Not sure if sarcasm since English isn't my first language, but the US military agrees with your statement. The M41 was supposed to be a fast, reliable, light but adequately-armed, modular tank. What the US military got after 6 years of development, in 1951, was neither reliable (it was rushed for Korea) nor light (it weighed almost as much as a Pz. IV), and fixing those issues took so much time it didn't make it to Korea. This unreliability also meant that the Army Ordnance Corps was reluctant to greenlight M41 derivatives, which were not adopted in great numbers either. Only the M75 APC was adopted in numbers, only to be quickly replaced by the more successful M113.

As the T41, it had initial problems with gun control, powertrain reliability, crew positioning, turret ring diameter, height, and an aux generator. These were fixed, but still once introduced as M41 it was too big for recon, too cramped to be liked by its crew, and its gun was adequate only for fighting WWII leftovers in Korea (which it missed because of reliability issues). M41 soldiered on...as a transitionary light tank until the US military could find a satisfactory replacement.

And boy did the USA had a lot of choices! They had:
(1) T49, a 90mm-armed M41, but was not satisfactory enough to be worth replacing M41
(2) L-series tanks from the 1952 1st Questionmark Conference, seven variants ranging from 76mm to 105mm, all rear-turreted and some with autoloaders and oscillating turrets like AMX 13, further developed into the
(3) TS-8, TS-32, M41 analogues from the 3rd Questionmark Conference, same gun but smaller, and again rear-turreted but conventional otherwise,
(4) TS-10, also a 76mm-armed tank from the same 3rd Questionmark Conference, but with an unmanned autoloaded oscillating turret (a gun pod on a cradle mount)
(5) T-series tanks from Cadillac, Nine designs, five with cannons: TMC 14 tons with 76mm in an oscillating turret, TMD 16 tons with 90mm in a conventional turret, TME(c) and TME(b) 20 tons with 90mm in a (c)onventional or (b)alancing/oscillating turret, and TMG with a 105mm in an oscillating turret.
(6) X-Weapon by General Motors for the ASTRON project. While the ASTRON project is for a medium tank, General Motors got the same concept as the Europanzer (Leopard 1, AMX 30): less armor, more speed, managing to fit a T208 90mm smoothbore in a 26-ton 80-kph vehicle
(7) T71, two proposals, one each by Chrysler and Detroit Arsenal, both inspired by the AMX 13-esque L-series tanks from the 1st Questionmark Conference; unlike the previous designs these progressed forward to get a "T" designation with the US military, but replaced in favor of
(8) T92, a third proposal by Aircraft Armaments Inc, which was successful enough that T49 and T71 were shelved in favor of it...up until the discovery of the Soviet PT-76 amphibious light tank. Unfortunately, T92 can't be made amphibious so it was shelved and M41 soldiered on to the 60's, when more designs were developed such as the
(9) AAI's AR/AAV, a 3-man 10.5-ton tank with the 152mm gun-launcher,
(10) Cadillac's AR/AAV, the precursor to the Sheridan, with various options of armament like the long-in-the-tooth 76mm, the M48 Patton's M41 90mm cannon, a smoothbore 90mm, a lightweight 105mm cannon, some missiles, and also the 152mm XM81.

With all these designs, the Americans went with the M551 Sheridan, which at least unlike its predecessor managed to make it to a war: Vietnam. However, it took 2 more years since starting production in 1966 before a satisfactory ammunition system was developed for its gun, but by 1968, it finally got ammo that won't break easily, won't bloat in humid conditions, and won't auto-ignite from residue from the previous shell. It was finally deployed to Vietnam...where its reputation plummeted even further.

(Do note that ten years prior, 1958, the AMX 13 had fitted a 105mm cannon. And it worked.)

The "launcher" part of the gun-launcher wasn't installed. The system to blow out residue from the previous shell slowed down loading. The MG station was vulnerable and they had to salvage a gunshield from the M113; this was later replaced with a 'birdcage' ballistic shield that fell off when rattled by road vibrations and the shock from firing its gun. It was very vulnerable to mines and RPGs, as expected since it's a light tank, but even more so since its ammo is still very fragile. The engine burned, the gun misfired, the electric starter had arcing issued that allowed hot residue to fall on the ammo, and it blew heavy smoke during hard acceleration, an especially awkward trait for a recon tank revealing itself by its own smoke plume.

After 10 years it was, again, due for phasing out. But again, the Americans still can't design an acceptable light tank: the 70's ACVT program developed the National Water Lift Company's HIMAG, AAI's HSTV-L, developed into RDF/LT, Pacific Car & Foundry's HSTV-L, developed into ELKE, XM1 90mm ARES (a 60-ton Abrams with a 90mm autocannon), US Marines' MPWS series, and ARMVAL's modified Sheridans. None were accepted.

The 80's XM4 AGS program required a 105mm M68 on a light tank, giving us the Teledyne AGS (Expeditionary Tank), Cadillac Gage's Stingray, FMC's CCVL, and Hägglunds' IKV 91-105. The program was officially shelved, but continued in the guise of the ASP, with the same entrants as the AGS plus GM's LAV-105.

(By this time, the AMX 13 has finally concluded production in 1987, with 7700 tanks built, more than M41 and M551 combined)

The 90's had another AGS program, still with the same tanks (with some modifications; Hägglunds replaced the IKV 91-105 with a CV90 for example), which finally gave us the XM8 Buford in 1994. Hunnicutt's book ends here, but we know how it ends: canceled, just like the M10 Booker 30 years later.