I think we have the makings of a good hour or so of conversation about the P51B and D models...............lol  (Noooooooo.........shut up Steve!  )

I have a version of the CFS2 P51B. It is a RCAF version. I don't have my Sim here at work.

I have a 1% P51B which is a British version.
In both, the flight config is completely different from it's B counterpart. I find the B a much nicer plane to fly. It's not as 'twitchy' or I call it 'sensitive' or 'touchy' on the stick, like the D model and it certainly doesn't have the bleed-off in a tight turn. It actually holds speed well untill you turn quite sharply, and even then it's only the sort of drop you would normally expect.

I don't know where the normal CFS2 RCAF one came from (try a search with P51 RCAF) but the 1%, like all mine, is from avhistory. It's a really good plane. I think you would find it a very pleasant plane to fly if you like the Spit.
The best I can compare it to is: the manoeuvrability and power (more!) of the Spit, but a turn 'approaching' that of the Hurricane. It also has the 'smooth action' of the Hurricane too. (I think the Hurri is 'smoother to fly' anyway - I always thought it was probably a weight thing. 

  I don't have the figures in front of me, but wasn't the Spitfire XIV lighter than the P-51B?  Also didn't the Spitfire XIV have a greater wing area that the P-51B?  If so, wouldn't that account for the facts in Hagar's last post?

You're right Hagar, the flight models in the CFS (and FS) planes are simply an interpretation of a particular designer's ideas of how that plane would (or would have) performed.
I suppose, if the same person designed ALL the planes, there might be a little bit of sense to be made from it all, but, as you contuinlually remind us , there really can't be when those that design these planes have probbaly never flown them.

M$ do claim that the models were based on 'advice' from the likes of Foss and Sakai, but did they ever fly a Spit, or a P51B? In one case, Sakai, I'm sure he didn't. In the second, Foss, I doubt he did (being Navy). 

So all we have to compare are the Sim models. None of us will ever get to compare both these, or any other warbirds. If any of us get to fly one, let alone compare two or more, we will be blessed beyond anyones dreams.  8) 8)

So, yes, you're right, the Sim models aren't really a good representation. Even the 1% planes, which claim to be 'accurate representations' are, at best, simlilar in some areas. 

I suppose I do get to making the assumption that the models are a reasonable representation, because all the Spit models and all the Mustang models would appear to behave much the same. But then, I suppose the same 'basic' config is used over and over.