[2banana]

Having a decent and reliable tank in great numbers beats having a great but unrealible tank in small numbers...

[353FMG]

But it is probable that the number of American tank crews killed were also greater than those of the German crews.

Or doesn’t it matter in time of war?

[Charles Martel]

Battle doctrine for the Allies differed from that of the Germans. We used the Sherman more in support of infantry than to kill enemy armor. That job was done by air power and field artillery (including tank destroyers).

Given the way we employed the M4 and the need to field them in the largest possible numbers, as well as the fact that we had to ship them across the Atlantic (unlike the Soviets, who drove their T-34s straight from the factories into battle), it's tough to argue with the choice.

[DesertRhino]

Exactly. Counting Panzer IV forward the Germans built a grand total of 16000 tanks. Of which about 2000 were some sort of mechanically unreliable super tank.
We built 49,000 Shermans alone. The Russians built a similar number of the deadly T-34s.

The Germans make things two ways, wonderful, or they fail in absolute teutonic perfection. A fine example is the V-2 Rocket. A technological marvel by any standard. And what did it do?
For roughly the cost of the Manhattan project, with slave labor, they managed to inaccurately deliver around 3000 tons of HE. The 8th Air Force and Bomber Command could deliver this amount in two raids, week in week out. By that standard, the V2 was a total fail.

They did the same thing with tanks.

[minnesota_bound]

#3 The Germans certainly found that out. Today it could be America with far too few fighter aircraft and other types.