Sur 0–100 km/h, Terramar gagne (8,31 s vs 8,62 s).
Performance comparison
Simulated drag race 0 → 1,000 m in real time. Synchronised speed counters and stopwatch. Physics calibration on 7 manufacturer measurements.
Simulation
Calibration
Physics model calibrated on manufacturer splits. The limited top speed is not the real aerodynamic top speed of the vehicles.
| Q4 40 e-tron 150 kW | Terramar | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 8,62 s | 8,31 s+0,31 s |
| 400 m standing start | 16,48 s | 16,25 s+0,23 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 30,31 s | 29,41 s+0,90 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 160 km/h | 214 km/h−54 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 10,57 kg/hp | 9,00 kg/hpbetter ratio |
Standing-start drag race, calibrated on manufacturer splits. The gap shows at each stage.
Simulated performance at each stage. Winner in green.
| Palier | Q4 40 e-tron 150 kW | Terramar |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 2,25 s | 2,27 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 3,76 s | 3,44 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 6,28 s | 6,00 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 8,62 s | 8,31 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 11,71 s | 11,46 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 22,41 s | 20,91 s |
| 0–200 km/h | — | 45,12 s |
| 400 m standing start | 16,48 s | 16,25 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 30,31 s | 29,41 s |
| Top speed | 160 km/h | 214 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 201 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 310 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 125 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Propulsion | |
| Gearbox | Unknown |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 201 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 300 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 810 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed DSG |
Off the line, the Terramar hits 100 km/h in 8.31 s versus 8.62 s for the Q4 40 e-tron 150 kW. At this point, the Terramar leads by 0.31 s and sits roughly 5 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the Terramar is doing 116 km/h against 115 km/h for the Q4 40 e-tron 150 kW. The gap is 0.18 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Terramar crosses the line in 16.25 s versus 16.48 s. The 0.23 s gap represents roughly 9 m of track — barely a car length.
Past 400 metres, the Terramar continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 160 km/h versus 157 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Terramar finishes in 29.41 s versus 30.31 s, with a 0.90 s lead.
Electronically capped at 160 km/h, the Q4 40 e-tron 150 kW never reaches its natural aerodynamic ceiling in this duel. That’s not a physical limit of the motor — it’s a deliberate manufacturer decision, typically tied to standard-fit tyre ratings or model-range positioning.
With two plug-in hybrid powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (10.57 kg/hp vs 9.00 kg/hp) and transmission (Unknown vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 13.70 seconds. The 0.31 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Swap one of the two models to explore an equivalent duel in the same segment.
Sur 0–100 km/h, Terramar gagne (8,31 s vs 8,62 s).
Q4 40 e-tron 150 kW passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 8,62 secondes (simulation calibrée).
Q4 40 e-tron 150 kW : 201 hp, ratio 10,57 kg/hp. Terramar : 201 hp, ratio 9,00 kg/hp.
Q4 40 e-tron 150 kW : 160 km/h. Terramar : 214 km/h.