Over 0–100 km/h, 320e G20 wins (7,46 s vs 8,32 s).
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.
| 320e G20 | 508 PureTech 180 EAT8 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 7,46 s−0,86 s | 8,32 s |
| 400 m standing start | 15,44 s−0,76 s | 16,20 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 28,77 s−0,02 s | 28,79 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 215 km/h | 238 km/h−23 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 8,65 kg/hp | 8,32 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 | 320e G20 | 508 PureTech 180 EAT8 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,31 s | 2,30 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,37 s | 3,85 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 4,96 s | 6,23 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 7,46 s | 8,32 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 10,74 s | 11,04 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 20,97 s | 18,89 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 46,63 s | 33,51 s |
| 400 m standing start | 15,44 s | 16,20 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 28,77 s | 28,79 stight gap |
| Top speed | 215 km/h | 238 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 204 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 350 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 765 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | - | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed Steptronic |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 179 hp | 4 cyl |
| Torque | 250 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 490 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed automatic (EAT8) |
Off the line, the 320e hits 100 km/h in 7.46 s versus 8.32 s for the 508 PureTech 180 EAT8. The instant torque of 350 Nm from the electric motor makes the difference. At this point, the 320e leads by 0.86 s and sits roughly 28 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the 320e is doing 115 km/h against 119 km/h for the 508 PureTech 180 EAT8. The gap is 0.99 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the 320e crosses the line in 15.43 s versus 16.20 s. The 0.77 s gap represents roughly 31 m of track - a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the gap narrows. The 320e maxes out at 215 km/h while the 508 PureTech 180 EAT8 keeps accelerating towards 238 km/h. At 600 metres, the gap is down to 0.52 s from 0.77 s at 400 metres.
At 1,000 metres, the 320e finishes in 28.77 s versus 28.78 s, with just 0.02 s to spare. The 508 PureTech 180 EAT8 fails to fully close the launch gap.
Electronically capped at 220 km/h, the 320e 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 12.74 seconds. The 0.86 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, 320e G20 wins (7,46 s vs 8,32 s).
320e G20 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 7,46 seconds (calibrated simulation).
320e G20: 204 hp, ratio 8,65 kg/hp. 508 PureTech 180 EAT8: 179 hp, ratio 8,32 kg/hp.
320e G20: 215 km/h. 508 PureTech 180 EAT8: 238 km/h.