Sur 0–100 km/h, X9 gagne (3,88 s vs 11,42 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.
| X9 | 216i Active Tourer F44 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,88 s−7,54 s | 11,42 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,34 s−6,84 s | 18,18 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 22,14 s−10,93 s | 33,07 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 200 km/h+10 km/h | 190 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 4,84 kg/hpbetter ratio | 12,52 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 | X9 | 216i Active Tourer F44 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,15 s | 2,52 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,92 s | 4,26 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,09 s | 7,90 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,88 s | 11,42 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 4,68 s | 16,24 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,72 s | 33,37 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 9,78 s | — |
| 400 m standing start | 11,34 s | 18,18 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 22,14 s | 33,07 s |
| Top speed | 200 km/h | 190 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 543 hp | Dual Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor AWD MPV |
| Torque | 717 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 630 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 109 hp | 3 cyl |
| Torque | 190 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 365 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | — | |
| Gearbox | 6-speed manual |
Off the line, the X9 hits 100 km/h in 3.88 s versus 11.42 s for the Bmw 216i Active Tourer. The instant torque of 717 Nm from the electric motor makes the difference. At this point, the X9 leads by 7.54 s and sits roughly 30 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the X9 is doing 173 km/h against 102 km/h for the Bmw 216i Active Tourer. The gap is 4.33 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the X9 crosses the line in 11.34 s versus 18.18 s. The 6.84 s gap represents roughly 217 m of track — a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the X9 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 200 km/h versus 141 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the X9 finishes in 22.13 s versus 33.07 s, with a 10.93 s lead. Both vehicles have similar top speeds (200 vs 190 km/h), preventing any comeback.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the X9 is capped at 200 km/h, the Bmw 216i Active Tourer at 190 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.
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 19.28 seconds. The 7.54 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, X9 gagne (3,88 s vs 11,42 s).
X9 passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 3,88 secondes (simulation calibrée).
X9 : 543 hp, ratio 4,84 kg/hp. 216i Active Tourer F44 : 109 hp, ratio 12,52 kg/hp.
X9 : 200 km/h. 216i Active Tourer F44 : 190 km/h.