Sur 0–100 km/h, Focus ST 250 Gen3 gagne (6,43 s vs 6,63 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.
| Focus ST 250 Gen3 | Clio 4 RS 200 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 6,43 s−0,20 s | 6,63 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,56 s−0,18 s | 14,74 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 25,77 s−1,02 s | 26,79 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 254 km/h+27 km/h | 227 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 5,56 kg/hpbetter ratio | 6,22 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 | Focus ST 250 Gen3 | Clio 4 RS 200 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,83 s | 1,63 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 3,06 s | 2,74 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 5,09 s | 4,66 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 6,43 s | 6,63 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 8,42 s | 8,72 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 13,56 s | 15,28 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 21,65 s | 28,70 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,56 s | 14,74 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 25,77 s | 26,79 s |
| Top speed | 254 km/h | 227 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 250 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 360 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 390 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | — | |
| Gearbox | 6-speed manual |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 200 hp | I4 |
| Torque | 240 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 245 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | EDC 6-speed (dual clutch) |
Off the line, the Focus ST 250 Gen3 hits 100 km/h in 6.43 s versus 6.63 s for the Clio 4 RS 200. Despite the faster sprint time, the Clio 4 RS 200 is 7 m further along the track at this moment: stronger low-speed acceleration offsets a slower run beyond 100 km/h.
At 200 metres, the Clio 4 RS 200 is doing 126 km/h against 134 km/h for the Focus ST 250 Gen3. The gap is 0.12 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the Focus ST 250 Gen3 crosses the line in 14.55 s versus 14.74 s. The 0.19 s gap represents roughly 8 m of track — barely a car length.
Past 400 metres, the Focus ST 250 Gen3 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 188 km/h versus 174 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Focus ST 250 Gen3 finishes in 25.77 s versus 26.78 s, with a 1.01 s lead.
Electronically capped at 227 km/h, the Clio 4 RS 200 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.
With two combustion powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (5.56 kg/hp vs 6.23 kg/hp) and transmission (Manual vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 10.26 seconds. The 0.20 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, Focus ST 250 Gen3 gagne (6,43 s vs 6,63 s).
Focus ST 250 Gen3 passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 6,43 secondes (simulation calibrée).
Focus ST 250 Gen3 : 250 hp, ratio 5,56 kg/hp. Clio 4 RS 200 : 200 hp, ratio 6,22 kg/hp.
Focus ST 250 Gen3 : 254 km/h. Clio 4 RS 200 : 227 km/h.