[David603]

@Firescull

Generally, the Spitfire was more maneuverable while the Bf-109 was a bit faster with some better climbing ability. The skills of the pilots varied wildly from location to location and from time to time.

Well,that is common generalization from the beginning of the war,regarding Spitfire MK I/II,and Bf-109E4/E7,which is somehow reflected on all future Spitfire models...it is clearly mistake.

LuckyOne, I see where you are going with this point. For frontline fighters-which saw the vast majority of combat, actual accounts show that this remained true until almost the end of World War Two: Spitfires being somewhat more maneuverable and Bf-109s being somewhat faster with better climb.

Not strictly true. An early Spitfire IX (with Merlin 61) is faster than the contemporary Bf109F, while the Merlin 63 and 66 versions retain this superiority over the G2 and G6, and also have better climb rates. The Spitfire XIV (introduced in early 1944, and almost 1000 built, along with 300 of the similar MkXVIII) is substantially superior in speed and climb compared to any Bf109 up until the K series introduced in late 1944, and even then the K only has a slight top speed advantage and climb rates are very similar.

As for manouverability, the only time 109's and Spitfires had anything close to equality is when the Bf109F was facing the Spitfire V (to a lesser extent also G2 vs Spit IX).

I am not a Spitfire Fanboy as such, I actually enjoy flying both planes a great deal, and if anything the Bf109K4 is the plane I spend most time in online, but the old myth that Bf109s are always faster and better climbing than contemporary Spitfires needs to be dispelled.