Nadal 4 successive at RG were from 2005 to 2008.
Federer 5 successive at US Open were from 2004 to 2008.
i.e. in same era yet Nadal' FO achievement is 3rd best and Fed played in a mug era?
We all know this "weak era" crap is based simply on which players you like and which you don't like. As noone has ever been close to proving one era to be stronger than another, some feel free to assume away, and do so always to the advantage of their favourite player(s). As if their cheering alone is enough to make winning in that era more difficult. They must consider themselves really potent jinxers.
To the topic in hand, I prefer Federer's five in US Open, because it's the only streak that has not been copied, and he also was taken to five sets only twice and never looked in any real danger of losing (had 2-1 after three sets both times). Borg needed seven five-setters in his Wimbledon streak and needed to come back from 0-2 once and 1-2 three additional times.