Sur 0–100 km/h, G6 gagne (3,80 s vs 4,33 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.
| GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology X254 | G6 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 4,33 s | 3,80 s+0,53 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,66 s | 12,03 s+0,63 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 23,35 s | 22,89 s+0,46 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 210 km/h+10 km/h | 200 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 5,18 kg/hp | 4,41 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 | GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology X254 | G6 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,17 s | 1,06 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,94 s | 1,76 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,21 s | 2,86 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 4,33 s | 3,80 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 5,77 s | 5,01 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 10,06 s | 8,63 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 16,35 s | 13,99 s |
| 400 m standing start | 12,66 s | 12,03 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 23,35 s | 22,89 s |
| Top speed | 210 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 | 489 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 800 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 535 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Unknown |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 480 hp | Dual Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor AWD |
| Torque | 660 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 115 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
Off the line, the G6 hits 100 km/h in 3.80 s versus 4.34 s for the GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology. At this point, the G6 leads by 0.53 s and sits roughly 5 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the G6 is doing 152 km/h against 145 km/h for the GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology. The gap is 0.41 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the G6 crosses the line in 12.03 s versus 12.66 s. The 0.63 s gap represents roughly 31 m of track — a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the gap narrows. The G6 maxes out at 200 km/h while the GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology keeps accelerating towards 210 km/h. At 600 metres, the gap is down to 0.76 s from 0.63 s at 400 metres.
At 1,000 metres, the G6 finishes in 22.89 s versus 23.35 s, with just 0.46 s to spare. The GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology fails to fully close the launch gap.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology is capped at 210 km/h, the G6 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 electric powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (5.18 kg/hp vs 4.41 kg/hp) and transmission (Unknown vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 6.65 seconds. The 0.53 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, G6 gagne (3,80 s vs 4,33 s).
GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology X254 passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 4,33 secondes (simulation calibrée).
GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology X254 : 489 hp, ratio 5,18 kg/hp. G6 : 480 hp, ratio 4,41 kg/hp.
GLC 400 4MATIC with EQ Technology X254 : 210 km/h. G6 : 200 km/h.