BS on that. I knew men who served in armored units in WW2 and considered the Sherman a piece of junk. On average it took five Shermans to knock out one Panther Mk.5. German tanks had excellent armor and excellent guns with superior range.
The Sherman was poorly designed, built for manufacture and transport in large number, for which purpose it did serve. They were superior in quality (as in quality control) and weren’t broken down all over the length and breath of Europe like the malfunctioning hodge podge of manifestly inadequate German armor.
OH THE PANTHER! You mean tha T34 knock off? Yeah, a later development, which tended to catch fire at first.
German armor performed better because of the men inside of them, not the over engineered, overrated boxes around them. Their doctrine was superior. Their training and motivation was superior.
But the Hun got their asses kicked. My dad was one of the ones who helped kick it. What he told me the GIs feared was the 88mm gun. That and SS, which again is personnel not hardware. We grossly overestimate machines over men.
The Mk V main weakness was it’s crappy transmission.