Most of the WW-II era planes, like the ones in the list, fighters/fighter bombers, had similar missions, used similar engine technology and fuel, and similar materials. So they ended up having similar performance. The most interesting article I read that showed this was by a Grumman test pilot. They were trying to figure out why the Hellcat appeared to be slower than the Corsair. Again similar size and weight, identical engines, they should have been very close. Turned out they had the pitot tube system improperly designed. When they got it sorted out the planes showed nearly identical speeds and performance.
The biggest difference I've found between them is that most of the Grumman designs featured somewhat larger stabs, upwards of 25% of the wing area. That makes them ideal for modeling with very little need to fudge the shapes. I've also found that even if you go for some of the outliers, like the Focke Wulf 190, the relatively small stab works pretty well on the long fuselage. The tail volume is similar to the others, so that's where it's at.
Most of these planes would be good candidates for a re-look, considering the current trend to large engines in smaller airframes. They tended to have short noses(at least the radial engined planes) and can use a heavier engine than a typical stunter.
Topic: Profile Douglas Skyraider design (Read 1140 times)