Over 0–100 km/h, Terramar wins (8,31 s vs 8,95 s).
Simulated drag race 0 → 1,000 m in real time. Synchronised speed counters and stopwatch. Physics calibration on 7 manufacturer measurements.
| Measure | Terramar | Q3 Sportback | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 8.31 s | 8.95 s | 0.64 s · Terramar |
| 400 m standing start | 16.25 s | 16.69 s | 0.44 s · Terramar |
| 1,000 m standing start | 29.41 s | 30.71 s | 1.30 s · Terramar |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 214 km/h | 207 km/h | 7 km/h · Terramar |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 9.00 kg/hp | 10.40 kg/hp | better ratio · Terramar |
Standing-start drag race, calibrated on manufacturer splits. The gap shows at each stage.
| Stage | Terramar | Q3 Sportback |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 2.27 s | 1.85 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 3.44 s | 3.14 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 6.00 s · tight gap | 6.10 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 8.31 s | 8.95 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 11.46 s | 13.43 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 20.91 s | 25.68 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 45.12 s | 64.35 s |
| 400 m standing start | 16.25 s | 16.69 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 29.41 s | 30.71 s |
| Top speed | 214 km/h | 207 km/h |
Physics model calibrated on manufacturer splits. The limited top speed is not the real aerodynamic top speed of the vehicles.
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 201 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 300 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 810 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed DSG |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 150 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 250 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 560 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | - | |
| Gearbox | 7-stufige S tronic |
Off the line, the Terramar hits 100 km/h in 8.31 s versus 8.95 s for the Q3 Sportback. The instant torque of 300 Nm from the electric motor makes the difference. Despite the faster sprint time, the Q3 Sportback is 4 m further along the track at this moment: stronger low-speed acceleration offsets a slower run beyond 100 km/h.
At 200 metres, the Terramar is doing 116 km/h against 108 km/h for the Q3 Sportback. The gap is 0.00 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Terramar crosses the line in 16.25 s versus 16.68 s. The 0.43 s gap represents roughly 16 m of track - two to three car lengths.
Past 400 metres, the Terramar continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 160 km/h versus 150 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Terramar finishes in 29.41 s versus 30.71 s, with a 1.30 s lead. Both vehicles have similar top speeds (214 vs 207 km/h), preventing any comeback.
Electronically capped at 207 km/h, the Q3 Sportback never reaches its natural aerodynamic ceiling in this duel. That’s not a physical limit of the motor - it’s a deliberate manufacturer decision, typically tied to standard-fit tyre ratings or model-range positioning.
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 15.86 seconds. The 0.64 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, Terramar wins (8,31 s vs 8,95 s).
Terramar goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 8,31 seconds (calibrated simulation).
Terramar: 201 hp, ratio 9,00 kg/hp. Q3 Sportback: 150 hp, ratio 10,40 kg/hp.
Terramar: 214 km/h. Q3 Sportback: 207 km/h.