Over 0–100 km/h, SQ6 SUV e-tron wins (4,37 s vs 6,21 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.
| SQ6 SUV e-tron | John Cooper Works FWD | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 4,37 s−1,84 s | 6,21 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,70 s−1,56 s | 14,26 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 23,29 s−2,01 s | 25,30 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 230 km/h | 251 km/h−21 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 4,76 kg/hpbetter ratio | 5,09 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 | SQ6 SUV e-tron | John Cooper Works FWD |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,16 s | 1,85 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,93 s | 3,09 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,21 s | 4,95 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 4,37 s | 6,21 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 5,84 s | 7,93 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 10,17 s | 12,59 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 16,87 s | 20,51 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,70 s | 14,26 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 23,29 s | 25,30 s |
| Top speed | 230 km/h | 251 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 509 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 855 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 425 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Unknown |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 231 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 320 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 175 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed automatic |
Off the line, the SQ6 SUV e-tron hits 100 km/h in 4.37 s versus 6.21 s for the John Cooper Works FWD. The instant torque of 855 Nm from the electric motor makes the difference. At this point, the SQ6 SUV e-tron leads by 1.84 s and sits roughly 23 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the SQ6 SUV e-tron is doing 144 km/h against 137 km/h for the John Cooper Works FWD. The gap is 1.36 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the SQ6 SUV e-tron crosses the line in 12.70 s versus 14.26 s. The 1.56 s gap represents roughly 72 m of track - a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the SQ6 SUV e-tron continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 198 km/h versus 191 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the SQ6 SUV e-tron finishes in 23.29 s versus 25.29 s, with a 2.00 s lead. Despite a higher top speed (251 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h), the John Cooper Works FWD never recovers its launch deficit.
Electronically capped at 230 km/h, the SQ6 SUV e-tron 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 8.88 seconds. The 1.84 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, SQ6 SUV e-tron wins (4,37 s vs 6,21 s).
SQ6 SUV e-tron goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 4,37 seconds (calibrated simulation).
SQ6 SUV e-tron: 509 hp, ratio 4,76 kg/hp. John Cooper Works FWD: 231 hp, ratio 5,09 kg/hp.
SQ6 SUV e-tron: 230 km/h. John Cooper Works FWD: 251 km/h.