Which is better T34 or Sherman, and what are the advantages and disadvantages of T34 and Sherman. Wh

Both have their advantages, but it is difficult to say which one is stronger, for example, during World War II, the Soviets considered Sherman to be garbage, and the Soviets assigned all the U.S. aid Sherman to the secondary force, but the Korean War and the First Middle East War proved that Sherman could be compared to T34.

Judging from the data, the initial model of Sherman used 75 mm guns, and later 76 mm guns, and after the war, Super Sherman with 105 mm guns was developed, and the early T34 models used 76 mm guns, and the later models used 85 mm guns, T34 guns were more powerful, but because Sherman's guns used stabilizers, they were more accurate, and in general they had similar firepower.

In terms of protection, the Sherman and T34 have about the same thickness of frontal armor, but since the Sherman has a gasoline engine, it is extremely easy to **** after being hit, and the T34 is much better in this regard. In addition, Sherman is bulky and more likely to be hit.

In terms of maneuverability, the T34 is more powerful, and the strength of the Sherman is the advantage of the gearbox, and the Sherman is easier to maneuver than the T34. The T34's suspension system is simple and reliable, with excellent performance, while the Sherman is more complex but just as reliable.

In terms of overall reliability, the Sherman rarely needs to be repaired, and the T34 often has minor minor problems, but it is easier to repair than the Sherman.

In terms of productivity, both tanks are similar, both are extremely easy to produce, and almost 50,000 units of both tanks were produced during World War II.

In terms of environmental adaptability, T34 excels in the cold zone, somewhat unaccustomed in the tropics, and Sherman, on the contrary, excels in the tropical Pacific region.

Overall, the performance of these two tanks is indistinguishable, but the position of T34 in the history of tank development is difficult for Sherman to match, the T34 finalized in 1934 is the forerunner of modern tanks, after the war, whether it is the East or the West, almost all countries' tank design is similar to the design idea of T34, T34 can be said to be the first tank in the modern sense. So, despite being a sworn enemy of the Soviet Union, NATO military experts still admit that the T34 is the greatest tank in the history of mankind.

T34 ah, T34 is the best tank developed by the Soviet Union in World War II in order to deal with the German Tiger tank, although the United States has war potential in World War II, the economy is very strong, but the military strength is not as strong as Germany, the Soviet Union fought against Germany, the Soviet Union tried its best to develop high-end ** to fight the Germans, so the actual effect of the Soviet Union's T34 is very good, in Germany, the Soviet Union, the United States, Japan, these countries are in such a comparison, the small Japanese tank does not even have 10 tons, Sherman hit it a gun, However, the T34 is a medium tank, weighing 32 tons, which is heavier than Sherman's, and its firepower and defense are stronger than Sherman's, so T34 is stronger than Sherman. Generally speaking, World War II is still the Tiger tank strong, I heard that the Soviet Union at that time can only rely on quantity to win quality, 2 to 3 T34 around a Tiger to win, the Soviet Union made quite a lot of T34 to rival Germany, I want to use the Sherman tank to fight the German Tiger after the Normandy landing in the United States. If you blow up one by a Tiger tank, you can't afford to provoke it, the Soviet T34 can at least withstand the first shot of the Tiger.

In my opinion, the equipment of the old United States is far inferior to that of the Soviet Union.

The overall strength of the Sherman (M-4) is at best equal to the German No. 3 tank mid-term, while the T-34 can take out No. 3 like a can opener. Its strength is comparable to that of the German-made No. 4 tank. And forced Germany to develop"Leopard"type tank.

After the Normandy landings, the United States saw its own shortcomings and stepped up research and development"Pershing"Style.

T-34 with"Sherman"They are the same tanks of World War II, but the starting point is different, the Soviet Union consists of long experience, and the American experience is inexperienced. However, the United States has the advantage of being good at learning. They put"Sherman"Improved into an excellent tank.

Whether it is pure performance data, actual production, or combat examples and impact, the T34 is stronger than Sherman.

The advantages of T34 are that it is simple in structure, easy to manufacture, and has low production requirements. Firepower, protection, and maneuver are very balanced, and the requirements for training are low, and the passing state is good in the muddy state.

But the disadvantages are: 1. The comfort is poor, and if you stay in it for 2 hours, the average person will basically have no combat effectiveness; 2. The quality of cast armor is poor, and there are many trachoma, which affects the protection (you can go to the military expo to see the real thing, it is all trachoma), according to the memories of Soviet veterans, after being shot, the iron filings in the turret fly wildly, which will hurt their own people more; 3. The observation and sighting system is backward and lacks radio.

Sherman's advantages: the use of the M3 chassis, the cost of transformation training is low; 2. The size is reasonable, easy to transport, and his chassis size is the best design made according to the best design of the transport ship; 3. Perfect observation and sighting system; 4. High reliability.

Disadvantages: 1. The center of gravity is too high, easy to be found, and the maneuverability is poor; 2. Insufficient firepower; 3. Gasoline engines are easy to catch fire.

Looking at it now, the Soviet ones are even better, diesel, wide tracks, inclined armor.

The recognized T34 is better.

The tanks of the Soviet army were better, and I think it was mainly because of the correct design ideas that led to a deep understanding of tank warfare. Before the war, the Soviet army actually developed tanks and studied blitzkrieg with Germany. Plus the experience of brutality on the Soviet-German battlefield.

As a result, the T34 is a relatively pure, tank suitable for tank battles.

From the point of view of design thinking, Sherman is a tank designed by the Americans according to their own understanding of tanks, which is not the same as the Soviet designers who have been honed on the Soviet-German battlefield, so he was dumbfounded when he arrived in North Africa.

In fact, in the use of tanks, the tactics of the US military borrowed from the British army and its own assumptions. The Sherman was designed as an infantry tank, and the anti-tank task was a self-propelled gun with the same chassis but no top turret, which was not the same concept as the Soviet-German low-profile defensive self-propelled gun, and the actual effect was mediocre.

At that time, the anti-tank tasks on the Western Front were actually shared by the Air Force, which was reflected in various film and television works. So what the US Army is most afraid of is cloudy and rainy.

Just like the Americans play rugby, different people do different jobs, and there is no integrated concept of main battle tanks at all. After reading the Fury, I found that Sherman's tall hull was really suitable for supporting infantry.

But it cannot be denied that in terms of industrial design, reliability, productivity and scalability, the Sherman is also a good combat tool. Another significant advantage is that Sherman has participated in the US military's battles in various natural environments on various battlefields around the world, and his adaptability and reliability to different environments are commendable. There are no comparable samples of T34 in this regard.

I'm here to say something else, Sherman also came to the aid of the Soviet Union, and according to the Soviet Union's war history, the Soviets praised Sherman's refinement and operability. At the same time, it was found that because of the gasoline engine and narrow tracks, Sherman was less noisy and ran faster, because the body was higher, the vision was good, and the hit rate was higher. At that time, the Soviet Union was equipped with more European and American tanks than expected, all of which were formed equipment, and Sherman was not used as cannon fodder in the Soviet army, and sometimes he was specially assigned to more elite troops to carry out tasks such as surprise attacks, especially when he entered Eastern Europe in the later period.

On the Internet, you can casually check the evaluation of Soviet veterans on European and American tanks. Sherman tank commanding the Soviet Red Army From these interviews and records, as a tank soldier, I was not concerned about such issues as the caliber of the main gun and the thickness of the armor, after all, what would happen if I was hit was God had the final say. It is more concerned about the feeling of manipulation, the intensity of maintenance in peacetime, and the logistical supply, which is now popular - user experience, and in this regard, the Soviet army does not have a low opinion of Sherman.

T34, strong and durable, good protection, 76 The disadvantage is firepower. Sherman is too tall. There is also an inner gasoline engine. To be honest, it depends on the combat environment, after all, Sherman is much quieter. But T34 is easy to produce.

T34 is an American heavy tank? Or Soviet? Which is 76?