Over 0–100 km/h, iX xDrive50 I20 wins (4,69 s vs 5,00 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.
| iX xDrive50 I20 | Q5 SUV | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 4,69 s−0,31 s | 5,00 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,93 s−0,45 s | 13,38 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 23,92 s−0,63 s | 24,55 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 200 km/h | 250 km/h−50 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 4,94 kg/hpbetter ratio | 5,91 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 | iX xDrive50 I20 | Q5 SUV |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,29 s | 1,19 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,15 s | 2,00 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,50 s | 3,57 stight gap |
| 0–100 km/h | 4,69 s | 5,00 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 6,18 s | 6,88 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 10,39 s | 12,14 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 16,61 s | 20,28 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,93 s | 13,38 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 23,92 s | 24,55 s |
| Top speed limited | 200 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 | 523 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 765 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 585 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 367 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 500 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 170 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed S tronic |
Off the line, the iX xDrive50 hits 100 km/h in 4.69 s versus 5.00 s for the Q5 SUV. Despite the faster sprint time, the Q5 SUV is 1 m further along the track at this moment: stronger low-speed acceleration offsets a slower run beyond 100 km/h.
At 200 metres, the iX xDrive50 is doing 144 km/h against 136 km/h for the Q5 SUV. The gap is 0.18 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the iX xDrive50 crosses the line in 12.93 s versus 13.38 s. The 0.45 s gap represents roughly 21 m of track - two to three car lengths.
Past 400 metres, the iX xDrive50 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 200 km/h versus 188 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the iX xDrive50 finishes in 23.92 s versus 24.54 s, with a 0.63 s lead. Despite a higher top speed (250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h), the Q5 SUV never recovers its launch deficit.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the iX xDrive50 is capped at 200 km/h, the Q5 SUV at 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) 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 plug-in hybrid powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (4.94 kg/hp vs 5.91 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 7.94 seconds. The 0.31 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, iX xDrive50 I20 wins (4,69 s vs 5,00 s).
iX xDrive50 I20 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 4,69 seconds (calibrated simulation).
iX xDrive50 I20: 523 hp, ratio 4,94 kg/hp. Q5 SUV: 367 hp, ratio 5,91 kg/hp.
iX xDrive50 I20: 200 km/h. Q5 SUV: 250 km/h.