>>9293431I'm not angry, but your comparison doesn't make sense.
You're comparing a tank designed in 1940, to a tank that was designed in 1936, 3 years before WWII. In the first months of WWII, military doctrines were turned upside down.
>got quite a few upgradesThe only 2 relevant upgrades were the new cannon for anti-tank purposes and the side armor. The main armor was considered weak by 1941.
BUT
If we really want to compare the Sherman to the Panzer IV, then the Sherman failed.
The Sherman was designed as an American counter against the Panzer IV. While the Sherman was better than the Pz. IV, the difference was not that great, the Sherman roughly had 60% chance at winning against the Panzer IV. To the Panzer IV, the Sherman was not the same as the Tiger to T-34s.
