Over 0–100 km/h, SQ2 wins (4,94 s vs 7,76 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.
| SQ2 | e:Ny1 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 4,94 s−2,82 s | 7,76 s |
| 400 m standing start | 13,47 s−2,35 s | 15,82 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 24,55 s−4,86 s | 29,41 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 257 km/h+97 km/h | 160 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 5,12 kg/hpbetter ratio | 8,34 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 | SQ2 | e:Ny1 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,24 s | 2,17 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,07 s | 3,63 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,54 s | 5,87 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 4,94 s | 7,76 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 7,19 s | 10,24 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 12,14 s | 18,60 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 19,93 s | - |
| 400 m standing start | 13,47 s | 15,82 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 24,55 s | 29,41 s |
| Top speed | 257 km/h | 160 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| 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 |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 201 hp | Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor |
| Torque | 310 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 677 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
Off the line, the SQ2 hits 100 km/h in 4.94 s versus 7.76 s for the e:Ny1. Despite lacking instant torque, 300 hp of power compensates. At this point, the SQ2 leads by 2.82 s and sits roughly 30 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the SQ2 is doing 133 km/h against 122 km/h for the e:Ny1. The gap is 1.82 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the SQ2 crosses the line in 13.47 s versus 15.82 s. The 2.35 s gap represents roughly 94 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 160 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the SQ2 finishes in 24.55 s versus 29.40 s, with a 4.85 s lead.
The SQ2 features all-wheel drive (AWD) against the e:Ny1’s FWD. At low speeds (0-30, 0-50, 0-80 km/h), AWD doubles the driven contact area: all four wheels transmit torque to the road, virtually eliminating wheelspin at launch. This traction advantage is decisive in the range where the motor delivers peak torque, before power and aerodynamics take over.
Electronically capped at 160 km/h, the e:Ny1 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.
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 11.83 seconds. The 2.82 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.
Over 0–100 km/h, SQ2 wins (4,94 s vs 7,76 s).
SQ2 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 4,94 seconds (calibrated simulation).
SQ2: 300 hp, ratio 5,12 kg/hp. e:Ny1: 201 hp, ratio 8,34 kg/hp.
SQ2: 257 km/h. e:Ny1: 160 km/h.