M-4 Sherman Tanks Lined up in a Snow Covered Field, near St. Vith, Belgium-1945 [5311X4203]

And it would also be a good idea to stop trying to be incredibly hostile. It certainly doesn't do you any favors.

I apologize, I simply get frustrated when I see the same tired rumors about the Sherman.

Most tank crews disabled the stabilizer because it was too unwieldy.

Yes, but you simply claimed that the Tiger was more technologically advanced, and that's simply not true. I never claimed the tech worked or not.

Next, the gun performance of the Kwk 36 was significantly better through the fact that it had more accuracy, velocity, and mass per shell than the 76mm M1.

Debatable, depending on the shell, the 76mm does better than the kwk 36 at combat ranges.

As for velocity, that's simply not true, the shells fired by the 76mm are all either close to the exact same, or better, than anything fired by the kwk 36.

I also never said anything about the Tiger being made for infantry support or that it was the best at that in the German army's inventory.

No, you didn't say it was made for it, but you claimed it was better at it than the Sherman.

As for tank-on-tank action, the U.S. Army's doctrine at the time of the Sherman's introduction stated that tank destroyers such as the M010 Wolverine were to be the main vehicles to go up against other tanks.

That is wrong,The doctrine for the Armored Force even specifically states that the Medium and Light tanks must be able to fight other tanks. TDs were designed to combat expected German tank spearheads. They were intended to supplement, not replace, the AT capabilities of the other combat arms. By the end of the war the Sherman was armed exactly the same as the TDs.

Don't believe me? Here's the doctrine for you to read yourself. http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/PDFs/FM17-10.PDF

Finally, you are correct in that the Tiger was designed at first as a breakthrough tank, but where exactly in late 1942 and early 1943 would they be breaking through?

Russia, but that doesn't mean they were designed with the idea that it was a counter to T-34s and KVs.

Besides, there's a reason why both the Tiger and the Panther were first sent to Russia as soon as they were developed...

Because they were fighting a large enemy that needed more of their resources? There wasn't a special reason for it, they just needed more tanks there.

and that is because they were the only armored vehicles that could reliably get through the Russian armor at the time.

Nope, when it comes to medium vs medium, the Panzer IV with the Pak 40 could pen the t-34 without many problems. It could also pen the KVs, but that did have some problems.

All of this information can be found on cited websites such as Wikipedia. However, if that isn't good enough for you, I won't hesitate to post some sources.

I used a bit of wikipedia here too, and a book or two, plus a guy I know that works in a armor museum, so he knows his shit more than either of us.

Source: Panther vs Sherman: Battle of the Bulge 1944 by Steven Zaloga.

/r/HistoryPorn Thread Link - catalog.archives.gov