Over 0–100 km/h, XM 50e G09 and 745e G11 are neck and neck (5,16 s vs 5,19 s, no significant gap).
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.
| XM 50e G09 | 745e G11 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 5,19 s | 5,16 s+0,03 s |
| 400 m standing start | 13,44 s | 13,37 s+0,07 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 24,30 s | 24,08 s+0,22 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 250 km/h | 250 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 5,50 kg/hp | 5,08 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 | XM 50e G09 | 745e G11 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,39 s | 1,38 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,33 s | 2,29 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,82 s | 3,80 stight gap |
| 0–100 km/h | 5,19 s | 5,16 stight gap |
| 0–120 km/h | 6,88 s | 6,84 stight gap |
| 0–160 km/h | 11,59 s | 11,35 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 18,84 s | 18,09 s |
| 400 m standing start | 13,44 s | 13,37 stight gap |
| 1,000 m standing start | 24,30 s | 24,08 s |
| Top speed limited | 250 km/h | 250 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 476 hp | 4 cyl |
| Torque | 700 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 620 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Eight-speed M Steptronic transmission |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 394 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 600 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 000 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Propulsion | |
| Gearbox | Eight-speed Steptronic transmission |
Off the line, the Bmw 745e hits 100 km/h in 5.16 s versus 5.19 s for the Bmw XM 50e. The 0.03 s gap is negligible: both vehicles are neck and neck.
At 200 metres, the Bmw 745e is doing 139 km/h against 139 km/h for the Bmw XM 50e. The gap is 0.03 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw 745e crosses the line in 13.37 s versus 13.44 s. The 0.07 s gap represents roughly 3 m of track - barely a car length.
Past 400 metres, the Bmw 745e continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 196 km/h versus 193 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Bmw 745e finishes in 24.07 s versus 24.30 s, with a 0.22 s lead. Both vehicles have similar top speeds (250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) vs 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h), preventing any comeback.
Both rivals share the same electronic speed cap: the Bmw XM 50e and the Bmw 745e are governed to 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h. At that speed, standard-fit tyres approach their safety threshold - an industrial ceiling common to most electric vehicles in this segment. Neither car shows its true aerodynamic potential in this duel.
With two plug-in hybrid powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (5.50 kg/hp vs 5.08 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 7.89 seconds. The 0.03 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, XM 50e G09 and 745e G11 are neck and neck (5,16 s vs 5,19 s, no significant gap).
XM 50e G09 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 5,19 seconds (calibrated simulation).
XM 50e G09: 476 hp, ratio 5,50 kg/hp. 745e G11: 394 hp, ratio 5,08 kg/hp.
XM 50e G09: 250 km/h. 745e G11: 250 km/h.