Over 0–100 km/h, Clio 4 RS 200 wins (6,63 s vs 10,38 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.
| Clio 4 RS 200 | 116d F40 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 6,63 s−3,75 s | 10,38 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,74 s−2,88 s | 17,62 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 26,79 s−5,03 s | 31,82 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 227 km/h+27 km/h | 200 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 6,22 kg/hpbetter ratio | 11,85 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 | Clio 4 RS 200 | 116d F40 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,63 s | 2,52 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,74 s | 4,14 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 4,66 s | 7,32 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 6,63 s | 10,38 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 8,72 s | 14,43 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 15,28 s | 27,75 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 28,70 s | 75,90 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,74 s | 17,62 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 26,79 s | 31,82 s |
| Top speed | 227 km/h | 200 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 200 hp | I4 |
| Torque | 240 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 245 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | EDC 6-speed (dual clutch) |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 116 hp | 3 cyl |
| Torque | 270 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 375 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | - | |
| Gearbox | Six-speed manual (seven-speed Steptronic dual-clutch transmission) |
Off the line, the Clio 4 RS 200 hits 100 km/h in 6.63 s versus 10.38 s for the Bmw 116d. At this point, the Clio 4 RS 200 leads by 3.75 s and sits roughly 31 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the Clio 4 RS 200 is doing 126 km/h against 107 km/h for the Bmw 116d. The gap is 1.97 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Clio 4 RS 200 crosses the line in 14.74 s versus 17.61 s. The 2.87 s gap represents roughly 101 m of track - a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the Clio 4 RS 200 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 174 km/h versus 148 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Clio 4 RS 200 finishes in 26.78 s versus 31.81 s, with a 5.03 s lead.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the Clio 4 RS 200 is capped at 227 km/h, the Bmw 116d at 200 km/h. This isn’t a physical engine limit - it’s a manufacturer choice, usually for tyre safety or homologation reasons. Neither car reaches its true aerodynamic top speed.
With two combustion powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (6.23 kg/hp vs 11.85 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 16.96 seconds. The 3.75 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, Clio 4 RS 200 wins (6,63 s vs 10,38 s).
Clio 4 RS 200 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 6,63 seconds (calibrated simulation).
Clio 4 RS 200: 200 hp, ratio 6,22 kg/hp. 116d F40: 116 hp, ratio 11,85 kg/hp.
Clio 4 RS 200: 227 km/h. 116d F40: 200 km/h.