Over 0–100 km/h, Cooper E FWD wins (7,20 s vs 7,35 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.
| ID.3 Pro | Cooper E FWD | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 7,35 s | 7,20 s+0,15 s |
| 400 m standing start | 15,50 s | 15,37 s+0,13 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 29,13 s | 28,93 s+0,20 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 160 km/h | 160 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 8,82 kg/hp | 7,58 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 | ID.3 Pro | Cooper E FWD |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,88 s | 1,96 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 3,15 s | 3,28 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 5,31 s | 5,36 stight gap |
| 0–100 km/h | 7,35 s | 7,20 stight gap |
| 0–120 km/h | 10,01 s | 9,63 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 18,97 s | 17,59 s |
| 400 m standing start | 15,50 s | 15,37 stight gap |
| 1,000 m standing start | 29,13 s | 28,93 s |
| Top speed | 160 km/h | 160 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 204 hp | Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor |
| Torque | 310 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 800 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Propulsion | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 184 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 290 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 395 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Traction | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
Off the line, the Cooper E FWD hits 100 km/h in 7.20 s versus 7.35 s for the ID.3 Pro. Despite the faster sprint time, the ID.3 Pro is 2 m further along the track at this moment: stronger low-speed acceleration offsets a slower run beyond 100 km/h.
At 200 metres, the Cooper E FWD is doing 124 km/h against 121 km/h for the ID.3 Pro. The gap is 0.00 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Cooper E FWD crosses the line in 15.37 s versus 15.50 s. The 0.13 s gap represents roughly 5 m of track - barely a car length.
Past 400 metres, the Cooper E FWD continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 160 km/h versus 160 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Cooper E FWD finishes in 28.93 s versus 29.13 s, with a 0.20 s lead. Both vehicles have similar top speeds (160 vs 160 km/h), preventing any comeback.
Both rivals share the same electronic speed cap: the ID.3 Pro and the Cooper E FWD are governed to 160 km/h. At that speed, standard-fit tyres approach their safety threshold - an industrial ceiling common to most electric vehicles in this segment. Neither car shows its true aerodynamic potential in this duel.
With two electric powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (8.82 kg/hp vs 7.58 kg/hp) and transmission (Automatic vs Automatic).
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 11.71 seconds. The 0.15 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, Cooper E FWD wins (7,20 s vs 7,35 s).
ID.3 Pro goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 7,35 seconds (calibrated simulation).
ID.3 Pro: 204 hp, ratio 8,82 kg/hp. Cooper E FWD: 184 hp, ratio 7,58 kg/hp.
ID.3 Pro: 160 km/h. Cooper E FWD: 160 km/h.