@ Dakota: Good call... you can tell by the larger, longer gun and the different shape of the turret, which help distinguish it from an M-10. Excellent video - thanks.
The M36 is an awesome, kick a$$ WW2 tank destroyer. Until the late M26 Pershing heavy tank introduction, the M36 was the only AFV that could take in the latest heavy German armor. I shy away from calling it the Jackson. It seems this was a post-war nickname. Also in 2021 honoring Confederate generals in no longer acceptable.
@@jeffreyyoung7824 - Not sure I follow you, Jeffrey.... are you referring to the shape of the M-10 or the M-36? The M-10 series were afflicted with counter-balance issues early in their development. It was discovered that the M-10's turret did not always revolve reliably upon command, especially upon slopes and uneven terrain. The problem was localized in part to improper turret weight distribution. Because of the dire need for the tank destroyers in TD units, rather than an immediate redesign, a series of "duck-bill" shaped counter-weights were retrofitted to remedy the problem of too much weight forward. These retrofit kits could also be installed in the field, by mechanics and other armor-support personnel. Steve Zaloga discusses these in his Osprey Military book on the M-10 TD. The M-36 Jackson, which came along later in the war, had a turret basket "bustle" which acted as a counterweight to the long and heavy 90mm gun, and also provided storage for an additional 10-11 rounds of ammunition, as well as providing a surface upon which a pedestal-mounted MG could sit.
I wish I had prior knowledge of this event. I would have been there. My Step-Father was a driver during the WWII and was at rhe battle of the Bulge. I was a M1 tanker when I was in the army.
Cool video Dakota Wood! The Stuart tank might also have a Guiberson diesel in it. It was a radial diesel engine option that was available in the M3 tanks. The twin Cadillac engines came later with the M5's. The dust blown up by the M36 is from the exhaust being pointed downward. Exhaust pipes are like megaphones. If you point them up, it like cupping your hands around your mouth and yelling, "HERE I COME!". By pointing the exhaust downward, its actually harder to hear the tank coming from a distance. The exhaust note is not only covered by the body of the tank, the audio signal is also reflected off the ground, taking the hard edge off the initial "Pop" of the exhaust note, giving it an overall mellower sound. That's why they do that with some cars, too.
Thanks for the info. Raises an interesting question. What is the greater risk..the enemy seeing you coming or hearing you coming? Depends on the time of day or night I suppose is one factor.
Yes, the M5 Stuarts that were sold to countries after WW-II had some diesel conversions done. There was one from Guatemala being auctioned of in the US with a diesel. OMG, how loud it sounded.
The dust cloud on the M36 wasn't from the exhaust, while the exhaust does exit out in the same area, the radial engines are air cooled and the ducts for the air that the engine has pulled through are pointed a little down causing the dust cloud, and yes, they did kick up a lot of dust back then. Iirc, they made a couple of mods to adjust the air blasts further up to keep that from happening as bad.
M36 had the GAA engine, which was water cooled but of course all water cooled engines are ultimately air cooled by air pushed thru the radiator. That's what was exiting out of the back of the M36.
@@vitis65 unlike most of the worthless bags of meat in the world he did very well after the war. even helped kids and did work developing the CAP program
55 mph top speed, too. Fastest tank of the war. Doesn't sound too fast, but in a time when most tanks were all done at 25-35 mph, it was literally a "rocket ship"....and the long barreled 76mm high powered gun gave it an extremely hard punch.
Nice to see. You guys with the Allies liberated Europe and my homecountry the Netherlands. for me, i believe the Sherman Firefly tank with the Ordnance QF 17-pounder 76,2mm Lang 55 main gun was the best version of all Shermans. Unfortunately the German tanks were better armoured and had better main guns.
I was watching some videos of M10s filmed during the war and they did, indeed, kick up a giant dust cloud wherever they went. (The M36 used the same hull)
That’s WW2 Armor orginazation they have a Canadian m4 grizzly M18 hellcat M36 Jackson M4 high speed tractor and a another high speed tractor converted into the m3 Stuart I believe they also have a m10 td
That is actually not an M-5 stuart. It is the chassis of an M-5 high speed arty tractor with a faux upper hull and turret. The suspension is a dead give away. The very front of the hull 'nose' is not right either. It might be cummins powered after all.
Seems crazy that they would use radial engines especially if you have to crank it 50 times every now and then to not have smoke when you are trying to be stealth, perhaps they had a lot of power and were lightweight and compact? I'll have to look that up.
The M-36 Jackson was the only American armored fighting vehicle with the best antitank gun. The 90mm derived from an antiaircraft gun. At the very end of the war in Europe a few 90mm tanks made it. Too little, too late
Hybrid .... same 90mm gun in both vehicles. Different results... The M36 TD was in combat by Oct of 1944. In time for the Battle of the Bulge. The M36 was a reliable vehicle. Over 1,400 were available before Germany surrendered. The M26 Pershing first combat was 25 February. The M26 had a serious propensity to breakdowns. Broken down Tanks don’t contribute to combat. When the M36 was send to Korea it broke down so often it was quickly replaced by the reliable M4E8 Sherman.
But Hellcat was far deadlier. And, if war lasted longer, super hellcat was prepared (but war ended and never saw the light of the day. Upgrades were 90mm turret, shooting stabilizer so it can shoot while driving, and new Ford motor that was supposed to replace Continental. More horsepower would give him speed of 60 mph). Hellcat was master of shoot and run, had torsion suspension with superior manouverability over any of those there, and speed of 55 mph. He also always used armor piercing rounds which made him extreme deadly up to 2.5km, which was for those times, amazing numbers.
The M18 looks great, but the engine issue is nasty. I wonder if the rotary engine could be replaced with a Diesel engine? I prefer the Ford GAA in the Sherman's as well.
Okay, lesson time. M10, M18, and M36 were not tanks. They were tank destroyers which had far less armor than a tank and an open top turret. This was to allow then to have greater speed and maneuverability. Example; M18 Hellcat had a maximum of 1/2 inch of armor plate and could do over 50 mph on the road. Only the late model M36, the M36b2 had armor as it was a M36 turret mounted on a M4A3 Sherman hull.
I hate to say this. The M-5 "Buddy" did not start it's life as a tank. It was a M-5 prime mover artillery tractor that was remade into a show tank. But it looks good.
M10s fume extractors are just the as on the Sherman's there on swing arm brackets can be positioned up in the rear hill housing or down like that to cause a smoke screen
Aren't both the M18 and M36 tank destroyers? Post Normandy almost all tanks from the US were Shermans unless they kept a few Stuarts/Lees. Very late in the war a handful of Pershings were sent to the front.
if you have seen any footage of the war in Ukraine... the russian tanks have diesel stack billowing out in the air... pretty distinctive from the air,,, ( we have heat signatures now but... I digress)that is why we experimented with the exhaust in a downward fashion. the bad was that /// they weren't good at fording... the exhaust would get trapped and stall out the tank mid river
Yes the STUARTS A diesel . Defo A classic Radial engine has a PLOP PLOP BRRRRMMMMOLOP BANG . Not a steady purring Smooth sound Look for the PLOP LOP POP POP IN A MASSIVE EMPTY PIPE SOUND Then full throttle They still sound uneven ..
Hate to burst your bubble but that is not a M10 TD. I don’t remember the number designation but it’s some type of upgrade... the M10 had a totally different turret and the gun did not have a barrel as long as this vehicle has, as well as the gun mantle. This mantle looks like the late war Sherman jumbo style mantle.
Lovely . Lol people are like look at all the smoke . Well imagine a cold start on full choke . In any vehicle it's always bit smokey So when you got ! 13 cyl radial it's Gona need CHOKE BIG TIME . Ok . ..
Oil smell because radials use a lot of oil. Try working on the radial in an M3, Royal pain in the ass. I have. M-4s used multiple types of engines. That Jackson was being driven harder than most
@JohnTuttle - please educate yourself as you are repeating myths. The M4 was not a death trap. Its crews had a higher survival rate than Panther and Tiger crews. American armor rarely encountered Tigers. The Tiger was likely to break down or run our of gas anyway. Again educate yourself.
@@donb1183 lol you're an idiot. M4 no armor and pea shooting gun. Panther/Tiger with legendary 88mm. Yes, crew mortality is high, when you are outnumbered 20:1...that doesn't make the M4 a good tank. Just mass produced.
The Sherman's weren't intended to go face-to-face with those tanks, anyways. They got delegates to infantry-tanks unless a situation necessitated anti-armor. The US had much better guns than the 75mm for anti-armor purposes.
Because the Sherman could be, and was produced, shipped, and distrubuted in large numbers, it was the better tank. A hundred Shermans on the battlefield are way better than zero Tigers. Brits/US could field 5,000 Shermans, from Denmark to the Mediterranean. Against 500 Tigers and Panthers. Shermans could literally drive around them by tens of miles away. As German lost experienced tank crews, and experienced mechanics, Tigers/Panthers potential abilities were less and less able to be used, or even show up on the battlefield. A Sherman were able to do 4,000 combat road miles. Fire 4,000 rounds. Tigers were lucky to live 1/10th the miles or rounds. Shermans provided infantry support 1,000 times more than Tigers. Allied infantry had way better chance with plentiful Shermans.
I now realize the tank I called an M10 was a M36 Jackson. Sorry for the misinformation.
Great video - thanks.
@ Dakota: Good call... you can tell by the larger, longer gun and the different shape of the turret, which help distinguish it from an M-10. Excellent video - thanks.
@@GeorgiaBoy1961 Also the triangular shaped rear turret bustle is a dead give away.
The M36 is an awesome, kick a$$ WW2 tank destroyer. Until the late M26 Pershing heavy tank introduction, the M36 was the only AFV that could take in the latest heavy German armor. I shy away from calling it the Jackson. It seems this was a post-war nickname. Also in 2021 honoring Confederate generals in no longer acceptable.
@@jeffreyyoung7824 - Not sure I follow you, Jeffrey.... are you referring to the shape of the M-10 or the M-36? The M-10 series were afflicted with counter-balance issues early in their development. It was discovered that the M-10's turret did not always revolve reliably upon command, especially upon slopes and uneven terrain. The problem was localized in part to improper turret weight distribution. Because of the dire need for the tank destroyers in TD units, rather than an immediate redesign, a series of "duck-bill" shaped counter-weights were retrofitted to remedy the problem of too much weight forward. These retrofit kits could also be installed in the field, by mechanics and other armor-support personnel. Steve Zaloga discusses these in his Osprey Military book on the M-10 TD. The M-36 Jackson, which came along later in the war, had a turret basket "bustle" which acted as a counterweight to the long and heavy 90mm gun, and also provided storage for an additional 10-11 rounds of ammunition, as well as providing a surface upon which a pedestal-mounted MG could sit.
Dad was the commanding officer of the 634th Tank Destroyer Bttn and passed away in
1978. Thanks for the recording of the M-10.
Not an M10. It's a M36 GMC Jackson. Same hull/chassis, different turret and gun.
I just finished reading The Tank Killers
All about Tank Destroyers in WW2. It would reference your dad.
@@ghostmost2614 Thanks very much. I'll check it out for sure!
Awesome... we have a Sherman Tank in a museum here...thanks from NZ 👍🇳🇿
I wish I had prior knowledge of this event. I would have been there. My Step-Father was a driver during the WWII and was at rhe battle of the Bulge. I was a M1 tanker when I was in the army.
Great seeing them up and running awesome shape
Cool video Dakota Wood!
The Stuart tank might also have a Guiberson diesel in it. It was a radial diesel engine option that was available in the M3 tanks. The twin Cadillac engines came later with the M5's.
The dust blown up by the M36 is from the exhaust being pointed downward. Exhaust pipes are like megaphones. If you point them up, it like cupping your hands around your mouth and yelling, "HERE I COME!". By pointing the exhaust downward, its actually harder to hear the tank coming from a distance. The exhaust note is not only covered by the body of the tank, the audio signal is also reflected off the ground, taking the hard edge off the initial "Pop" of the exhaust note, giving it an overall mellower sound.
That's why they do that with some cars, too.
Thanks for the info. Raises an interesting question. What is the greater risk..the enemy seeing you coming or hearing you coming? Depends on the time of day or night I suppose is one factor.
@@vitis65 I would say both. Best not to be seen, but like they say, you never see the one that gets you.
Great vIdeo, thanks for sharing!
Thank you
Very much liked this! Living history.
Cool video and great commentary.
Hello to the Allies! Interesting video and show! Great technique in good condition! I like! Thank you for the video!
Yes, the M5 Stuarts that were sold to countries after WW-II had some diesel conversions done. There was one from Guatemala being auctioned of in the US with a diesel. OMG, how loud it sounded.
The dust cloud on the M36 wasn't from the exhaust, while the exhaust does exit out in the same area, the radial engines are air cooled and the ducts for the air that the engine has pulled through are pointed a little down causing the dust cloud, and yes, they did kick up a lot of dust back then. Iirc, they made a couple of mods to adjust the air blasts further up to keep that from happening as bad.
M36 had the GAA engine, which was water cooled but of course all water cooled engines are ultimately air cooled by air pushed thru the radiator. That's what was exiting out of the back of the M36.
4:40, Oh yeah, this was a much better diesel conversion than others I've heard.
My grandfather was on a M 10 during the war. His tank was blown up not by a German tank but by a FW 190 attack plane.
Hope he made it out ok and lived a long and happy life afterwards.
@@vitis65 unlike most of the worthless bags of meat in the world he did very well after the war. even helped kids and did work developing the CAP program
Awesome video.
Sounds like Kyle is in the driver seat of that Stewart, drinking a Monster 🤣🤣
*Stuart*
nice one mate
The Stewart’s engine sounded just like the 5.9 liter, 6 cylinder Cummins turbo diesel in my Ram truck.
It is an M36 Jackson and not the M10. Great work!!
M 18 was such a great tank. 7 to 1 kill ratio in WW II. Much smaller than a Sherman but with the same deadly punch.
55 mph top speed, too. Fastest tank of the war. Doesn't sound too fast, but in a time when most tanks were all done at 25-35 mph, it was literally a "rocket ship"....and the long barreled 76mm high powered gun gave it an extremely hard punch.
@@DeanMk1 55mph is literally a faster top speed than most mbts currently in service.
M18 hellcat isn't a tank. Its a tank destroyer !
Apparently the army preferred the m10 over the m18.
@@josephhardwicke6344 well look at the weight difference 😂 the abrams is capable of 60+ but it’s governed
Awesomeness
Nice to see. You guys with the Allies liberated Europe and my homecountry the Netherlands. for me, i believe the Sherman Firefly tank with the Ordnance QF 17-pounder 76,2mm Lang 55 main gun was the best version of all Shermans. Unfortunately the German tanks were better armoured and had better main guns.
The Stuart sounds like a turbo'd Cat.
I was watching some videos of M10s filmed during the war and they did, indeed, kick up a giant dust cloud wherever they went. (The M36 used the same hull)
BEUTIFUL
Who owns all these tanks; TD's and halftracks? And they look brand new - WOW - Great job boys -
Wish you had shown more of the White scout car.... not many got used by US, most were sent to allies in FDR,s lend lease.
Many were used by the U.S. just not common in the ETO.
Cool. You should put the name of the event in the description so we can find it next year. I can get to Mt. Dora.
All the armored vehicles had Yiddish names! Cool! :-)
Very cool... where was this?
I could literally smell the smoke!
That’s WW2 Armor orginazation they have a Canadian m4 grizzly
M18 hellcat
M36 Jackson
M4 high speed tractor and a another high speed tractor converted into the m3 Stuart
I believe they also have a m10 td
i love tanks and the fumes oh my++++
That is actually not an M-5 stuart. It is the chassis of an M-5 high speed arty tractor with a faux upper hull and turret. The suspension is a dead give away. The very front of the hull 'nose' is not right either. It might be cummins powered after all.
Very interesting! Thanks for your info, I will favorite your comment so others can see 👍🏼
Well... that's was exciting
Seems crazy that they would use radial engines especially if you have to crank it 50 times every now and then to not have smoke when you are trying to be stealth, perhaps they had a lot of power and were lightweight and compact? I'll have to look that up.
They just were the engine's that were around. Later versions of the Sherman use different engines.
Yeah sounds like a Cummins diesel on the light tank
Say, Trak. Ah, the aroma!
Pt.2 tell hollywood i want anotha movie the prequel sequel like star wars
The m36, I bet panther crew shit their pants when they saw one
The M-36 Jackson was the only American armored fighting vehicle with the best antitank gun. The 90mm derived from an antiaircraft gun. At the very end of the war in Europe a few 90mm tanks made it. Too little, too late
Robert Dawson very cool! Thanks for sharing!
Hybrid .... same 90mm gun in both vehicles. Different results...
The M36 TD was in combat by Oct of 1944. In time for the Battle of the Bulge. The M36 was a reliable vehicle. Over 1,400 were available before Germany surrendered.
The M26 Pershing first combat was 25 February. The M26 had a serious propensity to breakdowns. Broken down Tanks don’t contribute to combat. When the M36 was send to Korea it broke down so often it was quickly replaced by the reliable M4E8 Sherman.
that's too german of you
But Hellcat was far deadlier. And, if war lasted longer, super hellcat was prepared (but war ended and never saw the light of the day. Upgrades were 90mm turret, shooting stabilizer so it can shoot while driving, and new Ford motor that was supposed to replace Continental. More horsepower would give him speed of 60 mph). Hellcat was master of shoot and run, had torsion suspension with superior manouverability over any of those there, and speed of 55 mph. He also always used armor piercing rounds which made him extreme deadly up to 2.5km, which was for those times, amazing numbers.
I would have liked to been there
That was definitely a diesel engine in that Stuart
Yep it’s a turbo diesel for sure
@@ben-jam-in6941 The irony is that it produced the least smoke.
FAST BOI
Nice pause I'm a gasoline mechanic but that stuart had no stock engine that's for sure!
You aren’t sneaking up on anyone with that engine!...........I feel for those poor tank crews on a cold, wet Winters day!
The M18 looks great, but the engine issue is nasty. I wonder if the rotary engine could be replaced with a Diesel engine? I prefer the Ford GAA in the Sherman's as well.
Okay, lesson time. M10, M18, and M36 were not tanks. They were tank destroyers which had far less armor than a tank and an open top turret. This was to allow then to have greater speed and maneuverability. Example; M18 Hellcat had a maximum of 1/2 inch of armor plate and could do over 50 mph on the road. Only the late model M36, the M36b2 had armor as it was a M36 turret mounted on a M4A3 Sherman hull.
Thank you so much for the info!
@@DakotaWoodHD Also, Jackson was not an official name for the M36 until post war.
I hate to say this. The M-5 "Buddy" did not start it's life as a tank. It was a M-5 prime mover artillery tractor that was remade into a show tank. But it looks good.
The original M3 and M5 Stewart light tanks had radial engines, which is why there is a hump in the rear to make room. That is an M5 in the video.
The _M5's_ always had the twinbank v-8's.
@@peterson7082 True, but the humped rear hull of the M3 was never changed when no longer required for the V-8s.
Those tracks look like they need tensioning.
My thoughts exactly. I also noticed that the tracks on the M18 looked aftermarket. Except for the track tension, they looked really good.
A M10 hellcat is stuck on a beach in Taiwan 🇹🇼
And it’s abandoned there
M10s fume extractors are just the as on the Sherman's there on swing arm brackets can be positioned up in the rear hill housing or down like that to cause a smoke screen
ua-cam.com/video/cNyUxl0MXWQ/v-deo.html
BTW, I love the M36 Jackson!!!!!!!!!!!
M10 would work well as a leaf blower on roads.
Aren't both the M18 and M36 tank destroyers? Post Normandy almost all tanks from the US were Shermans unless they kept a few Stuarts/Lees. Very late in the war a handful of Pershings were sent to the front.
if you have seen any footage of the war in Ukraine... the russian tanks have diesel stack billowing out in the air... pretty distinctive from the air,,, ( we have heat signatures now but... I digress)that is why we experimented with the exhaust in a downward fashion. the bad was that /// they weren't good at fording... the exhaust would get trapped and stall out the tank mid river
A 37mm, a 75mm, a 90mm, and two 76mms... that just about covers it.
3rd tank was a M-36 Jackson ,not a M-10.
You are correct. I wanted to post this, but I figured someone else would realize that too. Good eye, bro!
That's a cast hall Sherman tank . Thy started to make welded hall Sherman tank was faster to make
Once the Hellcat was started tho
............. Heed the sound. Glass Cannon. 🤣😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
덕중지덕은 양덕 입니다, 존경!! respect...!!!
M3s had radial engines. The Israelis used Cummings for their Shermans
Some Shermans had radial engines.
Imagine if the US had installed those tank destroyer guns in all the sherman tanks back in the ww2
The 76mm. was the same as on the 76mm. armed _M4's._
The Chieftain has a very detailed explanation on this in one of his videos.
I don’t want to sound like a geek but the m10 is a m36 Jackson. Good video chum.😁
Haha thanks for the clarification!
No it isn't muppet
Well, still the same hull so.. :)
Devil's Island, yea it is a M36. here you go do some homework. www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/US/M36_Jackson.php
There's a question that needs to be answered: Why were ww2 us tank drstroyers' armors very thin?
5:10 no thats m36 slugger/jackson
Sorry to tell you but there was no M10 it was a M36B2. You can tell by the gun and turret. It dose sit on a M10 hull and a M4 chassis.
is that M36 tank ?
Tracks so loose looked they were about to fall off?
is it just me or do a couple of these tanks look like they need some track tensioning?
They run these vehicles often at their facility. Facebook.com/ww2armor
Yeah i never knew ww2 tank tracks were that saggy, especially that sherman.
The M18 with the droopy track is currently getting new shoes.
Yea, that was my first thought...one hard turn and they'd shed a track.
They'd rather throw a track, rather than snap one, is my guess.
Yes the STUARTS A diesel . Defo A classic Radial engine has a PLOP PLOP BRRRRMMMMOLOP BANG . Not a steady purring Smooth sound Look for the PLOP LOP POP POP IN A MASSIVE EMPTY PIPE SOUND Then full throttle They still sound uneven ..
It would be cool to have a M1 Abrams too, like airshows when they have legacy formations of WWII pursuit planes with moden fighters.
That stuart is definitely a diesel!
No sir
How rich are these people that they can buy a tank (ps how much is a tank?)
Hate to burst your bubble but that is not a M10 TD. I don’t remember the number designation but it’s some type of upgrade... the M10 had a totally different turret and the gun did not have a barrel as long as this vehicle has, as well as the gun mantle. This mantle looks like the late war Sherman jumbo style mantle.
M36
The tank destroyer shown is an M36 "Jackson" which was basically an up-gunned M10 with a larger turret to accommodate a long-barreled 90mm gun.
Definitely an M36, M10 has a different turret design.
Bonjour a tous du Canada It's not too much oil in cylinder it' secret device generate smoke
against mosquito or other insect
The tanks that helped save democracy.
Lovely . Lol people are like look at all the smoke . Well imagine a cold start on full choke . In any vehicle it's always bit smokey So when you got ! 13 cyl radial it's Gona need CHOKE BIG TIME . Ok . ..
Oil smell because radials use a lot of oil. Try working on the radial in an M3, Royal pain in the ass. I have. M-4s used multiple types of engines. That Jackson was being driven harder than most
6 dislikes from tiger tank operators
i will make it 7
Dont do it comrade!
Why? You operated Panzerkampfwagen IV ausf H?
Not an M-10 but an M-36.......
Still dnt understand why the hellcat has the turret open
Rino Ceronte That is the way tank destroys we’re intended to be used.
The theory was that tank destroyers were supposed to see the enemy first. They were light and quick on the draw. It worked, most of the time.
that is an m5A1
Small!!!
Brad pitt😂
thats not a steut light tank thats an m5 stuerts look diferint
Government funk😂
M36 not m10
Check these guys out at facebook.com/ww2armor
That wasn't armor, they were death traps. Props to anyone that climbed into one of those and went up against Panthers and Tigers.
@JohnTuttle - please educate yourself as you are repeating myths. The M4 was not a death trap. Its crews had a higher survival rate than Panther and Tiger crews. American armor rarely encountered Tigers. The Tiger was likely to break down or run our of gas anyway. Again educate yourself.
@@donb1183 lol you're an idiot. M4 no armor and pea shooting gun. Panther/Tiger with legendary 88mm. Yes, crew mortality is high, when you are outnumbered 20:1...that doesn't make the M4 a good tank. Just mass produced.
The Sherman's weren't intended to go face-to-face with those tanks, anyways. They got delegates to infantry-tanks unless a situation necessitated anti-armor. The US had much better guns than the 75mm for anti-armor purposes.
@@johntuttle9544 batle of arracourt sherman tank KO a lot of panthers...
Because the Sherman could be, and was produced, shipped, and distrubuted in large numbers, it was the better tank. A hundred Shermans on the battlefield are way better than zero Tigers. Brits/US could field 5,000 Shermans, from Denmark to the Mediterranean. Against 500 Tigers and Panthers. Shermans could literally drive around them by tens of miles away.
As German lost experienced tank crews, and experienced mechanics, Tigers/Panthers potential abilities were less and less able to be used, or even show up on the battlefield. A Sherman were able to do 4,000 combat road miles. Fire 4,000 rounds. Tigers were lucky to live 1/10th the miles or rounds.
Shermans provided infantry support 1,000 times more than Tigers. Allied infantry had way better chance with plentiful Shermans.
Dirt tanks.