Was this the most effective AFV of WW2?

>>32791481
Depends on your definition of effective, If we talk in terms of kills per vehicle then tigers and other heavy tanks blows it out of the park.

>>32791767
Sounds like op is talking in general effective. Which means that reliability, cost and such should be included.

The T-34

File: Sherman Korea.jpg (2MB, 2855x3503px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2855x3503px

>>32793918
meme tank

>>32791481
For the Germans at least. Problem with many of the German meme tanks was that they were being issued heavily to units- the SS- who were notorious for over reporting performance to the point that even the Abwehr were cutting their reports by half.


The most successful German designs were typically the most boring. The Panzer 4 was a superb tank when it was new, and the 3 was an excellent design even if it was short lived as a dedicated tank.

>>32794353
shit tank

>>32795776
>t. ass blasted wehraboo

>>32795257
Hell, Panzer IV would've been excellent throughout its entire production run if the Germans had taken the time to come up with a powerplant and suspension units that could actually keep up with the weight of the new guns and additional armor. A more robust transmission wouldn't have hurt either.

>>32795776
>shit tank

Oh, surely. Except for the engine whose power was actually sufficient considering the vehicle's weight. And the suspenision system that wasn't out of date or grossly overloaded. Or the gyroscopic stabilizer that no German design was able to replicate. Or the final drive that could actually be swapped out in a timely manner. Or the frontal armor that was thicker even from the beginning of its production run than a late war Panzer IV's. Or the fact that a non-pants-on-head-retarded logistics system was supporting them.

For what it was designed for, yes. In terms of an all-purpose AFV, the M4 Sherman, particularly the M4A3, followed by the T-34. Panzer IV wasn't bad either, but it never did receive the level of improvement needed to keep it completely viable. Generally speaking though, these three designs had the numbers and the mobility, and the Sherman in particular, with its wide variety of ammunition and numerous variants, was a true blue jack of all trades.

The Panther's myopic optics (better suited for long range engagements than anything else) and poor mechanical reliability rule it out as a good all-purpose tank, and the Tiger I and II were too unreliable and too few in number.