>>7497413Based off what I’ve read it’s a combination of several things
>the Sherman wasn’t the tank the army really wanted when it was first introduced, but it was the best thing available in such short notice much like how the Lee was before it. So once you are in peacetime you have far more time to build what you really want.>m4 might have had room for improvement, but it had picked up a mixed reputation during ww2. Further more considering Shermans seemed to have struggled with NK tanks it’s only logical to call it quits seeing as the US was the new world power and leader of the free world having a tank that is subpar wouldn’t be very becoming of such a power. >the many variants of the m4 probably played a role in it. The parts might be interchangeable for the most part, but it’s not hard to imagine choosing to start over with a better overall tank and simplifying production with that one vs building 20+ different variants every time an new issue comes up.>the dick waving contest with the soviets was under way and the M4 is not the most impressive tank compared to the Soviet monsters of the late/post war era. >JS-3 JSU-152 and other late/post war Soviet armor scared the hell out of allied nations so the logical idea was making something bigger and just as scary >the M26 Pershing and been rather impressive to the military and could pose a real threat to the new machines of the soviets with far less modifications. So instead of constantly shoehorning mods onto the m4 and producing m26s just faze out the m4 and improve the m26 when needed. 