Over 0–100 km/h, X2 xDrive25e F39 wins (6,74 s vs 9,16 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.
| X2 xDrive25e F39 | Q3 SUV | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 6,74 s−2,42 s | 9,16 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,89 s−2,04 s | 16,93 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 27,32 s−3,53 s | 30,85 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 195 km/h | 209 km/h−14 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 7,86 kg/hpbetter ratio | 10,40 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 | X2 xDrive25e F39 | Q3 SUV |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,46 s | 2,19 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,49 s | 3,65 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 4,65 s | 6,48 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 6,74 s | 9,16 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 9,34 s | 13,38 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 16,97 s | 25,21 s |
| 0–200 km/h | - | 54,13 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,89 s | 16,93 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 27,32 s | 30,85 s |
| Top speed | 195 km/h | 209 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 220 hp | 3 cyl |
| Torque | 385 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 730 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 6-speed Steptronic |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 150 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 250 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 560 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed S tronic |
Off the line, the Bmw X2 xDrive25e hits 100 km/h in 6.74 s versus 9.16 s for the Q3 SUV. The instant torque of 385 Nm from the electric motor makes the difference. At this point, the Bmw X2 xDrive25e leads by 2.42 s and sits roughly 27 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the Bmw X2 xDrive25e is doing 122 km/h against 111 km/h for the Q3 SUV. The gap is 1.39 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw X2 xDrive25e crosses the line in 14.89 s versus 16.93 s. The 2.04 s gap represents roughly 73 m of track - a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the Bmw X2 xDrive25e continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 169 km/h versus 151 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Bmw X2 xDrive25e finishes in 27.32 s versus 30.84 s, with a 3.52 s lead. Both vehicles have similar top speeds (195 vs 209 km/h), preventing any comeback.
The Bmw X2 xDrive25e features all-wheel drive (AWD) against the Q3 SUV’s FWD. 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 Bmw X2 xDrive25e is capped at 195 km/h, the Q3 SUV at 209 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 16.01 seconds. The 2.42 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, X2 xDrive25e F39 wins (6,74 s vs 9,16 s).
X2 xDrive25e F39 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 6,74 seconds (calibrated simulation).
X2 xDrive25e F39: 220 hp, ratio 7,86 kg/hp. Q3 SUV: 150 hp, ratio 10,40 kg/hp.
X2 xDrive25e F39: 195 km/h. Q3 SUV: 209 km/h.