Over 0–100 km/h, M5 CS F90 wins (3,03 s vs 3,14 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.
| Taycan Turbo J1.1 | M5 CS F90 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,14 s | 3,03 s+0,11 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,15 s | 10,82 s+0,33 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 20,28 s | 19,94 s+0,34 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 260 km/h | 295 km/h−35 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 3,47 kg/hp | 2,87 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 | Taycan Turbo J1.1 | M5 CS F90 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 0,88 s | 0,91 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,47 s | 1,51 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 2,35 s | 2,37 stight gap |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,14 s | 3,03 stight gap |
| 0–120 km/h | 4,18 s | 3,74 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,95 s | 6,21 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 10,78 s | 9,97 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,15 s | 10,82 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 20,28 s | 19,94 s |
| Top speed | 260 km/h | 295 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 670 hp | Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor (PSM) |
| Torque | 850 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 322 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed front / Two-speed dog-ring rear |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 635 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 750 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 825 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed M Steptronic transmission with Drivelogic, transmission oil cooling |
Off the line, the Bmw M5 CS hits 100 km/h in 3.03 s versus 3.14 s for the Taycan Turbo. Despite lacking instant torque, 635 hp of power compensates. The 0.11 s gap is negligible: both vehicles are neck and neck.
At 200 metres, the Bmw M5 CS is doing 170 km/h against 164 km/h for the Taycan Turbo. The gap is 0.21 s. The gap widens compared to the 0-100.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw M5 CS crosses the line in 10.81 s versus 11.15 s. The 0.33 s gap represents roughly 19 m of track - two to three car lengths.
Past 400 metres, the Bmw M5 CS continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 231 km/h versus 229 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Bmw M5 CS finishes in 19.94 s versus 20.28 s, with a 0.34 s lead.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the Taycan Turbo is capped at 260 km/h, the Bmw M5 CS at 305 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.
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 4.80 seconds. The 0.11 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, M5 CS F90 wins (3,03 s vs 3,14 s).
Taycan Turbo J1.1 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 3,14 seconds (calibrated simulation).
Taycan Turbo J1.1: 670 hp, ratio 3,47 kg/hp. M5 CS F90: 635 hp, ratio 2,87 kg/hp.
Taycan Turbo J1.1: 260 km/h. M5 CS F90: 295 km/h.