The CS757 still beats all other 757's, IMHO.

With all the tweaks and adjustments in place, I find that it gives a comparable climb rates that are certainly close to what I'd expect from the "other" well known 757.
I return to the CS757 and CS737 time and time and time again. They're exceptional in every way, except in one respect: None are quite finished.
My wish is that CS will provide fixes for their 757, 767, & 777 rather than expect users to fix their ever-so-slightly-not-quite-there-yet aeroplanes.
Please CS, two New Year's resolutions: Issue final fixes for your products as clearly they need some fine tuning (flight dynamics and SID/STAR management) and please issue some regular news bulletins as once upon-a-time, I know that CS issued three updates within two months (or similar; Tim's review if I recall correctly mentioned this).
Once you update the current models, only then should you create new aircraft. I hate reading all the negative CS press and narratives in the "other" unofficial forum, although some of it, dare I say, appears justified.

BTW, is there an issue with your Navigraph raw data? For instance, the MELVO approach to MHTG Toncontin has spurious elements in it, which when removed and adjusted, allows the CS757 to fly the RNAV RW02 perfectly. On top of this, many ILS-X, Y, or Z approaches don't appear within the route after selection in the FMS, and this knocks out the TOD/VNAV profile, which leads me to suspect the data, only because the aircraft flies RNAV and VNAV without fault.

Hobestly CS, only you can fix this! Raise your profile to where it should be. Please consider issuing fixes for existing operational problems.