Over 0–100 km/h, Stelvio Quadrifoglio wins (3,83 s vs 4,12 s).
Simulated drag race 0 → 1,000 m in real time. Synchronised speed counters and stopwatch. Physics calibration on 7 manufacturer measurements.
| Measure | Stelvio Quadrifoglio | M2 G87 | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3.83 s | 4.12 s | 0.29 s · Stelvio Quadrifoglio |
| 400 m standing start | 11.86 s | 12.08 s | 0.22 s · Stelvio Quadrifoglio |
| 1,000 m standing start | 21.59 s | 21.81 s | 0.22 s · Stelvio Quadrifoglio |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 283 km/h | 285 km/h | 2 km/h · M2 G87 |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 3.59 kg/hp | 3.76 kg/hp | better ratio · Stelvio Quadrifoglio |
Standing-start drag race, calibrated on manufacturer splits. The gap shows at each stage.
| Stage | Stelvio Quadrifoglio | M2 G87 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1.03 s · tight gap | 1.17 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 1.72 s | 1.95 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 2.92 s · tight gap | 3.06 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3.83 s | 4.12 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 5.03 s | 5.26 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 8.13 s | 8.46 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 12.83 s | 13.14 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11.86 s | 12.08 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 21.59 s | 21.81 s |
| Top speed | 283 km/h | 285 km/h |
Physics model calibrated on manufacturer splits. The limited top speed is not the real aerodynamic top speed of the vehicles.
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 510 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 600 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 830 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | - | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed automatic |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 460 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 550 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 730 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Propulsion | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed M Steptronic |
Off the line, the Stelvio Quadrifoglio hits 100 km/h in 3.83 s versus 4.12 s for the M2. At this point, the Stelvio Quadrifoglio leads by 0.29 s and sits roughly 4 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the Stelvio Quadrifoglio is doing 156 km/h against 155 km/h for the M2. The gap is 0.20 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the Stelvio Quadrifoglio crosses the line in 11.86 s versus 12.08 s. The 0.22 s gap represents roughly 12 m of track - two to three car lengths.
Past 400 metres, the Stelvio Quadrifoglio continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 216 km/h versus 215 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Stelvio Quadrifoglio finishes in 21.59 s versus 21.80 s, with a 0.21 s lead. Both vehicles have similar top speeds (283 vs 285 km/h), preventing any comeback.
Both rivals share the same electronic speed cap: the Stelvio Quadrifoglio and the M2 are governed to 283 km/h. At that speed, standard-fit tyres approach their safety threshold - an industrial ceiling common to most electric vehicles in this segment. Neither car shows its true aerodynamic potential in this duel.
With two combustion powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (3.59 kg/hp vs 3.76 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 5.94 seconds. The 0.29 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, Stelvio Quadrifoglio wins (3,83 s vs 4,12 s).
Stelvio Quadrifoglio goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 3,83 seconds (calibrated simulation).
Stelvio Quadrifoglio: 510 hp, ratio 3,59 kg/hp. M2 G87: 460 hp, ratio 3,76 kg/hp.
Stelvio Quadrifoglio: 283 km/h. M2 G87: 285 km/h.