I don't know where to start with this. First of all, just because T.A. has been here making posts for longer than I have doesn't exactly mean he knows more than me about everything. Second of all, the part where you say that U.S. tank engineering was far superior to the Russian's is completely absurd. Even if you think that the Sherman was a good tank (which I disagree with) the Russian tanks were superior to the American's (i.e. T-34s, KV-1, IS-2 BT-7, etc.). Furthermore, the Russians clearly had the most prominent role in the defeat of Germany, and to say that if there tanks were so good then why would they have needed us is absurd.

But back to the Sherman and T-34. Both the T-34 and the Sherman were reliable tanks. Even if you argue that the Sherman was more reliable, it doesn't even matter because the T-34 was reliable enough. The Sherman was no match for any of the the latter German tanks it encountered such as the Panther and the Tiger. The T-34 on the other hand was so good that it forced the Germans to make the Panther (which would have been the best tank if it had not been so complex). The T-34 actually stood a chance against these tanks and a lot of the time got the better of them. I mean the Germans called the Sherman the "Tommy Cooker". Anyone who thinks that the Sherman with its weak, low velocity 75mm, and light unsloped armor would defeat a T-34/85 is insane.

Also T.A. if you are taking into account the sloping for those numbers, there is no way the T34/85 would have those numbers. Also, I don't understand what you did with the guns, could you mabye explain?