yeah, it really is, although it's kinda hard to compare a "modern" Mustang with a wartime model.
Engine and structural exhaustion wasn't a concern back then, but nowadays we need to preserve these machines in the best possible way.

Unfortunately there isn't an universally recognised "school of warbirds" (or if there is, I've never heard of it), so often the pilots of these machines tend to fly them without much care or pro-active attitude.

Because of the solid engineering background of my friends, they tend to approach and fly their machines in an "intelligent" way: they do not overstress their engines or airframes beyond necessity (I think I mentioned before that we normally take off with just 75% throttle), nor put them through potentially dangerous or high stress envelopes (this doesn't mean they're not trained for it of course )

Engine management is quite straightforward and disciplined: WEP is available but never used (if you respect all the procedures there's really no need for it); we tend to set our engines to specific values according to the phases of flight(take-off; cruise; aerobatics etc..), but being an extremely energetic fighter, it's easy to use its aerodynamic features to make it a very efficient flyer.

weight distribution is the same, but the planes are a bit lighter than the originals: armour plating is not present unless structural, and the old battery and radios + central tank have been replaced with a jump seat. Wing armament is there, but obviously the ammunition belts are slightly lighter because they're inert.

Unfortunately there are several owners/operators that don't really pay much care to the engine managing (although there's an ever growing awareness in the field), and often these 60+ years old components get abused..