Over 0–100 km/h, RS e-tron GT wins (3,34 s vs 4,81 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 | X4 M40d G02 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,34 s−1,47 s | 4,81 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,17 s−1,98 s | 13,15 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 20,27 s−3,83 s | 24,10 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 250 km/h | 250 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 3,25 kg/hpbetter ratio | 5,94 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 e-tron GT | X4 M40d G02 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 0,98 s | 1,19 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,64 s | 1,93 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 2,63 s | 3,42 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,34 s | 4,81 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 4,24 s | 6,55 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,79 s | 11,38 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 10,40 s | 18,97 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,17 s | 13,15 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 20,27 s | 24,10 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 | 738 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 830 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 395 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Unknown |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 340 hp | 6 cyl |
| Torque | 700 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 020 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed Steptronic |
Off the line, the RS e-tron GT hits 100 km/h in 3.34 s versus 4.81 s for the Bmw X4 M40d. The instant torque of 830 Nm from the electric motor makes the difference. At this point, the RS e-tron GT leads by 1.47 s and sits roughly 8 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the RS e-tron GT is doing 167 km/h against 138 km/h for the Bmw X4 M40d. The gap is 1.18 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the RS e-tron GT crosses the line in 11.17 s versus 13.14 s. The 1.98 s gap represents roughly 91 m of track - a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the RS e-tron GT continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 233 km/h versus 192 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the RS e-tron GT finishes in 20.27 s versus 24.09 s, with a 3.82 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 e-tron GT and the Bmw X4 M40d 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 7.57 seconds. The 1.47 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, RS e-tron GT wins (3,34 s vs 4,81 s).
RS e-tron GT goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 3,34 seconds (calibrated simulation).
RS e-tron GT: 738 hp, ratio 3,25 kg/hp. X4 M40d G02: 340 hp, ratio 5,94 kg/hp.
RS e-tron GT: 250 km/h. X4 M40d G02: 250 km/h.