy and Normandy (With Canadians) and see German tankers say "Its only a Valentine with a little 6lbr" right before the 6lbr rips them a new one.




Fuzzy Bunny

Luke, I am your mother.

50 XP

2nd May 2005

0 Uploads

6,274 Posts

0 Threads

#95 11 years ago

It's even funnier on Desert Rose when the Germans manage to thieve a Valentine, and the Allies bring up a second Valentine, and the two mate thumpingly for half an hour while rounds from all other enemy tanks just bounce off the melee without effect.




Natty Wallo

FH2 LevelDesigner

50 XP

16th December 2005

0 Uploads

1,652 Posts

0 Threads

#96 11 years ago
Fuzzy Bunny;3877437It's even funnier on Desert Rose when the Germans manage to thieve a Valentine, and the Allies bring up a second Valentine, and the two mate thumpingly for half an hour while rounds from all other enemy tanks just bounce off the melee without effect.

They can use the 88 or the B-25 or HurricaneMKII or Crusader or MatildaII or Churchill or 2Pounder or PIAT or mines or mine-carrier or Expacks or their brains?




jumjum

Write heavy; write hard.

50 XP

11th April 2005

0 Uploads

6,827 Posts

0 Threads

#97 11 years ago

Anlushac11;3877161...The PzIV-G, H, and J long barrell cannon versions were better tank versus tank but the Sherman was better at infantry support due to its low velocity 75mm gun. Sherman and T-34 were also easier to maintain.

Later model PzIV's had spaced armor on front upper hull which was good at stripping the ballistic cap off the shell and made it much less effective at penetration. It didnt help that the Russians 76.2mm and US 75mm both had poor performing AP rounds til mid 1944.

The spaced armor on the front upper hull also limited the effectiveness of HEAT rounds. PzIV's achilles heel was its turret face.

Later model wet hull Shermans with the 76mm gun were every it as good as the "Lang Nasen" Pz4's. The E8 Shermans with the GAA V-8, new HVSS suspension, and the extra wide tracks were better than the PzIV models.

Now take a Sherman M4A3E2 "Jumbo" with a 76mm gun and the PzIV is deep trouble. Its 75mm gun is going to have very hard time penetrating the Jumbo anywhere on the front or front half of the vehicle and the Jumbo's turret is almost immune to penetrations from 75mm L/48 ammo.

Which is exactly the way it plays out on FH Battle of the Bulge.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#98 11 years ago

Jumjum the sherman(105) in BotB is pure ownage compared to the m4a3e2.




Komrad_B

Score Monkey

45,850 XP

2nd September 2004

0 Uploads

4,500 Posts

0 Threads

#99 11 years ago
Cl0S3D;3878373Jumjum the sherman(105) in BotB is pure ownage compared to the m4a3e2.

Uh... No.

Sherman 105 has an howitzer as a weapon, but keeps the armor of a standard sherman. About the only advantage is that shells lob, I killed a Kingtiger from a hilltop once or twice because of this.

The Sherman Jumbo has *massive* armor, it will resist shells from a Panzer IV just about everywere, except the back, and will deflect them if they hit the front armor. The Jumbo also beats Tigers one on one, and is second only to the Kingtiger, Panther and Jagdpanther on the western front.




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#100 11 years ago

I think the Sherman 105mm does own quite a bit. I think alot of this has to do with its need to lob shells on target often means shells hit the thinner hull and roof armor where it can penetrate much more easily. Hit a Tiger II in the front armor and it will only scratch the paint. Hit a Tiger II on the roof and its good bye Tiger.