Over 0–100 km/h, RS 3 Sedan wins (3,85 s vs 5,30 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.
| RS 3 Sedan | E 400 e 4MATIC W214 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,85 s−1,45 s | 5,30 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,05 s−1,52 s | 13,57 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 21,96 s−2,62 s | 24,58 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 250 km/h | 250 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 3,91 kg/hpbetter ratio | 5,89 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 | RS 3 Sedan | E 400 e 4MATIC W214 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,03 s | 1,36 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,72 s | 2,06 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 2,82 s | 3,74 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,85 s | 5,30 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 5,04 s | 7,13 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 8,78 s | 12,19 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 13,65 s | 19,66 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,05 s | 13,57 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 21,96 s | 24,58 s |
| Top speed limited | 250 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 | 400 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 500 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 565 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed S tronic |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 381 hp | 4 cyl |
| Torque | 650 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 245 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Unknown |
Off the line, the RS 3 Sedan hits 100 km/h in 3.85 s versus 5.31 s for the E 400 e 4MATIC. Despite lacking instant torque, 400 hp of power compensates. At this point, the RS 3 Sedan leads by 1.45 s and sits roughly 12 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the RS 3 Sedan is doing 151 km/h against 135 km/h for the E 400 e 4MATIC. The gap is 1.03 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the RS 3 Sedan crosses the line in 12.04 s versus 13.57 s. The 1.52 s gap represents roughly 69 m of track - a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the RS 3 Sedan continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 212 km/h versus 190 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the RS 3 Sedan finishes in 21.96 s versus 24.58 s, with a 2.62 s lead. Both vehicles have similar top speeds (250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) vs 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h), preventing any comeback.
Both rivals share the same electronic speed cap: the RS 3 Sedan and the E 400 e 4MATIC are governed to 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) 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.
Instant electric torque gives an advantage off the line. The higher top speed of the combustion engine gives an advantage over longer distances. The distance at which one catches the other depends on the top speed differential.
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 8.31 seconds. The 1.45 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, RS 3 Sedan wins (3,85 s vs 5,30 s).
RS 3 Sedan goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 3,85 seconds (calibrated simulation).
RS 3 Sedan: 400 hp, ratio 3,91 kg/hp. E 400 e 4MATIC W214: 381 hp, ratio 5,89 kg/hp.
RS 3 Sedan: 250 km/h. E 400 e 4MATIC W214: 250 km/h.