What is the worst tank of WWII?

We heard about the best, what would be the worst "main" battle tank of the war? I would have to say the Sherman. You must remember, I am looking the the main battle tank and the Sherman falls under this. It was under gunned and caught on fire easily. Yet, it was produced in large quantities. It did have good armor protection. It was easy to produce and maintain. But, in a slugging match, it was no match at all. The Americans could have done better.

------------------
"They wrote in the old days that it is sweet and fitting to die for one's country. But in modern war there is nothing sweet or fitting in your dying. You will die like a dog for no good reason."

 

wasn't there this model of tank the US had that was called the "Grant" used in North Africa? I don't think that one did very well?
I don't recall it having any positive features...at least the sherman was easy to produce!

 

My vote goes for the two man crewed Japanese light tanks as the worst tanks in WW2.

 

My vote goes to.........

the crusader, this tank preformed miserable in the dessert war. It broke down or cought fire without enemy "help"

 

Wittmann: I just wanted to say-welcome aboard.

 

panther and tiger, Evans
(panter and tiger = two tanks
tanks = thanks)
so thanks Evans

 

Dear Wittmann: Tanks you and Tanks for the laughs, also-notice your ratings? Take care and have a nice weekend.

Het Otto, we both need to keep our day jobs-Eh?

I agree with you assessment on the crews and training. Definately the Japanese tanks were abysmal. Those things were like Volkswagen Beetles with a MG~~OR~~ a small box with tracks. Those things looked like wind-up toys. Perhaps the Japanese tank manufacturers turned to making those irritating toys we have seen on the market ever since the 1950's.

 

Otto,
Most definitely! The panzer forces in the East have proven that superior training does make a difference. We all would admit that the T-34 was grossly superior to anything the Germans had until the Tiger was introduced yet the Germans were knocking them out at a rate of 2or3 to one when they changed tactics and discipline. I would even say that the Germans had the best trained panzer korps of all the nations.

 

Should it not be noted that Japanese tanks, although they were inferior to the MBTs of the ETO when compared to them as though they were intended to combat them, were intended at most as MG carriers & such.
Moreover, a Tiger, Panther, Churchil, Grant, etc isn't the sort of heavy object that makes for easy sea transport. The PTO was largely islands.
Also, the enemies the japanese faced didn't exactly have topnotch armor or AT capabilities themselves - at least other than the Russians, who the Japanese wisely avoided after a brush with them, and the Americans if you wish to consider the Sherman, which i believe did not show up in nearly the numbers it did in the ETO. Recall that the growth of tanks in size and offensive power came about as a result of the combatant nations in Europe encountering each other's tanks and trying to one-up each other.
The Germans, to comment further, achieved their initial victories using some of their lightest tanks, while the behemoths made (in)famous during WW2 fought mostly during the long, but nonetheless futile defense of Germany.
As a matter of fact, in my opinion, the Germans are as likely a candidate for producing the worst tanks as any other nation. Granted, some were among the most formidable of the war, but was it not other aspects of ther nature - their complexity, with all the related performance problems, and difficulty to construct in large numbers, which contributed in no small part to Germany's eventual defeat?