Over 0–100 km/h, X5 M50d F15 wins (5,15 s vs 5,30 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.
| X5 M50d F15 | E 400 e 4MATIC W214 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 5,15 s−0,15 s | 5,30 s |
| 400 m standing start | 13,47 s−0,10 s | 13,57 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 24,61 s | 24,58 s+0,03 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 250 km/h | 250 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 5,69 kg/hpbetter ratio | 5,89 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 | X5 M50d F15 | E 400 e 4MATIC W214 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,33 s | 1,36 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,15 s | 2,06 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,71 s | 3,74 stight gap |
| 0–100 km/h | 5,15 s | 5,30 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 6,95 s | 7,13 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 12,03 s | 12,19 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 20,34 s | 19,66 s |
| 400 m standing start | 13,47 s | 13,57 stight gap |
| 1,000 m standing start | 24,61 s | 24,58 stight gap |
| 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 | 400 hp | 6 cyl |
| Torque | 760 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 275 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Eight-speed Steptronic transmission |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 381 hp | 4 cyl |
| Torque | 650 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 245 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Unknown |
Off the line, the Bmw X5 M50d hits 100 km/h in 5.15 s versus 5.31 s for the E 400 e 4MATIC. Despite lacking instant torque, 400 hp of power compensates. The 0.15 s gap is negligible: both vehicles are neck and neck.
At 200 metres, the Bmw X5 M50d is doing 136 km/h against 135 km/h for the E 400 e 4MATIC. The gap is 0.07 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw X5 M50d crosses the line in 13.47 s versus 13.57 s. The 0.10 s gap represents roughly 5 m of track - barely a car length.
Past 400 metres, the situation changes. Past 400 metres, both rivals hit the same electronic ceiling at 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h. Neither can claw back ground through top speed - the outcome hinges on the acceleration curve between 100 and 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h.
At 1,000 metres, the E 400 e 4MATIC finishes in 24.58 s versus 24.60 s. The 0.03 s delta shows an extremely tight race.
Both rivals share the same electronic speed cap: the Bmw X5 M50d and the E 400 e 4MATIC 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.
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 8.31 seconds. The 0.15 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, X5 M50d F15 wins (5,15 s vs 5,30 s).
X5 M50d F15 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 5,15 seconds (calibrated simulation).
X5 M50d F15: 400 hp, ratio 5,69 kg/hp. E 400 e 4MATIC W214: 381 hp, ratio 5,89 kg/hp.
X5 M50d F15: 250 km/h. E 400 e 4MATIC W214: 250 km/h.