My answer is the FW-190D, even it had no many chances to probe itself due it was introduced in the late war stage.
http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=18392#18392
Panzerknacker, check the above link!
Also http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=26673#26673
A little bit late for voting FW.
Well…I am not aware about the contest…I simply gave my opinion.
Waiting for another quiz BDL 
There’ll be one in the morning mate
There’ll be one in the morning mate[/quote]
M’kay
MC.202 Folgore (Italy) vs P-47 Thunderbolt (USA)
MC.202 Folgore (Italy)
Top Speed: 373mph (600km/h)
Rate of Climb: 3,566ft (1,087m) per minute
Service Ceiling: 37,730 (11,500m)
Range: 379 miles (610km)
Armament: 2x 12.7mm (0.50in) MGs in nose plus provision for 2x 7.7mm (0.303in) MGs in the wings
One of the best Italian fighters of the war, the MC.202 Folgore (Thunderbolt) was developed from the radial engined MC.200, although the radial engine was replaced with a licence built DB.501. The Folgore entered service in 1941, but production of the engine was slow and consequently the build up of Folgore strength was slowed down.
In service, the Folgore proved itself superior to the Hurricane and P-40, and was well matched with the Spitfire V in terms of performance, but was underarmed which prevented it from shooting down many Allied bombers. It could out turn any Allied fighter in a dogfight (even the Spitfire) and only the Spitfire and the P-51 were considered a real match for it.
P-47 Thunderbolt (USA)
Top Speed: 428mph (689km/h)
Rate of Climb: 2,222ft (677m) per minute
Service Ceiling: 42,000ft (12,800m)
Range: 1,260miles (2,028km)
Armament: 8x 12.7mm MGs, up to two 1,000lb (454kg) bombs
First flown in 1941, the P-47 was the largest and heaviest single piston engined fighter ever built, and British Spitfire pilots joked that the pilots would be able to avoid German fire by undoing their harnesses and running round the cockpit. Early P-47 Thunderbolts proved to possess a poor rate of climb and were not very manoueverable, although they proved popular with pilots because of the large amount of battle damage they were able to absorb (pilots called in the ‘Unbreakable’ or the ‘Plane that can do anything’). The pilots knew that they would be unable to dogfight with Luftwaffe pilots in their massive, heavy fighters and soon learned to use the very high dive speed of the P-47 to ‘bounce’ Bf-109s and Fw-190s and escape before getting entangled in a battle with a much more manoueverable aircraft. Using these tactics proved very succesful, with the P-47 only losing 0.7% of those aircaft sent into combat from enemy action.
Vote goes to the Jug. Proved itself throughout the war in two theaters racking up many kills. Also one of the most heavily armed Allied fighters!
Ugh. Tough one. The P-47 wasn’t the wonder aircraft the P-51 was… but I have a certain liking for it. Anything whose design has R.F.'s in double digits works for me. 
I urge anyone to go to Hendon, and stand next to one of the British WW2 fighters… then stand next to the P-47. You’d be forgiven for thinking, given the scaling, that it was a bomber. It’s huuuuuuuuuge by comparison!
Will vote later.
I found a fantastic quote from a US pilot who’s squadron changed over from Spitfires to P-47s. I’m busy with an assignment for work at the minute, will post it up later/tomorrow.
I have to go with the Jug here. Big, rigged and effective, more effective in the ground attack role, but an awesome beast. Im looking forwards to getting the 1st round out of the way and getting down to buisiness with the real contest.
P-47 for me…
One Pilot’s Initial Reaction To The P-47 Introduction
One day in January 1943 General Hunter, the Commander of the 8th Fighter Command, came to visit us at Debden. He said he had a ‘surprise’ for us we were soon to re-equip with the very latest American fighter, the P-47 Thunderbolt. As he spoke we heard an unusual engine note outside and one of the new fighters landed and taxied up beside one of our Spitfires. We went outside to look it over. It was huge: the wing tip of the P-47 came higher than the cockpit of the Spitfire. When we strapped into a Spitfire we felt snug and part of the aircraft; the Thunderbolt cockpit, on the other hand, was so large that we felt if we slipped off the Goddamned seat we would break a leg! We were horrified at the thought of going to war in such a machine: we had enough trouble with the Focke Wulfs 190’s in our nimble Spitfire Vs; now this lumbering seven-ton monster seemed infinitely worse, a true ‘air inferiority fighter’. Initial mock dog-fights between Thunderbolts and Spitfires seemed to confirm these feelings; we lost four Thunderbolt pilots in rapid succession, spinning in from low level while trying to match Spitfires in turns. In the end our headquarters issued an order banning mock dog fighting in Thunderbolts below 8,000 feet.
Gradually, however, we learnt how to fight in the Thunderbolt. At high altitude she was a ‘hot ship’ and very fast in the dive; the technique was not to ‘mix it’ with the enemy but to pounce on him from above, make one quick pass and get back up to altitude; if anyone tried to escape from a Thunderbolt by diving, we had him cold. Even more important, at last we had a fighter with the range to penetrate deeply into enemy territory–where the action was. So, reluctantly, we had to give up our beautiful little Spitfires and convert to the new juggernauts. The war was moving on and we had to move with it.
The change to the Thunderbolt might have been necessary militarily, but my heart remained with the Spitfire. Even now, thirty years after I flew them on operations, the mere sound or sight of a Spitfire brings me a deep feeling of nostalgia and many pleasant memories. She was such a gentle little aeroplane, without a trace of viciousness. She was a dream to handle in the air. I feel genuinely sorry for the modern fighter pilot who has never had the chance to get his hands on a Spitfire; he will never know what real flying was like.
According to http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/macchi.htm Folgore = Lightning and Saeta = Thunderbolt.
Also I wanted to add a picture
From http://www.ww2incolor.com/gallery/other/mc_202_folgore_001?full=1
I will vote later anyway!
Vote - Thunderbolt, but damn that Folgore could climb well!
3-0 to the Thunderbolt as it stands, will give this a couple more days as there are a couple of people who have said they will vote later
I give in.
I vote P-47.
It’s an awesome piece of machinery. The things that make it less manoeuvrable make it more rugged, and better for shooting up stuff. I’m also heavily biased towards the thing on the grounds of looks… It looks AMAZING. Nice in the D version but even the earlier razorback ones looked the business.
The Folgore. I don’t know. Maybe it’s because it’s lesser known… but I think also I have this attitude that it’s all well and good being able to turn with the enemy… or to fly faster than the enemy… or to do X better than Z. But “best” is all about the emerging properties as a whole. The P-47 was no Mustang, but by god did it do the business. And that’s what it’s all about.
P-47
P47
Sheer firepower & speed in the dive give it an enormous advantage.
Is a quiet unequal comparative, The P-47 had the twice of engine power and 4 times the firepower of the MC-202 :?
Unequal but entirely fair. Both are of a similar stage of the war.