"I believe that the F-22 will be the victor at the moment because it's the only fighter capable of Supercruise capability, Mach 1+ flight without afterburners."
This is a popular misconception. The F-22 is the first fighter plane capable of 'high' mach numbers without afterburner. I never understood when it first was being touted as the first aircraft to go supersonic without reheat. Our first generation fighters could go supersonic in a shallow dive, with very low powered inefficient jet engines and not nearly as aerodynamic as their decades later counterparts. Hell, a 747 can get up to Mach .9, so it only seems logical that a hugely more aerodymanic aircraft with very minimal frontal area and almost 1 to 1 thrust ratio even without afterburner could go just that much faster on its own.
When that catch phrase first came out, I talked to an ex AF
F-4 pilot, who actually did maintance test flights after they got worked on. He explained the whole flight profile of those tests, part of which was to go supersonic without the benefit of afterburner.
As for LY744's question... I would assume that the afterburner on the F-14/15/16/18 would add a pretty similiar punch across the board. If that is true, then perhaps they would still be ranked the same, albeit the top speeds being uniformly lower than with a/b. So it would be something like this:
That's for the American fighters, so let's say without a/b you lose .8 (just throwing that out there for examples sake) then it would look something like:
Good question, and I'd like to know the answer.