Sur 0–100 km/h, SQ2 gagne (4,94 s vs 6,71 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.
| Explorer EcoBoost 300 | SQ2 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 6,71 s | 4,94 s+1,77 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,93 s | 13,47 s+1,46 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 27,10 s | 24,55 s+2,55 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 220 km/h | 257 km/h−37 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 6,70 kg/hp | 5,12 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 | Explorer EcoBoost 300 | SQ2 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,82 s | 1,24 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 3,04 s | 2,07 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 4,96 s | 3,54 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 6,71 s | 4,94 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 8,99 s | 7,19 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 15,83 s | 12,14 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 30,71 s | 19,93 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,93 s | 13,47 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 27,10 s | 24,55 s |
| Top speed | 220 km/h | 257 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 305 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 420 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 043 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 10-speed torque-converter automatic |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 300 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 400 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 535 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed S tronic |
Off the line, the SQ2 hits 100 km/h in 4.94 s versus 6.71 s for the Explorer EcoBoost 300. At this point, the SQ2 leads by 1.77 s and sits roughly 21 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the SQ2 is doing 133 km/h against 127 km/h for the Explorer EcoBoost 300. The gap is 1.13 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the SQ2 crosses the line in 13.47 s versus 14.92 s. The 1.45 s gap represents roughly 61 m of track — a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the SQ2 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 190 km/h versus 173 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the SQ2 finishes in 24.55 s versus 27.09 s, with a 2.54 s lead.
Electronically capped at 220 km/h, the Explorer EcoBoost 300 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 combustion powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (6.70 kg/hp vs 5.12 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 10.35 seconds. The 1.77 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, SQ2 gagne (4,94 s vs 6,71 s).
Explorer EcoBoost 300 passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 6,71 secondes (simulation calibrée).
Explorer EcoBoost 300 : 305 hp, ratio 6,70 kg/hp. SQ2 : 300 hp, ratio 5,12 kg/hp.
Explorer EcoBoost 300 : 220 km/h. SQ2 : 257 km/h.