Over 0–100 km/h, P7 wins (6,58 s vs 6,83 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.
| CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie | P7 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 6,83 s | 6,58 s+0,25 s |
| 400 m standing start | 15,00 s | 14,81 s+0,19 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 26,90 s−0,74 s | 27,64 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 210 km/h+40 km/h | 170 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 7,56 kg/hpbetter ratio | 7,59 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 | CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie | P7 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,93 s | 1,75 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 3,23 s | 2,93 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 5,20 s | 4,84 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 6,83 s | 6,58 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 8,93 s | 8,81 stight gap |
| 0–160 km/h | 15,59 s | 15,66 stight gap |
| 0–200 km/h | 26,18 s | - |
| 400 m standing start | 15,00 s | 14,81 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 26,90 s | 27,64 s |
| Top speed | 210 km/h | 170 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 272 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 335 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 055 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | - | |
| Gearbox | Unknown |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 263 hp | Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor |
| Torque | 390 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 995 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Propulsion | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
Off the line, the P7 hits 100 km/h in 6.58 s versus 6.83 s for the CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie. At this point, the P7 leads by 0.25 s and sits roughly 7 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the P7 is doing 127 km/h against 128 km/h for the CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie. The gap is 0.23 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the P7 crosses the line in 14.81 s versus 15.00 s. The 0.19 s gap represents roughly 8 m of track - barely a car length.
Past 400 metres, the situation changes. The P7 maxes out at 170 km/h while the CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie keeps accelerating towards 210 km/h. At 600 metres, the gap has dropped to 0.14 s.
Around 712 metres, both vehicles are level. This is the inversion point: the CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie overcomes its launch deficit thanks to a 40 km/h higher top speed.
At 1,000 metres, the CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie finishes in 26.90 s versus 27.64 s. The 0.75 s delta in favour of the CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie shows that top speed makes a clear difference.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie is capped at 210 km/h, the P7 at 170 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 electric powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (7.56 kg/hp vs 7.59 kg/hp) and transmission (Unknown vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 10.25 seconds. The 0.25 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, P7 wins (6,58 s vs 6,83 s).
CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 6,83 seconds (calibrated simulation).
CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie: 272 hp, ratio 7,56 kg/hp. P7: 263 hp, ratio 7,59 kg/hp.
CLA 250+ mit EQ Technologie: 210 km/h. P7: 170 km/h.