Sur 0–100 km/h, i4 eDrive35 G26 gagne (6,08 s vs 6,30 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.
| EQS 450 V297 | i4 eDrive35 G26 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 6,30 s | 6,08 s+0,22 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14,56 s | 14,38 s+0,18 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 26,38 s | 26,26 s+0,12 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 210 km/h+20 km/h | 190 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 7,45 kg/hp | 6,99 kg/hpbetter ratio |
Standing-start drag race, calibrated on manufacturer splits. The gap shows at each stage.
Simulated performance at each stage. Winner in green.
| Palier | EQS 450 V297 | i4 eDrive35 G26 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,62 s | 1,69 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 2,71 s | 2,81 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 4,57 s | 4,56 stight gap |
| 0–100 km/h | 6,30 s | 6,08 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 8,51 s | 8,04 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 15,04 s | 14,28 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 25,02 s | — |
| 400 m standing start | 14,56 s | 14,38 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 26,38 s | 26,26 stight gap |
| Top speed | 210 km/h | 190 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 333 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 568 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 480 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | EQS 450 | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 286 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 400 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 000 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | i4 eDrive35 | |
| Gearbox | Automatic transmission, single-speed with fixed ratio |
Off the line, the Bmw i4 eDrive35 hits 100 km/h in 6.08 s versus 6.30 s for the EQS 450. The 0.22 s gap is negligible: both vehicles are neck and neck.
At 200 metres, the Bmw i4 eDrive35 is doing 131 km/h against 128 km/h for the EQS 450. The gap is 0.07 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw i4 eDrive35 crosses the line in 14.38 s versus 14.56 s. The 0.18 s gap represents roughly 8 m of track — barely a car length.
Past 400 metres, the gap narrows. The Bmw i4 eDrive35 maxes out at 190 km/h while the EQS 450 keeps accelerating towards 210 km/h. At 600 metres, the gap has dropped to 0.25 s.
At 1,000 metres, the Bmw i4 eDrive35 finishes in 26.26 s versus 26.37 s, with just 0.11 s to spare. The EQS 450 fails to fully close the launch gap.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the EQS 450 is capped at 210 km/h, the Bmw i4 eDrive35 at 190 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 (7.45 kg/hp vs 6.99 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 9.86 seconds. The 0.22 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, i4 eDrive35 G26 gagne (6,08 s vs 6,30 s).
EQS 450 V297 passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 6,30 secondes (simulation calibrée).
EQS 450 V297 : 333 hp, ratio 7,45 kg/hp. i4 eDrive35 G26 : 286 hp, ratio 6,99 kg/hp.
EQS 450 V297 : 210 km/h. i4 eDrive35 G26 : 190 km/h.