Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I'd say that P-36 was not that toughMost (all?) of it's iterations were without armor of any sort, so we have Zero/Oscar-style advantages and problems here. Great for climb and turning, less great when it needs to catch the bogey or to run away from it, while every burst that struck home will mean grave danger to the pilot.
Spitfire in 1942 have had problems with Zero, however, many of problems were less related to the aircraft, rather to the system it was employed. The P-36 have had a good roll rate, expecting it to attain more than 320 mph (in order to out-roll the Zero) would've been asking too much.
The 2-stage R-1830 in P-36 would've been a fairly good match, I agree with that. We'd still have the weight increase, due to heavier engine, s-s tanks, armor, better armament etc.
BTW, the single, and atop of that synchronised .50 will be hardly at advantage vs. multiple French 7.5mm MGs.
There was far easier (and lighter) to make install the s-s liner in the single, semispherical fuel tank of the F4F, than it will be for the P-36. Once the P-40C (that used the same 3-piece tankage as P-36) got s-s protection, the fuel system went from 171 lbs in the P-40 (no suffix) to 420 lbs in the P-40C, a gain of almost 250 lbs.
After all is said and done, would we be any better with 4 HMG-armed, up-armored & up-engined P-36, or with P-40C/D? That is before we consider the ability to heavily over-boost the V-1710, unlike what R-1830 was capable for. The V-1710-33 was making 960 HP at 17000 ft.
General feelings are that the P36 was too slow and obsolete to fight in WW2, yet the Hurricane has a loyal following especially up through the Battle of Britain.
Yet, I was looking at the specs on wwiiaircraftperformance and the P36 was 17 mph faster than the Hurricane at 10,000 feet. It was equal in top speed to the Hurricane at 17,000 feet when equipped with the P&W R-1830-23 engine. It could beat the Hurricane in a time to climb to 23,000 feet and it could easily out turn it under any conditions. The Hurricane had 8 .303 machine guns, the P36 either 1 .50 and 5 30's or, I understand the later models had 2 .50's and 4 30's.
So why was the Hurricane ok and the P36 was obsolete? If the P36 had the 1830-23 engine or later, I don't see what the Hurricane had over it at all.
As for P-40s, they were very much faster than the Hurricane or P-36.
Altitude can be converted to speed. So if Zero has an altitude advantage then P40 might not have a speed advantage when the turning & burning begins.
General feelings are that the P36 was too slow and obsolete to fight in WW2, yet the Hurricane has a loyal following especially up through the Battle of Britain.
Yet, I was looking at the specs on wwiiaircraftperformance and the P36 was 17 mph faster than the Hurricane at 10,000 feet. It was equal in top speed to the Hurricane at 17,000 feet when equipped with the P&W R-1830-23 engine. It could beat the Hurricane in a time to climb to 23,000 feet and it could easily out turn it under any conditions. The Hurricane had 8 .303 machine guns, the P36 either 1 .50 and 5 30's or, I understand the later models had 2 .50's and 4 30's.
So why was the Hurricane ok and the P36 was obsolete? If the P36 had the 1830-23 engine or later, I don't see what the Hurricane had over it at all.
(quick speed chart, A&AEE data except for blue, which is from a French manual)
Hawk 75 - R1830 SCG
Mohawk - R1830 SC3-G
Mohawk - GR1820 G205A
Hurricane - Merlin III
The British were very impressed with the flying characteristics of the Hawk 75, placing it above both the Hurricane and the Spitfire in that respect. I think high-altitude performance would certainly have been a factor in the Battle of Britain (where it wasn't so much for the AdA in the Battle of France), but I think the main thing is what tomo pauk alluded to - that the Mohawk wasn't quite ready for British service and in sufficient numbers numbers to play a role in 1940.