The P-51 Mustang and Supermarine Spitfire were both brilliant Allied fighters during WW2, but which one was the best?
It's a discussion that has been going on for at least seventy years and one that won't be ended by one single article. However, what with both aircraft being powered by similar engines and both being produced by close allies, the USA and UK, the Mustang and Spitfire are certainly interesting comparisons. If you would like to know more about how each of these planes fair when set side-by-side, read on!
Let's look at the facts!
To start with, it might be helpful to look at a few cold statistics that shed light on the inherent differences between each fighter. Later on, we can dive more deeply into the specifics.
| Aircraft | Mustang | Spitfire |
| Country | USA | Britain |
| Type | Fighter | Fighter |
| First Flight | 1940 | 1936 |
| Introduction | 1942 | 1938 |
| Crew | 1 | 1 |
| Number Built | 16,000 | 20,300 |
As we can see from the comparison table above, it's not exactly a fair fight. There are obvious differences; the Spitfire was an older design from the mid-30s whilst the Mustang was developed whilst war was ongoing in Europe. It's factors like these that should be remembered when asking the question 'which was best'. Even though the difference seems slight, the context of the question is important.
A P-51D in Flight
All Out Performance
To make this fair, let's have a look at two of the most popular and successful variants of each fighter. The P51D and Spitfire MK.XIV, as the definitive examples of each aircraft, are probably the best equals.
A Rolls-Royce Griffon, the engine that powered the MKXIV Spitfire to a top speed of 437mph.
In most cases, the Spitfire had better performance as an all-purpose fighter. The all-important climb rate for a P51D sat at 3200ft per minute whilst the Spitfire could climb at an impressive 3650ft per minute. The maximum speed of a P51D was 437mph whilst the Spitfire was slightly faster at 448mph. For interception, this was clearly quite important. However, the P51D was generally more specialized than the Spitfire. In it's main role, the Mustang proved itself as a superb escort fighter in Allied bombing raids over Germany. For this role, the American aircraft didn't really need the Spitfire's versatile performance. Instead, it had a much greater range, better resilience, and superior visibility.
Firepower
When looking at how effective a fighter is, it's a good idea to look what sort of devastation one can unleash. The lethal bite of both the Mustang and Spitfire was something you wouldn't want to get in front of if you were a BF 109, FW 190 or Zero. Again, let's compare the P51D and Spitfire MK XIV.
| Primary Guns | Secondary Guns | |
| P51D | 6x M2 Browning Machine Guns | N/A |
| Spitfire MK XIV | 4x 20mm cannons | .303 Machine Guns |
It's clear that both aircraft had fearsome loadouts. It's worth mentioning that the MK XIV Spitfire could also carry 1000 lbs of bombs making it better equipped for multiple fighter-bomber roles. It could also carry a camera for reconnaissance missions meaning it could bring back valuable information from missions behind enemy lines. Wing racks were fitted to some P51D's, but the recommended load was just 500lbs. Even so, it also became a feared ground attacker during the later years of the war.
Contribution to the Conflict
Both aircraft have achieved legendary statuses for their contribution to WW2. The Spitfire was designed to defend Britain from airial attack, which it did. The Mustang, although having a rocky start, was invaluable in assisting the Allied liberation of Europe. Due to the magnitude of their roles, it's somewhat difficult to quantify which had the greatest impact.
Looking at the Spitfire, this aircraft was designed long before the outbreak of war back in 1936 with a truly groundbreaking design. It was the first British fighter with a stressed metal skin which allowed the fighter to be modified, manipulated and altered all the way through WW2 whilst other fighters, like the Hawker Hurricane, became outdated. Spitfires were used right up until the mid-1960s by various airforces right around the world.
The last version of the Spitfire, the MKXXIV
Like the Spitfire, the Mustang proved itself on multiple fronts. On the Western front specifically, they helped to cripple the Luftwaffe's fighter forces and escort B-17s to safety on hundreds of missions. Commander of the Luftwaffe Hermann Göring was quoted as saying, "When I saw Mustangs over Berlin, I knew the jig was up." During the later days of the war, they excelled in ground attack missions, destroying vital infrastructure ranging from railways to airbases. The Mustang too served after WW2 and played another key role in Korea.
A Mustang taxis through a puddle at an airbase in Korea.
Which do you think was the best fighter and why? Write a comment below!
Article by James Whomsley
Editor of FliteTest.com
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
The fact of the matter is, the Spitfire had a better design as a fighter, it could carry more bombs, had a bigger punch, & could fly faster, climb higher, turn tighter etc.
The P51D was an escort, its bonus was range, so as to which was best? The Spitfire had higher performance, hands down. However, which of them you would use depends on the situation. The P51D should only be used in situations where long range is required. Otherwise, the Spitfire should be used as it has better performance.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
I'll tell you which, the Spitfire would because of its superior performance, the Mustang is only useful in escort type jobs, any other dogfight, and the Spitfire will win.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
But if you want to go looking for a fight, then the Mustang is by far the better choice!
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Goering's quote wasn't "I knew the jig was up when I saw Spitfires over Paris," or even "I knew the jig was up when I saw Thunderbolts over Alsace."
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Later in the war both aircraft used external fuel tanks to extend range. Adolf Galland's book is a quite instructive insider view on how Germany lost the air war, one aspect being that the opportunity was missed to challenge the allied escort fighters early in their flight so that they were forced to drop their tanks and could not fly so deep into Germany.
Which looks better is trying to split degrees of excellence and varies by model. Is the purity of line of an early Mk 2 Spit better than a pre-merlin 51, or the proportions of a 51D better than a Mk 22? It is probably determined by your national viewpoint - as a Brit growing up where the Battle of Britain was fought and recalling Spits in the '70's doing aerobatics on B O B Sunday over Bentley Priory where Dowding led fighter command in 1940, there is a clear choice for me.
Log In to reply
Its an American built plane by 'North American Aviation' but was designed for the British to British specs and requirements.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
As to power, the Mk. 24 was only ever built in tiny quantities, so although slightly more powerful, it didn't see much active service.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Both of these compromises could have been easily dealt with by a comprehensive redesign, but with the Nazis at the door, HMG naturally decided to proceed with the limitations inherent from progressively modifying an old design.
The Mustangs aerodynamics were revolutionary, and were a natural outcome of the lessons learned, equally at Cal Tech, and in the skies over southern England (which the Spitfire made possible).
The Brits definitely deserve the credit for the Mustang's existence, having paid for the design and development, and for having kept the production line open while the AAF (with a typically American head-in-the-sand attitude) was letting the type die on the vine. That the American brass finally saw what was right in front of them all along is one of the ironies of the war.
Which was better? IMHO, an irrelevant question. The Spitfire lead to the Mustang, and together they won air superiority over the Luftwaffe.
...and that's what counts
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
From a personal perspective I would prefer the Mustang, why?
Built using modern methods of manufacture with consequently standardised parts.
Wider track so safer ground handling.
More room in the cockpit for longer flights.
And critically, the main fuel tank was below you and not in your lap as in the spit. Many pilots found the fuel leaking from the main tank caused horrible burns.
Mustang is as smooth as silk and easy to fly.
I've not flown a spit so can't compare.
Love to some time though.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply