Over 0–100 km/h, M5 CS F90 wins (3,03 s vs 3,85 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.
| M5 CS F90 | RS 3 Sedan | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,03 s−0,82 s | 3,85 s |
| 400 m standing start | 10,82 s−1,23 s | 12,05 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 19,94 s−2,02 s | 21,96 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 295 km/h+45 km/h | 250 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 2,87 kg/hpbetter ratio | 3,91 kg/hp |
Standing-start drag race, calibrated on manufacturer splits. The gap shows at each stage.
Simulated performance at each stage. Winner in green.
| Palier | M5 CS F90 | RS 3 Sedan |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 0,91 s | 1,03 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,51 s | 1,72 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 2,37 s | 2,82 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,03 s | 3,85 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 3,74 s | 5,04 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,21 s | 8,78 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 9,97 s | 13,65 s |
| 400 m standing start | 10,82 s | 12,05 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 19,94 s | 21,96 s |
| Top speed limited | 295 km/h | 250 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 635 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 750 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 825 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed M Steptronic transmission with Drivelogic, transmission oil cooling |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 400 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 500 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 565 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed S tronic |
Off the line, the Bmw M5 CS hits 100 km/h in 3.03 s versus 3.85 s for the RS 3 Sedan. At this point, the Bmw M5 CS leads by 0.82 s and sits roughly 6 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the Bmw M5 CS is doing 170 km/h against 151 km/h for the RS 3 Sedan. The gap is 0.79 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw M5 CS crosses the line in 10.81 s versus 12.04 s. The 1.23 s gap represents roughly 63 m of track - a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the Bmw M5 CS continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 231 km/h versus 212 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Bmw M5 CS finishes in 19.94 s versus 21.96 s, with a 2.02 s lead.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the Bmw M5 CS is capped at 305 km/h, the RS 3 Sedan at 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h. This isn’t a physical engine limit - it’s a manufacturer choice, usually for tyre safety or homologation reasons. Neither car reaches its true aerodynamic top speed.
With two combustion powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (2.87 kg/hp vs 3.91 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 5.76 seconds. The 0.82 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, M5 CS F90 wins (3,03 s vs 3,85 s).
M5 CS F90 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 3,03 seconds (calibrated simulation).
M5 CS F90: 635 hp, ratio 2,87 kg/hp. RS 3 Sedan: 400 hp, ratio 3,91 kg/hp.
M5 CS F90: 295 km/h. RS 3 Sedan: 250 km/h.