Understood but I would be very surprised if the aircraft was significantly different in any important way from the sim. If the model is realistic enough for general handling and engine failures on a ZFT conversion, then where are the problems?
You’re well within the tested flight envelope, as opposed to deep stalls, transsonic dives, spins, etc. It’s the same airframe just lacking in thrust. Makes the sums easier: just lift, drag and gravity now!
The thrust is not the only difference. You've depleted the hydraulic pressure on the 737 by the time the flaps reach 5 and you're left on manual reversion, need for alternate flap extension, standby electrics and manual gear extension.
If you're high and able to start the APU, it's doable. If from a low altitude, things get quite interesting. We practice this from 1500' agl just after takeoff once every couple of recurrents and even when prepared for the double fail, it's not as easy as chopping the throttle and diving like on the 172 or like when in a glider. A tin-can in 190kts without any brakes demands quite a good field to be put down on in order not to kill most people in it.