So many of them made, and in so many variants. There were also many other afvs based on the Sherman chassis.

my 2 cents
John

They were used from the fall of 1942 through the end of the war.

The US M4 Sherman has been the victim of a lot of unfair criticism, which only in the last 20 years or so has been rectified by closer examination of the true facts. Firstly, and this is perhaps the most important fact, is that the US Army had a misguided doctrine regarding the use of its armor. US tanks were initially intended to provide SUPPORT for the infantry, and not the other way around. US armor was not designed for tank vs tank combat. Consequently, US tank crews were very inexperienced as regards to tank vs tank combat, as they found out. Initially, as at Kasserine, February, 1943, Shermans were destroyed largely by German anti-tank weapons such as the PaK.38 and PaK.40, and also by the excellent Flak.18 and 36/37, in defilade. The Tiger I also came as a nasty surprise, whereas Pz.Kpfw.IIIs and IVs had the advantage only if they caught US Armor by surprise. Early M4s were roughly equal to the Pz.Kpfw.IVs, and superior to Pz.Kpfw.IIIs... Once American M4 tankers gained experience, they were able to defeat the German Mk.IIIs and Mk.IVs with regularity- THAT IS A FACT... The appearance of the German Panthers and Tigers in Italy and in Normandy, which were usually concealed in ambush, were initially a real headache for US M4 tankers. One of the deficiencies of the M4-series Mediums was their relatively thin armor, when compared to panthers and Tigers. In time, it was found that ALL Panthers, Tiger Is and Tiger IIs COULD be killed by AT Round penetration in their sides and/or rear. Where the German Panthers and Tigers were clearly superior to US tanks, was in their frontal armor, superior main weapons and optical gun sights. Turret-traverse: A great technical disadvantage of German armor was that they employed manual turret-traverse, whereas the M4-series tanks enjoyed the benefits of electric/hydraulic turret-traverse, with a manual detente. If a Panther or Tiger was caught off of it's longitudinal axis, as it would be in having slid or driven into a ditch, it would be virtually IMPOSSIBLE to traverse the turret if an upward orientation was necessary. This was because of the great weight of the turret and main gun assembly. The US M4-series tanks turret-traverse was roughly THREE TIMES AS FAST as the Germans' manual traverse... Dependability and quality: The US M4-series tanks were VERY dependable mechanically. This dependability was evident in the M4-series having a very low amount of "down-time" as opposed to their German counterparts. The M4-series dependability was enhanced by American youth having grown up in a nation of mechanics- US tankers were remarkably experienced in automotive technology. American boys were great "tinkerers", in that time of no computers or cell phones. Most American kids today don't even know what a spark plug is for... Now this is important: Where an American tank crew could fix many mechanical problems, a German tank crew would many times have to abandon their mount for lack of mechanical experience and/or lack of parts. The German Panther and Tiger crews were plagued with various mechanical difficulties, such as engine, transmission and final drive failures, plus a nasty propensity for engine compartment fires- Fuel and oil would build up in the bottoms of their Panthers' and Tigers' engine bays, due to faulty fuel line connections. Their tanks would catch fire from the excessive heat given off by the under-powered, over-worked engines. The M4-series tanks were much more reliable in this respect. Track-life: All US tanks, even today's M1 Abrams-series tanks, utilize "live track" which will coil up on itself, greatly increasing track life and wear. (Don't model your US tanks with "track-sag"- US tracks are to be adjusted as tight as possible.) The advantage of "live track" rolling up on itself is manifested in less wear and tear on the engines, transmissions, final drive units and FUEL ECONOMY... The average Sherman had a track-life of 2500 miles, as opposed to German tanks, which at best, could only manage 500 miles. Fuel consumption: Given the fact that German Tigers and Panthers were so heavy, inefficient fuel consumption was another great disadvantage for the Panthers and Tigers. German armor's fuel consumption was calculated as "how many gallons to the mile", whereas with US tanks, fuel mileage was calculated as "how many miles to the gallon". History will bear me out- The Germans lost the "Battle of the Bulge" because of American determination and the Germans' running out of gas... The track-life of the Sherman, along with it's excellent fuel mileage (for a tank, that is...) contributed greatly to the Allies' race across France in July-September of 1944. Numerical superiority: It is a well-known fact that the M4-series Medium was built in staggering numbers- Nearly 50,000 Shermans were built during World War II. Only the Soviet T-34 exceeded the M4-series in production numbers. There is an oft quoted testimonial by a German tanker that goes: "One of our Tigers can kill TEN of your Shermans, but you always seem to have ELEVEN..." Please pardon me if my quote is not verbatim... On the matter of M4s killing German Tigers and Panthers: US tankers quickly learned several very efficient ways to defeat Tigers and Panthers; by maneuver, which entailed several M4s engaging (if possible) in a bewildering fashion, by swarming around the big German tanks like hornets, diverting attention from several Shermans making for the sides or rear of their target, thus being able to defeat the thinner sides and rear plates of said German tank. Another technique of dispatching any German tank was to fire a "Willy-Pete" round (White Phosphorous) at any area of the enemy tank where there were hatches, engine covers or the turret race. The "Willy-Pete", burning furiously, would seep into the German tank, igniting oils, fuels and greases, not to mention the crew members. If you got "Willy Pete" on you, you made peace with your God... Inevitably, the "Willy-Pete" would very quickly seep and burn its way into the ammo stowage, causing catastrophic destruction of the vehicle. Firing a well-placed HE round (High Explosive) would also scare a German crew into mistakenly abandoning their tank... Sometimes... Suspensions: The American VVSS and HVSS suspensions were tried and proven to be very dependable, as opposed to the German Torsion Bar Suspensions. This was largely due to the failings of the German Steel Industry- German metallurgy had declined to the point where torsion bars snapped quite regularly, further adding to the German tank crews' discomfiture. Level of experience: By late 1944, early 1945, Sherman crews were at a distinct advantage over German tank crews in that the Allied tankers were now the more experienced men. German manpower was nearing its demise, as young teenagers and old men were replacing the veterans. Confidence in equipment: US tankers, with their higher level of training Stateside, were VERY confident in their equipment. Yes, there were lapses in this confidence when US tankers first encountered the Panthers and Tigers, but with time, their confidence returned once they gained more experience and realized that these German "super-tanks" weren't so "super" after all. Even US Infantry and Combat Engineers learned the weak points of these vaunted Panthers and Tigers, and were able to defeat them with supposedly inferior US-made Bazookas. As to M4-based M10 and M36 Tank Destroyers, along with the new M18 TDs, the tank destroyer crews learned the same lessons as their cousins in the M4s did, i.e. how to properly defeat "superior" German Armor. If you have ANY doubts regarding the capabilities of M4s, M10s, M36s, M18s and Bazookas, read the excellent book about the "Battle of the Bulge", "A TIME FOR TRUMPETS" and "Company Commander" by Charles B. MacDonald, who really was a US Infantry Company Commander in Europe during World War II. In my opinion, weighing all of these aforementioned factors leads me to believe that the M4-series Mediums may not have had the thickest skins or the most powerful guns and gunsights. BUT! The Shermans were vastly superior in mechanical dependability and quality, superior in automotive design and simplicity, and tops in the job that it was designed for. It was the US and Allied tankers that raised the M4s' so-called "mediocrity" to a superior level. In recognizing all of the M4s' faults and their very real attributes, the crews turned the M4 Mediums into STARS... Hope this answers your questions as to why the M4 Sherman has become so popular... M4s RULE!!!

I can't even bring myself to read that. Using paragraphs and proper sentence structure will make that a LOT more useful.

Thanks Jeff!!! I wonder why a certain fellow hasn't corrected anyone else' English Grammar on this hobby site..? Not that that it matters... Thanks to all OTHERS for sharing agreement regarding the M4-series Medium; perhaps the best tank of World War II!!!

The US M4 Sherman has been the victim of a lot of unfair criticism, which only in the last 20 years or so has been rectified by closer examination of the true facts.

Firstly, and this is perhaps the most important fact, is that the US Army had a misguided doctrine regarding the use of its armor. US tanks were initially intended to provide SUPPORT for the infantry, and not the other way around. US World War II armor was not designed for tank vs tank combat. Consequently, US tank crews were very inexperienced as regards to tank vs tank combat, as they found out.

Initially, as at Kasserine, February, 1943, Shermans were destroyed largely by German anti-tank weapons such as the PaK.38 and PaK.40, and also by the excellent Flak.18 and 36/37, in defilade. The Tiger I also came as a nasty surprise, whereas Pz.Kpfw.IIIs and IVs had the advantage only if they caught US Armor by surprise. Early M4s were roughly equal to the Pz.Kpfw.IVs, and superior to Pz.Kpfw.IIIs... Once American M4 tankers gained experience, often very painfully, they were able to defeat the German Mk.IIIs and Mk.IVs with regularity- THAT IS A FACT...

The appearance of the German Panthers and Tigers in Italy and in Normandy, which were usually concealed in ambush, were initially a real headache for US M4 tankers. One of the deficiencies of the M4-series Mediums was their relatively thin armor, when compared to panthers and Tigers. In time, it was found that ALL Panthers, Tiger Is and Tiger IIs COULD be killed by AT Round penetration in their sides and/or rear. Where the German Panthers and Tigers were clearly superior to US tanks, was in their frontal armor, superior main weapons and optical gun sights.

Turret-traverse: A great technical disadvantage of German armor was that they employed manual turret-traverse, whereas the M4-series tanks enjoyed the benefits of electric/hydraulic turret-traverse, with a manual detente. If a Panther or Tiger was caught off of it's longitudinal axis, as it would be in having slid or driven into a ditch, it would be virtually IMPOSSIBLE to traverse the turret if an upward orientation was necessary. This was because of the great weight of the turret and main gun assembly. The US M4-series tanks turret-traverse was roughly THREE TIMES AS FAST as the Germans' manual traverse... Dependability and quality: The US M4-series tanks were VERY dependable mechanically. This dependability was evident in the M4-series having a very low amount of "down-time" as opposed to their German counterparts. The M4-series dependability was enhanced by American youth having grown up in a nation of mechanics- US tankers were remarkably experienced in automotive technology. American boys were great "tinkerers", in that time of no computers or cell phones.

Most American kids today don't even know what a spark plug is for... Now this is important: Where an American tank crew could fix many mechanical problems, a German tank crew would many times have to abandon their mount for lack of mechanical experience and/or lack of parts. The German Panther and Tiger crews were plagued with various mechanical difficulties, such as engine, transmission and final drive failures, plus a nasty propensity for engine compartment fires- Fuel and oil would build up in the bottoms of their Panthers' and Tigers' engine bays, due to faulty fuel line connections. Their tanks would catch fire from the excessive heat given off by the under-powered, over-worked engines. The M4-series tanks were much more reliable in this respect.

Track-life: All US tanks, even today's M1 Abrams-series tanks, utilize "live track" which will coil up on itself, greatly increasing track life and wear. (Don't model your US tanks with "track-sag"- US tracks are to be adjusted as tight as possible.) The advantage of "live track" rolling up on itself is manifested in less wear and tear on the engines, transmissions, final drive units and FUEL ECONOMY... The average Sherman had a track-life of 2500 miles, as opposed to German tanks, which at best, could only manage 500 miles.

Fuel consumption: Given the fact that German Tigers and Panthers were so heavy, inefficient fuel consumption was another great disadvantage for the Panthers and Tigers. German armor's fuel consumption was calculated as "how many gallons to the mile", whereas with US tanks, fuel mileage was calculated as "how many miles to the gallon". History will bear me out- The Germans lost the "Battle of the Bulge" because of American determination and the Germans' running out of gas... The track-life of the Sherman, along with it's excellent fuel mileage (for a tank, that is...) contributed greatly to the Allies' race across France in July-September of 1944.

Numerical superiority: It is a well-known fact that the M4-series Medium was built in staggering numbers- Nearly 50,000 Shermans were built during World War II. Only the Soviet T-34 exceeded the M4-series in production numbers. There is an oft quoted testimonial by a German tanker that goes: "One of our Tigers can kill TEN of your Shermans, but you always seem to have ELEVEN..." Please pardon me if my quote is not verbatim... On the matter of M4s killing German Tigers and Panthers: US tankers quickly learned several very efficient ways to defeat Tigers and Panthers; by maneuver, which entailed several M4s engaging (if possible) in a bewildering fashion, by swarming around the big German tanks like hornets, diverting attention from several Shermans making for the sides or rear of their target, thus being able to defeat the thinner sides and rear plates of said German tank. Another technique of dispatching any German tank was to fire a "Willy-Pete" round (White Phosphorous) at any area of the enemy tank where there were hatches, engine covers or the turret race. The "Willy-Pete", burning furiously, would seep into the German tank, igniting oils, fuels and greases, not to mention the crew members. If you got "Willy Pete" on you, you made peace with your God... Inevitably, the "Willy-Pete" would very quickly seep and burn its way into the ammo stowage, causing catastrophic destruction of the vehicle. Firing a well-placed HE round (High Explosive) would also scare a German crew into mistakenly abandoning their tank... Sometimes...

Suspensions: The American VVSS and HVSS suspensions were tried and proven to be very dependable, as opposed to the German Torsion Bar Suspensions. This was largely due to the failings of the German Steel Industry- German metallurgy had declined to the point where torsion bars snapped quite regularly, further adding to the German tank crews' discomfiture.

Level of experience: By late 1944, early 1945, Sherman crews were at a distinct advantage over German tank crews in that the Allied tankers were now the more experienced men. German manpower was nearing its demise, as young teenagers and old men were replacing the veterans. Confidence in equipment: US tankers, with their higher level of training Stateside, were VERY confident in their equipment. Yes, there were lapses in this confidence when US tankers first encountered the Panthers and Tigers, but with time, their confidence returned once they gained more experience and realized that these German "super-tanks" weren't so "super" after all. Even US Infantry and Combat Engineers learned the weak points of these vaunted Panthers and Tigers, and were able to defeat them with supposedly inferior US-made Bazookas. As to M4-based M10 and M36 Tank Destroyers, along with the new M18 TDs, the tank destroyer crews learned the same lessons as their cousins in the M4s did, i.e. how to properly defeat "superior" German Armor. If you have ANY doubts regarding the capabilities of M4s, M10s, M36s, M18s and Bazookas, read the excellent book about the "Battle of the Bulge", "A TIME FOR TRUMPETS" and "Company Commander" by Charles B. MacDonald, who really was a US Infantry Company Commander in Europe during World War II.

In my opinion, weighing all of these aforementioned factors leads me to believe that the M4-series Mediums may not have had the thickest skins or the most powerful guns and gunsights. BUT! The Shermans were vastly superior in mechanical dependability and quality, superior in automotive design and simplicity, and tops in the job that it was designed for. It was the US and Allied tankers that raised the M4s' so-called "mediocrity" to a superior level. In recognizing all of the M4s' faults and their very real attributes, the crews turned the M4 Mediums into STARS... Hope this answers your questions as to why the M4 Sherman has become so popular... M4s RULE!!!

Thanks Jeff!!! I wonder why a certain fellow hasn't corrected anyone else' English Grammar on this hobby site..? Not that that it matters... Thanks to all OTHERS for sharing agreement regarding the M4-series Medium; perhaps the best tank of World War II!!!