Sur 0–100 km/h, Model X Performance gagne (3,05 s vs 8,31 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.
| Model X Performance | Terramar | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,05 s−5,26 s | 8,31 s |
| 400 m standing start | 10,92 s−5,33 s | 16,25 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 19,92 s−9,49 s | 29,41 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 262 km/h+48 km/h | 214 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 3,16 kg/hpbetter ratio | 9,00 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 | Model X Performance | Terramar |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 0,89 s | 2,27 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,48 s | 3,44 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 2,37 s | 6,00 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,05 s | 8,31 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 3,91 s | 11,46 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,45 s | 20,91 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 10,08 s | 45,12 s |
| 400 m standing start | 10,92 s | 16,25 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 19,92 s | 29,41 s |
| Top speed | 262 km/h | 214 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 778 hp | Dual Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor |
| Torque | 1139 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 459 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 201 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 300 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 810 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | 7-speed DSG |
Off the line, the Model X Performance hits 100 km/h in 3.05 s versus 8.31 s for the Terramar. At this point, the Model X Performance leads by 5.26 s and sits roughly 27 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the Model X Performance is doing 168 km/h against 116 km/h for the Terramar. The gap is 3.62 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Model X Performance crosses the line in 10.92 s versus 16.25 s. The 5.33 s gap represents roughly 194 m of track — a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the Model X Performance continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 233 km/h versus 160 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Model X Performance finishes in 19.92 s versus 29.41 s, with a 9.49 s lead.
The Model X Performance features all-wheel drive (AWD) against the Terramar’s FWD. At low speeds (0-30, 0-50, 0-80 km/h), AWD doubles the driven contact area: all four wheels transmit torque to the road, virtually eliminating wheelspin at launch. This traction advantage is decisive in the range where the motor delivers peak torque, before power and aerodynamics take over.
Electronically capped at 262 km/h, the Model X Performance 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 plug-in hybrid powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (3.16 kg/hp vs 9.00 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 13.30 seconds. The 5.26 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, Model X Performance gagne (3,05 s vs 8,31 s).
Model X Performance passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 3,05 secondes (simulation calibrée).
Model X Performance : 778 hp, ratio 3,16 kg/hp. Terramar : 201 hp, ratio 9,00 kg/hp.
Model X Performance : 262 km/h. Terramar : 214 km/h.