If you want to have a proper argument about FW190 performance levels it's probably best to dig up some materials.
So I've started...with this:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...0/fw190a5.html
Appears to be based on original documents with the information translated on the page for easy reading. If the numbers in this example are correct then the speed of our FW190A-5 (standard boost) is dead on at sea level and at critical height. The climb rate as represented here is somewhat less than what the IL-2 version has in IL-2 compare suggesting it may infact be over modelled if this report is accurate. I think a closer look at the aircraft represented in the game and in the test are probably important too.
I also found this RAF report very interesting:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...-47-1658-D.pdf
The notes remark about how excellent the FW190 manoeuvrability in the roll plane is but how the elevator tightens at speed (ours does not appear to) and how easy it is to stall the aircraft in tight turns and at stall speed. Interestingly they talk about 10 degrees of flaps to help tighten the turn. I've long since stopped using combat flaps on the FW190 in IL-2.. does anyone else?
You could argue that the RAF report is biased. It might be... is there a similar pilots notes comparison out there from a German source? I know the comments in my FW190A-5 Aces of the Eastern Front from Osprey have the same notes with one translation from somewhere (its not referenced which gives me pause) suggesting that FW190 pilots should employ the same tactics on the East Front as they are finding effective on the West Front - that is to say the high speed hit and zoom as a group tactic avoiding Spitfires or Yak's alike in the horizontal.
I took out a FW190A-5 and a A-8 online yesterday. It's good fun and with the improved turn rate in 4.11 it's even easier to draw a bead on a manoeuvring aircraft.