Jump to content


The Grizzly Sherman- Unsung Hero?

Sherman Grizzly 1 British Premium Tier 5 Worst Tank

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

Poll: Best T5 Premium Sherman (any nation) (40 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 50 battles in order to participate this poll.

Best T5 Premium Sherman (any nation)

  1. Grizzly/Frostbite (12 votes [30.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

  2. M4 Improved (12 votes [30.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

  3. Ripper (12 votes [30.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

  4. M4 Champion (4 votes [10.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.00%

Vote Hide poll

SuperSherman44 #21 Posted 28 September 2019 - 01:41 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 21553 battles
  • 923
  • Member since:
    01-07-2015

View Postz14sniperz, on 28 September 2019 - 12:05 AM, said:

I love playing the grizzly 

 

I wish I picked up the Champion M4 but I was taking a break

 

:great:

I Heart The Sherman (Best tank of WWII)

 

I got a new Xbox One S so I'm really excited!

 

R.I.P. Xbox 360 E ~2014-2019


CORSAIR_CRAZY #22 Posted 28 September 2019 - 03:52 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 33888 battles
  • 3,796
  • [SRT]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostTransparentBlue, on 27 September 2019 - 08:28 PM, said:

 

I forgot that.  It looks so Sherman-y.  

 

(It's also better than the Tier 5 Shermans.)

The ram was canada’s version of the sherman, initially sherman production was being prioratized for UK, US forces, and the Russians and the Canadians wanted some for their forces.  American locomotive foundries which also had factories in Canada helped kick start the Ram with almost all the components were based on US designs (many parts even shipped from the US) with assistance from US armored board or the Ordinance department, I forget which.  So the ram was being developed/built concurrently while the sherman was being developed/built in the event that US production was insufficient to provide enough tanks for the UK and Canada.

 

I’ve often wondered why but I perhaps the brits were behind it (like with the Canadian built Valentine) perhaps they wanted to make sure they could foster as much industrial might from their two allies if things hit the fan in the UK and they also distrusted the US congress would agree to provide equipment because at that time it was dominated by isolationists which made it difficult for FDR to help Britain.

 

unfortunately for the Ram, the turret ring that was chosen for the design was based on british specifications.  At that time the flawed british doctrine of infantry (large caliber slow muzzle velocity) tanks and cruiser tanks (small caliber high velocity penetrating shot antitank guns) was still not disavowed.  So the Ram becomes a brit influenced sherman design and the turret ring was made too small and just like on most british tanks of that era the tanks were simply not able to be up gunned due to size limitations of the turret ring.

 

the american philosophy was a very interesting one since it was Americas first honest to god tank design attempt and incredibly they got it right, they pioneered the idea of having a dual purpose tank with a gun that could both kill tanks and fire a great HE anti bunker, anti personnel, and soft skin vehicles round.  Unfortunately no one had a crystal ball in late 1941 and little did they know the 75mm would not be able to penetrate later generations of german tanks.  When the sherman was developed it was easily capable of destroying the german tanks it was being built to compete with (panzer 3 and 4).

 

so the ram was rendered obsolete from the get by the sherman because it was tied to a brit philosophy that was well on it’s way to being discarded.  It still served an important stepping stone for Canada as it helped them kick off their own sherman (grizzly) production and the rams were used to train Canadian tanker as well.  Many lost their turrets and went overseas as armored troop carriers.

 

the fact that the 75mm armed ram is so much better than the 75mm armed sherman in the game is a testament for how little people that developed the game care about history.  It’s a total joke.

 

EDIT:  I meant to write 57mm armed ram vs 75mm armed sherman


  

I am a farmable asset,  please don’t call me a potato


Albapfalzd3 #23 Posted 28 September 2019 - 04:34 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 22473 battles
  • 2,825
  • Member since:
    04-07-2017

View PostCORSAIR_CRAZY, on 28 September 2019 - 03:52 PM, said:

The ram was canada’s version of the sherman, initially sherman production was being prioratized for UK, US forces, and the Russians and the Canadians wanted some for their forces.  American locomotive foundries which also had factories in Canada helped kick start the Ram with almost all the components were based on US designs (many parts even shipped from the US) with assistance from US armored board or the Ordinance department, I forget which.  So the ram was being developed/built concurrently while the sherman was being developed/built in the event that US production was insufficient to provide enough tanks for the UK and Canada.

 

I’ve often wondered why but I perhaps the brits were behind it (like with the Canadian built Valentine) perhaps they wanted to make sure they could foster as much industrial might from their two allies if things hit the fan in the UK and they also distrusted the US congress would agree to provide equipment because at that time it was dominated by isolationists which made it difficult for FDR to help Britain.

 

unfortunately for the Ram, the turret ring that was chosen for the design was based on british specifications.  At that time the flawed british doctrine of infantry (large caliber slow muzzle velocity) tanks and cruiser tanks (small caliber high velocity penetrating shot antitank guns) was still not disavowed.  So the Ram becomes a brit influenced sherman design and the turret ring was made too small and just like on most british tanks of that era the tanks were simply not able to be up gunned due to size limitations of the turret ring.

 

the american philosophy was a very interesting one since it was Americas first honest to god tank design attempt and incredibly they got it right, they pioneered the idea of having a dual purpose tank with a gun that could both kill tanks and fire a great HE anti bunker, anti personnel, and soft skin vehicles round.  Unfortunately no one had a crystal ball in late 1941 and little did they know the 75mm would not be able to penetrate later generations of german tanks.  When the sherman was developed it was easily capable of destroying the german tanks it was being built to compete with (panzer 3 and 4).

 

so the ram was rendered obsolete from the get by the sherman because it was tied to a brit philosophy that was well on it’s way to being discarded.  It still served an important stepping stone for Canada as it helped them kick off their own sherman (grizzly) production and the rams were used to train Canadian tanker as well.  Many lost their turrets and went overseas as armored troop carriers.

 

the fact that the 75mm armed ram is so much better than the 75mm armed sherman in the game is a testament for how little people that developed the game care about history.  It’s a total joke.

 

Actually the Ram was based on the M3 Lee and not the Sherman. The Grizzly was just pretty much a straight up M4A1 with different Sprocket and Tracks. You are right about the Sherman being a very good tank design that just kept getting better. Designed and in Service before the introduction of the Tiger and Panther tanks it was adapted to meet those threats with the introduction of the 76mm guns and better ammo. Even so with units being equipped with the 76mm armed tanks, many kept some of their 75mm armed tanks on hand due to it's superior HE round. In fact there were several hundred M4A3E8s built with 75mm guns. Why? They were being stockpiled for the invasion of Japan and since the 75mm was easily capable of handling any Japanese tank known is service they wanted that 75mm gun's HE round which again was far superior to the 76mm HE round.

 

Roy



Wroclaw #24 Posted 29 September 2019 - 01:33 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 56295 battles
  • 4,649
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

the M4 Improved should be changed.

 

Wargaming missed a chance to give us a proper premium Sherman with the M4 Improved. it should have had the same MM as the TT version, & it should have had the same top gun package. either it, or the Champion, should have been a fully upgraded 76mm M1A1.

 

its beggars belief that they would have made either to be just the same as the three premium 75mm equipped duds we already have.


Edited by Wroclaw, 29 September 2019 - 01:34 AM.


AskingCupid78 #25 Posted 29 September 2019 - 08:15 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 45870 battles
  • 839
  • Member since:
    07-28-2015
The Shermans are ok if you know how to use them with the right setup and crew, i have never bothered commenting about them on the forum because everybody is just moaning about how bad they are, i have actually 2 marked both the Ripper and The M4 Champion using mostly regular ammo and actually earned decent credits, i think that the M4 improved seeing up to tier 7 was just a typo from Wg its not like it is the first time that has happened.

CORSAIR_CRAZY #26 Posted 29 September 2019 - 02:20 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 33888 battles
  • 3,796
  • [SRT]
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

View PostWroclaw, on 29 September 2019 - 01:33 AM, said:

the M4 Improved should be changed.

 

Wargaming missed a chance to give us a proper premium Sherman with the M4 Improved. it should have had the same MM as the TT version, & it should have had the same top gun package. either it, or the Champion, should have been a fully upgraded 76mm M1A1.

 

its beggars belief that they would have made either to be just the same as the three premium 75mm equipped duds we already have.

The M4 improved is a historical tank, it was correctly implemented in the game down to the Horsch horizontal volute spring suspension that they used, which was borrowed or designed by the tractor company itself.  It’s one of those instances when you see WG actually following the correct implementation from real life which makes the rest of the cobbled together “real in WOT only” tanks all the more annoying.

 

the champion is supposed to be an Emcha lend/lease sherman but they got everything about it wrong.  No documented photos of russian shermans with sand bags exists.  That sand bag deal was strictly an american thing.  Many Emcha had logs tied to the sides like the Fury, they were ALL welded hull M4A2s like the ripper (but with the VVSS suspension) and most had the T49 bar cleat track seen on the revalorise, the rest all had the chevron metal cleat track (designation is T54E1) seen on the brit firefly.  The russians didn’t want the rubber tracks because in subzero temperatures it would get bonded to ice and rip off the metal.  

 

So to model an Emcha correctly they have everything they need in the game, the early Emcha (75mm) is just a Ripper (no sandbags) with VVSS suspension and  one of two types of metal tracks already in the game

 

to model a late Emcha use the M4A3E8 model (turret and all) with the engine deck from the ripper, the early narrow VVSS suspension and again either type of metal cleat tracks 


  

I am a farmable asset,  please don’t call me a potato





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users