err what? check out penentration stats for weapons like 57mm soviet AT gun, or the 85mm guns. They could take out vast majority of German tanks with ease.
People seem 2 forget that it was very rarely that tank fights occured >1000m range. Just like it is rare even in Afghanistan for very long-range firefights.
T-34 was without question the most advanced tank design in its time (1941). It had mistakes like all new tank designs have, but they were soon fixed. It was simple - this was no weakness. It had superiour speed all the way till 34/85.
Allied tanks were generally junk in tank2tank combat and were built 2 be mass produced. Shermans were nicknamed tommy cookers for an entire year b4 the problems were fixed. Sure maybe allied tanks weren't meant 2 be used as AT weapons per US doctrine, but they were - many times in 1944 and 1945.
I think just comparing a tank 2 tank is really dumb. maybe Germans had higher technical standards (until 1944-1945 then their steel quality became inferiour) but then again their tanks were infamous for being unpractical.
End of the day: on eastern front USSR + allies lost some 6,8 million KIA (Rossiyja i CCCP - vorozheniiji poterii v XX vek). Nazi Germany + allies lost ~ 4,4 million KIA (book: deutsche militariche verluste am Zweite Weltskrieg).
Nothing more that matters other than this, and the fact that Nazi Germany lost.
Everyone knows that no weapon existed that could take on the Pz II, let alone bigger tanks.