Over 0–100 km/h, M5 CS F90 wins (3,03 s vs 3,88 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.
| M5 CS F90 | X9 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,03 s−0,85 s | 3,88 s |
| 400 m standing start | 10,82 s−0,52 s | 11,34 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 19,94 s−2,20 s | 22,14 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 295 km/h+95 km/h | 200 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 2,87 kg/hpbetter ratio | 4,84 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 | M5 CS F90 | X9 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 0,91 s | 1,15 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,51 s | 1,92 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 2,37 s | 3,09 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,03 s | 3,88 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 3,74 s | 4,68 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,21 s | 6,72 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 9,97 s | 9,78 s |
| 400 m standing start | 10,82 s | 11,34 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 19,94 s | 22,14 s |
| Top speed | 295 km/h | 200 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 635 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 750 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 825 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed M Steptronic transmission with Drivelogic, transmission oil cooling |
| 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 |
Off the line, the Bmw M5 CS hits 100 km/h in 3.03 s versus 3.88 s for the X9. Despite lacking instant torque, 635 hp of power compensates. At this point, the Bmw M5 CS leads by 0.85 s and sits roughly 9 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the Bmw M5 CS is doing 170 km/h against 173 km/h for the X9. The gap is 0.57 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw M5 CS crosses the line in 10.81 s versus 11.34 s. The 0.52 s gap represents roughly 29 m of track - two to three car lengths.
Past 400 metres, the Bmw M5 CS continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 231 km/h versus 200 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Bmw M5 CS finishes in 19.94 s versus 22.13 s, with a 2.19 s lead.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the Bmw M5 CS is capped at 305 km/h, the X9 at 200 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 5.10 seconds. The 0.85 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, M5 CS F90 wins (3,03 s vs 3,88 s).
M5 CS F90 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 3,03 seconds (calibrated simulation).
M5 CS F90: 635 hp, ratio 2,87 kg/hp. X9: 543 hp, ratio 4,84 kg/hp.
M5 CS F90: 295 km/h. X9: 200 km/h.