P51 mustang or mitsubishi zero?

Question

P51 mustang or mitsubishi zero?

Answer 1

I think a better comparison would be a P-51 and Me-109.

Answer 2

If I had to sit in one and in a dog-fightfight, I would take the Mustang P-51D.

"The finest of the Mustangs was the P-51D powered by a Packard built V12 Merlin which produced nearly 1,700 hp. This machine could do about 440 mph in level flight, carried six heavy machine guns in the laminer-flow wing and could be fitted with rockets or 2,000lbs of ordnance for ground attack missions.

This machine when fitted with drop tanks could escort the US heavy bomber formations all the way to the targets and back, a feat no other single engined fighter could adequately manage. "The Mustang was also a supremely capable dog-fighter" which could take on any fighter aircraft put up to intercept the formations until the appearance of ME262 jets and to some extent the rocket propelled ME163 aircraft (the later being easy meat when it's fuel ran out)."

Yes, the Zero was a very potent fighter in the pacific theater. While the Zero was extremely maneuverable and had a fast rate of climb. It also had a top speed of only 350 miles per hour, a service ceiling of 38,500 feet, and a combat range of better than 1,170 miles.

The Zero was armed with a "pair" of 7.7 millimeter Vickers-type machine guns.  Each gun was supplied with 500 rounds of ammunition.  In addition, a 20-millimeter cannon with 60 rounds was mounted in each wing.  (This is rather puny compared to the 6 heavy machine guns in the Mustang.) The Zeros had neither armor plate nor bulletproof glass.  Instead, the zero relied for survival on its maneuverability and high rate of climb.

The Zero, once the most  feared fighter in the Pacific, became outclassed  by new more powerful American fighters. Unless you were willing to die in a suicide attack, the Mustang, with its superb amorments and brute speed is my choice of a single seat fighter aircraft. It was considered a very capable dog-fighter plane.

I was born in 1937 and I was very well informed on these and other fighters - the P38 being another of my favorites. We saw the news reels in theaters and I read Life Magazine with a passion as well as the newspapers. Although I am Canadian, almost alll of the famous American generals were my heros as were the heavy bomber pilots.

Answer 3

provide pictures and maybe we can answer better

Answer 4

By the time the P-51 was flying in the Pacific Theater, the cream of the Japanese Navy pilots had already been killed.

So a direct comparison is problematical.  The Mustang was faster in a straight line, in a climb, and in a dive.  Better armor, and hard hitting .50 cals.

The A6M could turn inside a P-51 if the pilot was dumb enough to try to get into a furball.

Overall, P-51 wins 99% of the time.

Answer 5

In fact, P-51 did serve in Pacific with 426th/457th and 10 other FG, escorting B-29 to Tokyo from Iwo Jima.  It was P-51D-25/20 models which were eqiped with K-14 gyroscope gunsight.  They had a substential number of Japanese fighter kills.  Zero (A6M7) were not very abundant in those days, and they would be no match to vertically superior fighters such as Mustang or P-47s.  

What American P-51 encountered were Hayate and other Nakamich fighters which were still called "Zeros".  

During this campaign, over 130 P-51 were lost due to groundfire with 99 pilots lost.  But as longrange escort fighter, it was proven that P-51 can outperform any Japanese fighter.

Answer 6

Not to mention, Zeros were inexpensively made with cheap and flammable materials.  The Mustang was a later entry and simply more advanced for the day.  Plus the P-51 just looks better, and looking good is half the battle!  P-51 has my vote.

Answer 7

P51 of course.

In fact, the Zero never fought against the P51 - the Mustang was used in the European Theater - while the Zero was only in the Pacific.

The real questions would be:

Zero or Wildcat/Hellcat

or

Mustang vs. 109.

Watch the Military Channel for additional information about these comparisons.

Answer 8

The P-51 is the better plane in all respects. The zero is slower not quite as agile and doesn't climb quite as fast and certianly doesn't dive as fast. even in the range game the Mustang wins hands down. The only thing a zero had a mustang didn't was two 20mm cannon. That wasn't enough by any stretch.

Answer 9

They never fought in the Pacific theatre, so it's not a fair comparison, if it's the Corsair F4U vs the Zero, I'll say it's a hard fight with the F4U having an edge on speed over the Zero's superb manuverability.

If your question is based on racing performance, I'll bet my last dollar on the Mustang, 'cos no way the Zero can match the P51 or F4U 440-450/mph top speed & aceleration. The Japanese pilots called the F4Us "Whistling Death".

Answer 10

Definatly the mustang

Answer 11

Both exceptionally fine machines, but the P-51 had an edge.History speaks for the rest.

Answer 12

P51 all the way. That was one of the best fighter planes the world has ever seen. I see one every so often at the local airport. I live in Beverly Ma.

Answer 13

Fiat CR42

Answer 14

zero

Answer 15

well wat ur doing is comparing two planes from different periods of the war. obviously the p51 would win. But if you compared the zero with other planes in its period, it would beat everything except for the f6f hellcat.