Let me add
Su 15 flagon to the list too

Mig 19 and lightning were basically overtaken by more advanced planes
But in lightning the big disappointment was no BVR weapons And poor load carrying capacity
Mig 19 has poor weapon carrying ability
No radar and limited ability for upgrades

There are examples on both sides:

M4 vs Tiger in WW2 = Numbers won but poor maint & tactics played a large role

Multiple battles in Vietnam = Tech won

ME vs Israel in multiple conflicts = Tech won

M60/M1 vs T-5x/6x/7x in Iraq = Tech won

In Vietnam US also had quantity +tech
In 1982 Israel also had quantity+ tech vs Syria
In Iraq there are other overwhelming advantages in the US side

over hyped

mig29. everyone was like, f16 killer. but it was only good at being killed. even other russian jets shot it down
atdx. all the media is like.. japanese stealth fighter. its too small and cant carry weapons
pakfa. look at the russian and pakfa threads here. it is hysterical! they go off about how its superior to f-35 and j-20 and everything. get angry when people point out its flaws like its engine and straight inlets. but then among themselves they basically say “So when will we get a new engine and new back half”

IMHO soviet design philosophy cannot be compared to western ones nor are their doctrines mirror images of one another
Cold war era soviet fighter designers did not care how their products performed in the export market what they wanted was weapons that would fit their unique operational requirements of PVO and VVS
There have been no large scale air campaigns involving mig 29 or 25 so cannot determine their effectiveness.Even the mig 23 mostly export versions of 73 war era was up against numerically superior and advanced IDAF operating in a very favorable environment.