I've said at least twice recently (including within this thread) that I don't have more recent data.
With respect to on-time performance, an interval that doesn't operate is not part of the on-time performance statistics as they presently are computed. Did on-time performance statistics of days of yore include intervals that were scheduled but never left the terminal, and if so, how many such intervals were there? In other words, if 34 E and F trains were scheduled, and only 30 operated, but all 30 were on time, then the on-time performance was 100% -- but not all scheduled service operated.
As to the other arguments, here we go again: do the words "no field shunting," "no automatic keyby," "timer," or "changes in work rules resulting from accidents (justifiably in railfans' eyes or otherwise)" mean anything whatsoever to Mr. Bauman? (and yes, I know the "prewar" IND equipment didn't have field shunting -- it was designed not to need field shunting)
And yes (again), I've read here about the Brooklyn Bridge Cable Railway's outstanding performance. The line had no automatic means of separating trains -- I'm not even sure it had signals.
David