Right now there is an issue with the aileron control effectiveness in the flight dynamics for the two "modern restored" variants included, which makes them near impossible to fly at the moment. The rest of P-40N's however are just fine. I have noticed that the prop doesn't handle like a true constant-speed prop as it should, and fails to reach 3000 RPM on takeoff - on takeoff it maxes out shy of 2300, but rises above that in a dive. Also, the aileron roll rate, something that the P-40 is known for, seems a tad bit lacking. The ailerons feel more like you're flying a Mustang (block of cement feel) than a P-40 (described by many pilots today as handling like a Pitts with an Allison engine on the front).
Visually, the FR P-40N has all of the right lines, proportions, dimensions, stance, etc., having been built based on the original Curtiss factory drawings. Properly-sized landing gear wheels and struts. Proper contours of the nose, fuselage, wings and tail. Proper windscreen and canopy size and shape. Properly shaped and contoured Curtiss Electric prop blades. Proper thickness of the antenna wire. Proper hardware (screws, nuts & bolts), etc... - all things you typically don't see in other developer's work. Too often I see warbirds developed for MSFS that look more like caricature drawings, than technical/accurate visual recreations of the real aircraft, as in the case with the FR P-40N. Unlike the other two MSFS P-40s, the FR P-40N also has a fully complete authentic cockpit (the IniBuilds P-40F comes close, but the gunsight is severely lacking, and should look like as portrayed in the FR P-40N). I like the way the FR P-40N flies a bit more than the IniBuilds P-40F. I can't compare it to the Big Radials P-40B, as its inaccurate and incomplete visuals have always prevented my interest in buying that one.