Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Sherman 76 and T34/85 perceptions versus reality

Discussion in 'Armor and Armored Fighting Vehicles' started by Walter_Sobchak, Feb 8, 2012.

  1. ickysdad

    ickysdad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    31
    Faint Praise can be expensive I paid $190.00 for mine abut 6 years ago and was lucky at the time to get it for that price. Hunnicutt's books are also expensive especially Firepower ,I bought my copy a couploe of years ago without dust cover,it still cost right at $100.00. However I'm serious about my book collection. LOL!!!!
     
  2. JBark

    JBark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    21
    Yes...thank God for libraries. I expected more from Faint Praise...like some damning, full of statistics, slam dunk on the issue of armored inferiority. It fell short though it gave a good deal of info in a good, readable form. What I see discussed on forums and in the books I read is that our armor was inferior and that irks me because I don't think it was. Smaller, yes. Thinner armor, that usually goes along with smaller. 40+ and 50+ ton tanks will generally have heavier armor than 20+ and 30+ ton tanks but that doesn't necessarily mean they are superior. I want to see these people that say our tanks were inferior show me where we suffered in casualties because of the tanks we had. Zaloga put it that tactics won the field in tank v tank combat, not technology.
     
  3. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Location:
    Michigan
    Really? Welll I think I am.
    I disagree. Indeed I haven't told a single lie here.
    I think my posting history rather demosntrates the opposite.
    Indeed it does. On the otherhand I've never claimed infalibility note I even admited I was wrong eralier in this thread when you provided clear evidence of it.
    Since there was no lie, at least on my part, this sentence is irrelevant.
    Critisism such as this are the last resort of one whose point has not bee made. Indeed I used not just a dictionary but two of them and proved you wrong.
    No. Why would I. You didn't say that.
    Again with the insults.
    You really believe that? And you state I should learn to use a dictionary.
    insult - definition of insult by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
    Insult | Define Insult at Dictionary.com
    Definition for insult - Oxford Dictionaries Online (World English)
    insult - definition of insult by Macmillan Dictionary
    I'd say you've dished out penty of insults in this thread. Note ther is nothing about them being "just" although at least some are clearly not.

    However I'm through with this you simply aren't worth the time.
     
  4. JBark

    JBark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    21
    It is pretty obvious that we don't think too much of each other or what the other thinks so what shall I do with this? LOL.

    Walter Sobchak expressed what I took as disappointment in where we took this thread. I offereed him my apology and made an attempt to return the discussion toward its intended path. I see you did neither. I am not surprised.

    After three days and ignoring a remark by the opening poster that the thread had gone astray you composed your last thread, all with the desire to get in your last shot. It would seem I was worth the time. Typical of you.
     
  5. Walter_Sobchak

    Walter_Sobchak Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    11
    hmmm, some interesting book suggestions. Too bad my book buying budget is rather limited. I wish more of these books would be digitized and sold as PDFs for a reasonable price.
     
  6. JBark

    JBark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    21
    I know what you mean about budget. I don't buy expensive books but I probably should not be spending as much as I do. I got Faint Praise, The Business of Tanks and Rude Mechanicals from the library and will be using them for much more in the future. There is a lot of stuff online at the various military websites. The US Army has a number has websites that show many books and papers about the war and you never know where else you might find some good stuff. This site DTIC Online contains a boatload of papers and books you can download for free. Search using terms like blitzkrieg, WWII armor, etc., etc. and you will find many PDF's. Good stuff, I don't know when I will find time to read it all. Much of what is there are papers written by military officers working on degrees in military science so if nothing else the bibliographies of their papers are a goldmine.
     
  7. Fury 1991

    Fury 1991 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    45
    In Korea the M-4 performed well against the T-34. I do know that much.
     
  8. JBark

    JBark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    21
    If I recall correctly they came out with the upper hand but many will attribute this to a comparison of the training and ability of the crews. Essentuially history shows this is often the deciding factor.
     
  9. Walter_Sobchak

    Walter_Sobchak Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    11
    I suspect there also must have been confrontations between Egyptian t-34/85's and Israeli Shermans in the 1956 Suez war, but I am not sure if much can be gleaned from those fights in regards to the technical merits of the two vehicles due to differences in crew training and competence.
     
  10. JBark

    JBark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    21
    The guns (as well as engines I believe) on the Shermans would have been a bit different than what was seen in WWII as the Israelis had put on, IIRC, a French copy of the 75mm of the Panther. There may have been others as well...I'm surprised I am not remembering. The training level was extremely high in the Israeli Army and I don't think the Egyptians had a level which compared. I remember reading that General Tal emphasized first shot accuracy in his tankers.
     
  11. gtblackwell

    gtblackwell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,271
    Likes Received:
    676
    Location:
    Auburn, Alabama, US
    Please do not shoot me, pun intended, for using Wiki but here is a short summary of combat between the Israeli Super Sherman M 51 and the Egyptian T 34/85 in the Six Days War..


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Abu-Ageila_(1967)

    The M 51 must be the ultimate Sherman, a Cummings diesel V-8 and an Israeli modified (reduced caliber) French F 1 105mm main gun that in it's full form was mounted on the AMX 30. Amazing tank, the M 4 fought in wars from 1942 to 1973 ( Yom Kipur) and was help in reserve until about 1980. I guess the same can be said for the T 34 online a year sooner.
     
  12. Walter_Sobchak

    Walter_Sobchak Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    11
    According to Zaloga's Armour of the Middle East Wars 1948-78 the Israelis had a combination of shermans with the 76mm gun as well as M-50 "super shermans" with the French 75 mm. The Egyptians also had a version of the sherman with the french 75mm gun, although they achieved this by mounting the AMX 13 turret on the M4 hull. It was a rather odd looking vehicle File:M4A4-AMX-13-latrun-2.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  13. gtblackwell

    gtblackwell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,271
    Likes Received:
    676
    Location:
    Auburn, Alabama, US
    Walther, You are correct , the israelis indeed bought and were "lent" M 4's with the 76. They began to rebuild and modify them and produced a batch of 50 M 50's with the French 75mm that was derived from the Panther was installed . They had a Continental gasoline V-8. These tanks made it into the 56 war. They began switching to Cummings diesels with improved tracks and suspension. The next improvement appears to be the French Fi 105 mm in a new turret and it generally is known as the M 51 and fought in the 67 war and some in the 1973 war. Other than a quick look at Wiki I gleaned most of this contemporary forums, Abba Eben's book and articles, and a tank war fair book that escapes my fading memory. So my numbers are probably off a bit but fairly true. As with any development era nothing is lock step. I suspect the israelis fielded a mix of the above in dire times with many variations,. The M4 AMX 13 marriage is truly weird looking and was tested by the IDF and found wanting in armor.

    With the mish mash of tanks fielded by all the combatants, the israelis even field some T 34/85's and Joseph Stalin's !!! one can imagine what target acquisition must have been like in desert dust!! After the 73 war they had a hundred T 54-55's fully operational. Eben wrote that the israeli tankers did not like the cramped interior and preferred the roomiest of the M 48.60 in order to respond more rapidly, the first shot theory. Eben was not a miltary man but rather a Foreign minister who know, it seems, much about every thing. I would love to read Zaloga's Armour of the Middle East Wars but doubt it is in large print. I will certainly look. Thanks for the responce, I suspect we are stretching the 76/34/85 thread!!!! But facinating stuff.
     
  14. JBark

    JBark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    21
    I always get a kick out of that combination and the AMX13 by itself. Does it look like it could stop any AT fire bigger than a .50cal?
     
  15. JBark

    JBark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    21
    I'm too lazy, when did the Centurions come on board for the Israelis?
     
  16. Walter_Sobchak

    Walter_Sobchak Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    11
    The Centurion came on board after the 56 war but before the 67 war. From what I remember the centurion was initially unpopular with the Israeli tankers who did not have experience operating such a heavy and complex machine. However, after a few years the Centurion quickly became the preferred tank within the IDF, especially once the Israeli troops learned to fully maximize the power and accuracy of the British 105mm L7 cannon. With the adoption of the Continental AVDS1790 diesel powerpack the Centurion became the best tank in the region, proving itself decisively during the 73 war.
     

Share This Page