There is no doubt that the Germans had much better weapons than the Allies during the war. Their tanks, machine guns, and anti-tank weapons were vastly superior to what the US army had.
However, their supreme commander negated their advantages through poor Geo-political decisions. If he had not invaded Russia, but concentrated on beating the UK, he could have owned Europe.
If the Germans stationed all the manpower into France and Italy that they wasted in Russia, the Allies might never have invaded either country. Likely, they might have just waited for the Atomic bomb to be developed, then that would have been that.
Not to mention the Germans were vastly outnumbered by the Allies. Similar problems the US had in Vietnam and Korea.
http://efour4ever.com/88.htm
I often heard Germans blame poor production output for their defeat in WWII; at the same time they claimed the Americans didn’t outmaneuver them on the battlefield, but just kept throwing Shermans at them until they ran out of ammo.
“You Amis didn’t defeat us, you outproduced us.”
Now that sounds very familiar, anyone like that today that we know?
Yes and no. The U.S. army had the M-I semiautomatic rifle which was superior to the bolt action models used by other armies. We also had the BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle) which was a little on the heavy side. Then the Germans came up with the sturmgewehr which was the first fully automatic assault rifle and the model the Russkies took for the AK-47. They also had the 88 mm gun which was superior to anything we had. Their fighter planes, the Messerschmidts, not so much. We had better prop planes by the end of the war.
But the Germans then came out with their ME-262 jet fighter for which we had no answer. Then there was the Tiger tank. We came out with the Pershing heavy tank by the end of the war. The panzerfaust was a superior hand-held anti-tank weapon. But we had the .50 cal machine gun.
WWII was a race by both sides to develop better weapons. The only weapon we had virtually no answer for was the the V-2 rocket. Fortunately, Hitler did not have enough Tiger tanks, V-2 rockets, jet planes, and sturmgewehrs. And by the end of the war we had the ultimate weapon the atomic bomb. Of course, the Germans were beaten by that time.
Not true: the Tiger and late model Panthers were better in one on one battles with our Shermans but as far as their ability to run reliably over distances it was no contest: our tanks could keep going much further without the maintenance the German stuff did. We swamped them with mass and our tankers learned to hit them from the sides and rear to destroy them despite their thicker armor.
Rifles and machine guns were in our favor too: the M-1 Garand was far and away the best infantry rifle of the war and our M1919 was reliable and effective. The Germans wasted money and time on the G-41s and G-43s and the Stg-44/MP-44 assault rifle was excellent but still no match for the M-1 and BAR combination in direct combat.
The MG42 is a bullet hose. Its 1100 rounds per minute rate of fire was awe-inspiring but it was only useful in direct fires against an exposed enemy - it didn't have the ability to be used for extensive defensive fires because the barrels would melt and the crew couldn't carry enough ammunition for long term combat.
You Germanophiles need to quit looking at a weapon's appearance and concentrate on how they are supposed to be applied.
P.S.; the Germans never came up with the equivalent of our M2 .50 caliber machine gun. They tried to fill that niche but their 20mm FLAK was too heavy and too inaccurate to match Browning's masterpiece. The .50 ate their light armor/hidden snipers/low-flying planes like there was no tomorrow.