Sur 0–100 km/h, I-PACE EV400 gagne (4,83 s vs 5,19 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.
| XM 50e G09 | I-PACE EV400 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 5,19 s | 4,83 s+0,36 s |
| 400 m standing start | 13,44 s | 13,19 s+0,25 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 24,30 s−0,06 s | 24,36 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 250 km/h+50 km/h | 200 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 5,50 kg/hpbetter ratio | 5,52 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 | XM 50e G09 | I-PACE EV400 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,39 s | 1,33 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,33 s | 2,22 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,82 s | 3,62 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 5,19 s | 4,83 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 6,88 s | 6,40 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 11,59 s | 11,23 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 18,84 s | 18,88 stight gap |
| 400 m standing start | 13,44 s | 13,19 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 24,30 s | 24,36 stight gap |
| Top speed limited | 250 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 | 476 hp | 4 cyl |
| Torque | 700 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 620 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Eight-speed M Steptronic transmission |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 400 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 696 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 208 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | — | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
Off the line, the I-PACE EV400 hits 100 km/h in 4.84 s versus 5.19 s for the Bmw XM 50e. At this point, the I-PACE EV400 leads by 0.36 s and sits roughly 3 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the I-PACE EV400 is doing 141 km/h against 139 km/h for the Bmw XM 50e. The gap is 0.22 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the I-PACE EV400 crosses the line in 13.18 s versus 13.44 s. The 0.25 s gap represents roughly 12 m of track — two to three car lengths.
Past 400 metres, the situation changes. The I-PACE EV400 maxes out at 200 km/h while the Bmw XM 50e keeps accelerating towards 250 (i.e. 155 mph — industry threshold) km/h. At 600 metres, the gap has dropped to 0.24 s.
Around 962 metres, both vehicles are level. This is the inversion point: the Bmw XM 50e overcomes its launch deficit thanks to a 50 km/h higher top speed.
At 1,000 metres, the Bmw XM 50e finishes in 24.30 s versus 24.36 s. The 0.06 s delta shows an extremely tight race.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the Bmw XM 50e is capped at 250 (i.e. 155 mph — industry threshold) km/h, the I-PACE EV400 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.
With two plug-in hybrid powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (5.50 kg/hp vs 5.52 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 7.89 seconds. The 0.36 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.
Sur 0–100 km/h, I-PACE EV400 gagne (4,83 s vs 5,19 s).
XM 50e G09 passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 5,19 secondes (simulation calibrée).
XM 50e G09 : 476 hp, ratio 5,50 kg/hp. I-PACE EV400 : 400 hp, ratio 5,52 kg/hp.
XM 50e G09 : 250 km/h. I-PACE EV400 : 200 km/h.