so as i suspected you are going to continue to contribute nothing and just post incessant demands for data ... sorry, you go do a little just a tiniest bit of research on the 190 and you will see the light about what i am saying.
Thorism decoder working overtime today.
You make a claim, you back it up. Either with new finds or links to old. Otherwise it's treated as more hyperbole luftwhine. 
Gratz on the dancer though, looks like she taught you to dance on the head of a pin. 
well i will have to assume you are 12 since you seem to continue to wish to believe the FMs in the games are made up of anything like a majority of objective confirmed concrete numerical data. i'm betting that they are not, and so the sources of the data then becomes very important and of course for the most part they are not revealed. as far as why i have become so expert on German a/c is that for the most part it does not seem to be the allied aircraft not meeting the expectations one has by investigation ...
you will note that no one in what 9 pages now has offered a german test or PO that supports the findings in the allied tests mentioned here or any german data that supports the flight character of the FMs in the games.
that would not be tolerated for an american plane btw, maybe you should put that in your sig..
"this we will not tolerate" , and then start a list ...
subjectivity has been addressed previously
I guess I'll have to stop assuming you're 15 years old.
Basically you want your subjective understanding of somebody else's subjective opinion to determine the FW190 FM in AH.
If you put that in your sig you wouldn't have to mention it in every thread about German A/C.
that may or may not be so however people make statements about other warbirds that are likewise very different than their wartime counterparts. it will be interesting to see what differences exist between the 190n and white one when it flies and what reasons can be found as to why ...
i suggest they use the same procedure with all the FMs especially in regards to the subjective evaluations.
preferably they would compile all the available data whatever form that may take, review it amongst a panel of players and experts form every "camp" who both edit the sources for any anomalies and then compile the remaining data into a set of goal numbers that the coders match and then resubmit the FM for review until it meets the panels expectations enough that they are comfortable saying it is a beta FM and then post the data and the what and whys of the process along with the beta to the community for final vetting ...
that is how it should be done IMO ...
good hard data would be nice but that is pretty much unavailable in the detail desired on the vast majority if not all of the FMs/Planes in the set ...
however what you don't do is take either the best or worst data for any type and use that exclusively for anything imo.
The Flugwerk 190 is not a good benchmark for what a wartime 190A8 could have done. Its several hundred kgs lighter and has equal (if not more) available power.
Thorsim, how do you propose that HTC could match what equals to a "correct" behavior of the 190 when you are talking about your subjective feelings. There are quite a few people here who think our 190 does indeed feels "correct" and has good handling qualities. Both are subjective opinions.. who is correct now?
The only alternative is to go by hard data, isn't it?
well first of all, have you seen all the data? secondly you are qualifying the turn in a way the germans did not as they were more pragmatic in their flight evaluations than their counterparts, imo.
i.e. they seemed to have measured the process of the turn in actual mock combat instead of separating the parts of a turn, at least in this case.
Everything that I've read suggests that the Germans thought that while the Fw 190 was more maneuverable overall, that the Bf 109 had better flat turning performance.
