In message , Eunometic
writes
(Krztalizer) wrote in message news:20040
...
You realise the Sherman was four inches lower-slung than the Panther?

Damn, Paul, that's just plain low - how dare you toss facts into this
argument???

G

It was a "disproportionatly" tall tank.

It was less tall than the Panther - you seem eager to damn that capable
if overcomplicated German vehicle.

"According to statistics of the American army, destroying a Panther
costed five Shermans or about nine T-34's."

Q: If you only have 45 tons of steel and the necesary chromite,
vanadium and manganese to make it into armour do you build 1.5
shermans or 1 panther?

Personally, I'd go for 1.5 Shermans and make sure they were Fireflies.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk