I know this is really old but I feel like I have to leave an answer. The answer is it depends. It depends on which model of spitfire and mustang you are comparing, which role you are comparing them in, who is flying them, etc. If you are comparing them in a 1:1 dogfight that’s also a different case. Early war spots were far superior to early was mustangs but soon mustangs caught up with the engine change. Towards the end of the war however, spitfires had a further engine change giving them more power, higher manifold pressure at lower altitudes, better climb rate, higher speed, and better turn radius. So again the answer is it depends but if you take the most modern spitfire and Mustang from May 1945 and put them head to head in a duel (with pilots of equal capability), my money would be on the Spit. Then again, the altitude they are fighting at would also potentially change the outcome but I don’t reckon by much. Spitfires were developed further than the P-51 as new models were coming out for longer than newer P-51 models. I hope this makes it a bit clear on why this question is a hard one to answer hahaha (and this is coming from a guy whose favourite plane is the P-51).
Both great aircraft but I like the Spitfire more because it is more maneuverable and looks Legit , however a spitfire would not as good at escorting a B-17 as a P-51 .
Additionally, same page as the citation below also states that the RAF, upon evaluating the Allison-engined Mustang I determined that “Tests soon showed the Mustang I to be superior to the Kittyhawk [P-40], Airacobra [P-39] and Spitfire [has to be the Merlin engined variety] in both speed and maneuverability at low altitudes.” And this wasn’t even the Merlin-engines Mustang, clearly superior to the original Allison engined model in nearly every measure.
Interesting. Just found this note in a recent book, “Dogfight” by Tony Holmes (Chartwell Books, 2012). In Part IV, Dueling for the Reich 1943-45, P-51 Mustang vs. Fw 190, the author relates on p. 216 that after the RAF took delivery of their first Allison-powered Mustang Is, “...It’s first operational sortie [with the RAF] was flown on July 27 and in October Allison-powered Mustangs became the first RAF single-engined single-seat fighters to penetrate German airspace from England.”
@Mostly well, I’ll meet you half way on this with a qualification: I’m certainly not a “fanboy”. The term is degrading and frankly, not an accurate description of me personally. I have a B.S. in History from the United States Air Force Academy, plus 24 years flying U-2s, T-38, T-37 and KC-135. So, I know a bit about Airpower and Airpower history (notice how I capped “Airpower”?), because I’ve spent most of my adult life thinking about this subject. I have also graduated from both the Air Command and Staff and Air War College courses. Plus, I’ve worked staff assignments at the numbered Air Force, CAOC and MAJCOM levels, working operational issues. So, I know a bit of what I’m talking about. The Spit was a great dog fighter but much shorter ranged. The Mustang didn’t turn quite as well, but was fast and long ranged and exploited zoom and boom tactics, but could certainly turn if need be. Both were highly successful in their roles. The fact of the matter, though, is we need to understand the history accurately. To do otherwise is to introduce a creeping misreading or revisionism to the truth.
@ChiChiWerx Okay then case closed. I love the mustang much more than the spitfire, but when It comes to performance in terms of air-to-air combat capabilities, and tactical use, the spitfire, In my opinion is better than the P-51. I get you're a fanboy for the P-51 but the spitfire can do many things the P-51 can't do, just as the P-51 can do just as many things as the spitfire can't.
@Mostly the summary page says exactly what I’ve been saying all along. So, no LoL. The first paragraph highlights its Home Defence role, while the second emphasizes its P.R. Role and evolution (in Griff Spit guise) as a more multi-role aircraft. The P-51 lands on MULTIPLE “finest fighter of WWII” lists by many historians. The Spit does as well, but not as many in my perusal of the subject, but I could be incorrect here. Tactically, but he Spit could outturn the Mustang (something you don’t even mention for some reason), while the Stang was superior in speed, but certainly no slouch when in cane to dogfighting (reference Eric Brown’s quote). Strategically, the Mustang’s superior range allowed it to attain the strategic effect of taking the fight to the enemy and into Germany. The Spitfire’s strategic impact was to prevent the Allies from losing the war in the first place. Both significant roles, but your characterization is incorrect. The Spit didn’t single-handedly win the war and just allow the Mustang and 8th Air Force to simply waltz into the Fatherland. There was a lot of bloody combat and mayhem from 1943 and beyond. In fact, the bloodiest day for the Mighty 8th was 14 Oct 43 on the Scheeinfurt mission. Ultimately caused the USAAF to abandon the idea of unescorted daylight bombing. If your assertion of the Spit being an escort is correct, where was the Spit on that day? Couldn’t be there, but the Stang was eventually there and allowed the continuation of 8th AF bombing against the German heartland, where the fighting was more desperate by the Luftwaffe.
@Mostly no LOL. CLEARLY I know what I’m talking about. It’s escort role was highly limited as RAF Bomber Command flew night missions without escort. Sure it flew sweeps and some escort across the Channel over France but this was likited. Plus it’s range was limited.
BTW, I’ve read all three of these primary accounts...and more. The three books are sitting in my library. You have read them, haven’t you? Or are you arguing your points based on knowledge gained by reading secondary and tertiary accounts on the Net? Besides I’m not saying the Spit did nothing. Read my comments carefully...I just disagree with your assertion marganalizing the Mustang’s role as a mop up. Simply incorrect.
@Mostly also how would you explain the fact that the P-51 has the most kills of any USAAF type in WWII? I thought you said, “hey, the P-51 was just mopping up.” The P-38 was withdrawn in favor of the Pacific theater, where it’s twin engines were a better safety margin over water and is cockpit heater was more adequate, leaving (I believe) a single P-38 group in Europe by 1944. The Bolt was readsigned to fly strike missions, better suited due to the P-47’s ability to absorb damage. The Spit didn’t even fly escort missions, it did photoreconnaissance with the longer ranged recce Marks modified to carry fuel in its leading edges. The Spit’s (and Hurri’s) main role in all this was that saved Britain’s butt during the BoB, without which the whole war would have been over. After that, it flew cross Channel missions where it first met the 190s. But the Spit’s role was “increasingly defensive from 1943 on” (Wikipedia quote), Home Defense. I would characterize the Spit’s role like a homeowner with a .38 shooting a home invader. But it really didn’t carry the fight into Western Germany. That was done by the Lancaster, Mossie, Typhoon and Tempest. By the way, another couple of excellent books on this are “Reach for the Sky”, Douglas Bader’s book and “The Big Show” by Pierre Clostermann. The first book by Gp Capt Douglas Bader tells about the earlier phase with the Spit as he was shot down over France in 1941. He lost his legs in a prewar flying accident and flew with articficial legs during the war—incredible story and great read, BTW. Clostermann was a Typhoon/Tempest Pilot during the war and his book tells the story of the latter part of the air war. Those along with the 4th FG’s account should give you a some more historical perspective in your assertions the Mustang did nothing and the Spitfire claimed air superiority over Western Europe.
@ChiChiWerx Well if you thought I was saying that then you were saying the same thing in vice-versa. You were basically saying that the P-51 won the war, and the Spitfire didn't do anything. lol
@Mostly do you’re saying, “hey the air war had already been won, so really the P-51 didn’t really do anything!”??? Really. Please read this book, 1000 Destroyed, it’s the USAAF’s 4th FG’s account of the war Over Europe.
P-51 got the movement but the spitfire has the guns
P-51
I know this is really old but I feel like I have to leave an answer. The answer is it depends. It depends on which model of spitfire and mustang you are comparing, which role you are comparing them in, who is flying them, etc. If you are comparing them in a 1:1 dogfight that’s also a different case. Early war spots were far superior to early was mustangs but soon mustangs caught up with the engine change. Towards the end of the war however, spitfires had a further engine change giving them more power, higher manifold pressure at lower altitudes, better climb rate, higher speed, and better turn radius. So again the answer is it depends but if you take the most modern spitfire and Mustang from May 1945 and put them head to head in a duel (with pilots of equal capability), my money would be on the Spit. Then again, the altitude they are fighting at would also potentially change the outcome but I don’t reckon by much. Spitfires were developed further than the P-51 as new models were coming out for longer than newer P-51 models. I hope this makes it a bit clear on why this question is a hard one to answer hahaha (and this is coming from a guy whose favourite plane is the P-51).
I think p-51 because of the maneuverability and better armererment of 6 .50 caliber machine guns
@Spacedoge12345plane it is.
@Mostly ChiChi is not a fanboy. It's okay to disagree with him, but people should be grateful he takes the time to share what he knows.
Btw u said ciffin not coffin. I liked the post btw@F104Deathtrap
Btw is ur user image a u-2 pilot @ChiChiWerx
On it@ChiChiWerx
Both great aircraft but I like the Spitfire more because it is more maneuverable and looks Legit , however a spitfire would not as good at escorting a B-17 as a P-51 .
Lol @DuckMintnewprofile
@ChiChiWerx @Mostly ARE YOU GUYS DONE? 😆 How do you have enough stamina to do this 😂
Additionally, same page as the citation below also states that the RAF, upon evaluating the Allison-engined Mustang I determined that “Tests soon showed the Mustang I to be superior to the Kittyhawk [P-40], Airacobra [P-39] and Spitfire [has to be the Merlin engined variety] in both speed and maneuverability at low altitudes.” And this wasn’t even the Merlin-engines Mustang, clearly superior to the original Allison engined model in nearly every measure.
Interesting. Just found this note in a recent book, “Dogfight” by Tony Holmes (Chartwell Books, 2012). In Part IV, Dueling for the Reich 1943-45, P-51 Mustang vs. Fw 190, the author relates on p. 216 that after the RAF took delivery of their first Allison-powered Mustang Is, “...It’s first operational sortie [with the RAF] was flown on July 27 and in October Allison-powered Mustangs became the first RAF single-engined single-seat fighters to penetrate German airspace from England.”
@Mostly well, I’ll meet you half way on this with a qualification: I’m certainly not a “fanboy”. The term is degrading and frankly, not an accurate description of me personally. I have a B.S. in History from the United States Air Force Academy, plus 24 years flying U-2s, T-38, T-37 and KC-135. So, I know a bit about Airpower and Airpower history (notice how I capped “Airpower”?), because I’ve spent most of my adult life thinking about this subject. I have also graduated from both the Air Command and Staff and Air War College courses. Plus, I’ve worked staff assignments at the numbered Air Force, CAOC and MAJCOM levels, working operational issues. So, I know a bit of what I’m talking about. The Spit was a great dog fighter but much shorter ranged. The Mustang didn’t turn quite as well, but was fast and long ranged and exploited zoom and boom tactics, but could certainly turn if need be. Both were highly successful in their roles. The fact of the matter, though, is we need to understand the history accurately. To do otherwise is to introduce a creeping misreading or revisionism to the truth.
@ChiChiWerx Okay then case closed. I love the mustang much more than the spitfire, but when It comes to performance in terms of air-to-air combat capabilities, and tactical use, the spitfire, In my opinion is better than the P-51. I get you're a fanboy for the P-51 but the spitfire can do many things the P-51 can't do, just as the P-51 can do just as many things as the spitfire can't.
@Mostly the summary page says exactly what I’ve been saying all along. So, no LoL. The first paragraph highlights its Home Defence role, while the second emphasizes its P.R. Role and evolution (in Griff Spit guise) as a more multi-role aircraft. The P-51 lands on MULTIPLE “finest fighter of WWII” lists by many historians. The Spit does as well, but not as many in my perusal of the subject, but I could be incorrect here. Tactically, but he Spit could outturn the Mustang (something you don’t even mention for some reason), while the Stang was superior in speed, but certainly no slouch when in cane to dogfighting (reference Eric Brown’s quote). Strategically, the Mustang’s superior range allowed it to attain the strategic effect of taking the fight to the enemy and into Germany. The Spitfire’s strategic impact was to prevent the Allies from losing the war in the first place. Both significant roles, but your characterization is incorrect. The Spit didn’t single-handedly win the war and just allow the Mustang and 8th Air Force to simply waltz into the Fatherland. There was a lot of bloody combat and mayhem from 1943 and beyond. In fact, the bloodiest day for the Mighty 8th was 14 Oct 43 on the Scheeinfurt mission. Ultimately caused the USAAF to abandon the idea of unescorted daylight bombing. If your assertion of the Spit being an escort is correct, where was the Spit on that day? Couldn’t be there, but the Stang was eventually there and allowed the continuation of 8th AF bombing against the German heartland, where the fighting was more desperate by the Luftwaffe.
@ChiChiWerx
yes lol
Geez, look here. Famous range graphic.
@Mostly no LOL. CLEARLY I know what I’m talking about. It’s escort role was highly limited as RAF Bomber Command flew night missions without escort. Sure it flew sweeps and some escort across the Channel over France but this was likited. Plus it’s range was limited.
@ChiChiWerx Lol, spits did escort missions over europe many times over, but ok.
Also I might check out some of those books, they sound interesting.
BTW, I’ve read all three of these primary accounts...and more. The three books are sitting in my library. You have read them, haven’t you? Or are you arguing your points based on knowledge gained by reading secondary and tertiary accounts on the Net? Besides I’m not saying the Spit did nothing. Read my comments carefully...I just disagree with your assertion marganalizing the Mustang’s role as a mop up. Simply incorrect.
@Mostly also how would you explain the fact that the P-51 has the most kills of any USAAF type in WWII? I thought you said, “hey, the P-51 was just mopping up.” The P-38 was withdrawn in favor of the Pacific theater, where it’s twin engines were a better safety margin over water and is cockpit heater was more adequate, leaving (I believe) a single P-38 group in Europe by 1944. The Bolt was readsigned to fly strike missions, better suited due to the P-47’s ability to absorb damage. The Spit didn’t even fly escort missions, it did photoreconnaissance with the longer ranged recce Marks modified to carry fuel in its leading edges. The Spit’s (and Hurri’s) main role in all this was that saved Britain’s butt during the BoB, without which the whole war would have been over. After that, it flew cross Channel missions where it first met the 190s. But the Spit’s role was “increasingly defensive from 1943 on” (Wikipedia quote), Home Defense. I would characterize the Spit’s role like a homeowner with a .38 shooting a home invader. But it really didn’t carry the fight into Western Germany. That was done by the Lancaster, Mossie, Typhoon and Tempest. By the way, another couple of excellent books on this are “Reach for the Sky”, Douglas Bader’s book and “The Big Show” by Pierre Clostermann. The first book by Gp Capt Douglas Bader tells about the earlier phase with the Spit as he was shot down over France in 1941. He lost his legs in a prewar flying accident and flew with articficial legs during the war—incredible story and great read, BTW. Clostermann was a Typhoon/Tempest Pilot during the war and his book tells the story of the latter part of the air war. Those along with the 4th FG’s account should give you a some more historical perspective in your assertions the Mustang did nothing and the Spitfire claimed air superiority over Western Europe.
@ChiChiWerx Well if you thought I was saying that then you were saying the same thing in vice-versa. You were basically saying that the P-51 won the war, and the Spitfire didn't do anything. lol
@Mostly do you’re saying, “hey the air war had already been won, so really the P-51 didn’t really do anything!”??? Really. Please read this book, 1000 Destroyed, it’s the USAAF’s 4th FG’s account of the war Over Europe.