Over 0–100 km/h, RS 3 Sportback wins (3,88 s vs 4,12 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.
| M2 G87 | RS 3 Sportback | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 4,12 s | 3,88 s+0,24 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,08 s | 12,08 s+0,00 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 21,81 s−0,24 s | 22,05 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 285 km/h+35 km/h | 250 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 3,76 kg/hpbetter ratio | 3,91 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 | M2 G87 | RS 3 Sportback |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,17 s | 1,04 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,95 s | 1,74 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,06 s | 2,85 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 4,12 s | 3,88 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 5,26 s | 5,07 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 8,46 s | 8,84 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 13,14 s | 13,81 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,08 s | 12,08 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 21,81 s | 22,05 s |
| Top speed limited | 285 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 | 460 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 550 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 730 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Propulsion | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed M Steptronic |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 400 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 500 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 565 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed S tronic |
Off the line, the RS 3 Sportback hits 100 km/h in 3.88 s versus 4.12 s for the M2. At this point, the RS 3 Sportback leads by 0.24 s and sits roughly 5 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the RS 3 Sportback is doing 150 km/h against 155 km/h for the M2. The gap is 0.13 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the M2 crosses the line in 12.08 s versus 12.08 s. The 0.00 s gap represents roughly 0 m of track
Past 400 metres, the M2 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 215 km/h versus 211 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the M2 finishes in 21.80 s versus 22.04 s, with a 0.24 s lead.
The RS 3 Sportback features all-wheel drive (AWD) against the M2’s RWD. At low speeds (0-30, 0-50, 0-80 km/h), AWD doubles the driven contact area: all four wheels transmit torque to the road, virtually eliminating wheelspin at launch. This traction advantage is decisive in the range where the motor delivers peak torque, before power and aerodynamics take over.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the M2 is capped at 285 km/h, the RS 3 Sportback 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 combustion powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (3.76 kg/hp vs 3.91 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 5.94 seconds. The 0.24 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, RS 3 Sportback wins (3,88 s vs 4,12 s).
M2 G87 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 4,12 seconds (calibrated simulation).
M2 G87: 460 hp, ratio 3,76 kg/hp. RS 3 Sportback: 400 hp, ratio 3,91 kg/hp.
M2 G87: 285 km/h. RS 3 Sportback: 250 km/h.