@barnee In “Armored Tactics” by Stackpole books, the author makes the argument that Canada had the most advanced understanding of armored warfare in the interwar period among the allies. The US attempted to design vehicles and tactics from scratch, but still ended up imitating the role of a traditional cavalry arm, whereas the British, despite their experience in WW1 drew the wrong lessons and adopted the french approach of 2 (or more) types of breakthrough tanks vs fortress tanks along with integration of these types within traditional infantry formations–both of which proved disastrous (for france). As we know, the germans focused the effect of their limited armor by creating mobile breakthrough mechanized divisions that could locally overwhelm and outmaneuver the penny packets of potentially better french tanks that were often bypassed or abandoned, because the French did not have the concept of an armored reserve.
All of this is a long winded way of saying that the Canadians need a special RAM tank unit to be a true representation of their potential. Even though the canadians did not produce many (any) of their own vehicles from scratch, they apparently (according to this source) were the only allies who drew the correct conclusions from the experience of WW1 and the German developments of the interwar period.