The Grant had the second turret removed and had a lower turret. These two adaptations significantly reduced the height of the tank's silhouette. Therefore I think the Grant is better.
The Grant still fielded the 37mm in a turret and a 75mm in the hull. The same as the Lee. Am i correct?
Quite correct. The Grant lacked the commanders cupola and had a longer turret to accomodate the radio equipment per the British specs. The US design had the radios in the hull. The M3 (Grant I = British turret/Lee I = US turret), M3A4 (Lee VI) and M3A5 (Grant II, with US turret) had riveted hulls. The M3A1 (Lee II), M3A2 (Lee III), and M3A3 (Lee V) had welded hulls. The M3A3 also had diesel engines. Most M3's had the (short) M2 75mm gun, while later model M3's had the (long) M3 75mm gun. Note that all M3's had gyro stabilized guns, both the 37mm and 75mm. All things considered, a late model M3A3 (Lee V) was probably the best of the breed.
The Grant still looked better, as compared to the Lee. The Lee turret looked like a cardboard cake holder sitting atop the hull. Not that the Grant was a thing of beauty, though.....
LEE or Grant tank It really didnt matter which looked better just that when first used by British forces in the desert it gave them a reasonable 75mm cannon capable of firing HE shells with a good amount of explosive instead of only solid 37mm's which didny really work against infantry or antitank weaponry
The Grant was a nasty surprise to the german AT gunners but they soon ajusted and started using their '88s' on them from long range. The crusader wasnt even able to carry HE rounds!!
Like all British tanks armed with the 2pdr, which simply wasn't a dual-purpose gun. Later versions of the Crusader (notably the Crusader III) wielded the 6pdr which was in fact capable of firing HE shells. The M3 tank was an "all right" step between the older, pre-war tanks and the Sherman for which it was a stopgap measure. It did indeed give German tanks a surprise because the tank had unseen range and hitting power due to its two guns. But it never was a star on the battlefield because of its huge silhouette and hardly movable main gun. The crews (6 men!) did often praise the tank for its roomy interiors though!
The M3 originally had a seven man crew! Commander Driver Asst driver/radioman 37mm Gunner 37mm Loader 75mm Gunner 75mm Loader I'm not sure who got dropped off, probably the assistant driver or the 37mm loader.
Since the asst. driver is usually the hull gunner, but the Lee/Grant doesn't have a hull MG (yet a big hull gun! ) I think it would have been this crewman that got dropped off.
For a tank that had so many flaws (high profile, pap gun in turret, riveted armor, etc, etc) it's curious how little flack the Lee/Grant attracts. I guess being refered to as a stop gap means in this case all sins are forgiven.
Well, put it this way - it was an enormous & much needed boost to our desert forces when it first arrived, and before its shortcomings really started to bite, it was replaced by the Sheman, which was an improvement again.
The Lee was the fastest tank ever to move from the drawing board to the construction line. Naturally there were many flaws; it had only the basics, giving the Allied forces a little breathing space in the Desert while giving the designers in the US time to come up with a real medium tank.
Well, at leat they saved the British from a bad mauling from the germans. Some would even agree their delaying action stopped the DesertWolf, oops, , i mean DesertFox from reaching cairo.
Offcourse thats true. But victory doesnt have one cause. A cumilation of those factors u mentioned plus the grant plus other factors lead to Rommels defeat.
