Sur 0–100 km/h, M5 Competition F90 gagne (3,33 s vs 3,34 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 e-tron GT | M5 Competition F90 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,34 s | 3,33 s+0,01 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,17 s | 11,11 s+0,06 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 20,27 s | 20,22 s+0,05 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 250 km/h | 250 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 3,25 kg/hp | 2,98 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 | RS e-tron GT | M5 Competition F90 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 0,98 s | 1,01 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,64 s | 1,68 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 2,63 s | 2,63 stight gap |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,34 s | 3,33 stight gap |
| 0–120 km/h | 4,24 s | 4,12 stight gap |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,79 s | 6,67 stight gap |
| 0–200 km/h | 10,40 s | 10,30 stight gap |
| 400 m standing start | 11,17 s | 11,11 stight gap |
| 1,000 m standing start | 20,27 s | 20,22 stight gap |
| 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 | 738 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 830 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 395 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Unknown |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 625 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 750 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 865 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed M Steptronic transmission with Drivelogic, transmission oil cooling |
Off the line, the Bmw M5 Competition hits 100 km/h in 3.33 s versus 3.34 s for the RS e-tron GT. Despite lacking instant torque, 625 hp of power compensates. The 0.01 s gap is negligible: both vehicles are neck and neck.
At 200 metres, the Bmw M5 Competition is doing 168 km/h against 167 km/h for the RS e-tron GT. The gap is 0.04 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw M5 Competition crosses the line in 11.11 s versus 11.17 s. The 0.06 s gap represents roughly 4 m of track — barely a car length.
Past 400 metres, nothing changes. Same ceiling, same acceleration, same trajectory — both rivals run in formation to the line. The 0.06 s gap at 1,000 metres confirms what the specs already suggested: on track, they’re interchangeable. The real contest happens elsewhere — range, comfort, charging network reliability.
Both rivals share the same electronic speed cap: the RS e-tron GT and the Bmw M5 Competition 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 4.78 seconds. The 0.01 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, M5 Competition F90 gagne (3,33 s vs 3,34 s).
RS e-tron GT passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 3,34 secondes (simulation calibrée).
RS e-tron GT : 738 hp, ratio 3,25 kg/hp. M5 Competition F90 : 625 hp, ratio 2,98 kg/hp.
RS e-tron GT : 250 km/h. M5 Competition F90 : 250 km/h.