Over 0–100 km/h, ID.4 GTX wins (6,15 s vs 7,07 s).
Simulated drag race 0 → 1,000 m in real time. Synchronised speed counters and stopwatch. Physics calibration on 7 manufacturer measurements.
| Measure | ID.4 GTX | Q7 SUV | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 6.15 s | 7.07 s | 0.92 s · ID.4 GTX |
| 400 m standing start | 14.48 s | 15.11 s | 0.63 s · ID.4 GTX |
| 1,000 m standing start | 26.84 s | 28.09 s | 1.25 s · ID.4 GTX |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 180 km/h | 226 km/h | 46 km/h · Q7 SUV |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 7.33 kg/hp | 9.09 kg/hp | better ratio · ID.4 GTX |
Standing-start drag race, calibrated on manufacturer splits. The gap shows at each stage.
| Stage | ID.4 GTX | Q7 SUV |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1.58 s | 1.17 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 2.63 s | 2.22 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 4.45 s | 4.70 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 6.15 s | 7.07 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 8.35 s | 10.12 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 15.21 s | 19.20 s |
| 0–200 km/h | - | 37.54 s |
| 400 m standing start | 14.48 s | 15.11 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 26.84 s | 28.09 s |
| Top speed | 180 km/h | 226 km/h |
Physics model calibrated on manufacturer splits. The limited top speed is not the real aerodynamic top speed of the vehicles.
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 299 hp | Dual Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor |
| Torque | 460 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 193 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 231 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 500 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 100 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed tiptronic |
Off the line, the ID.4 GTX hits 100 km/h in 6.15 s versus 7.07 s for the Q7 SUV. The instant torque of 460 Nm from the electric motor makes the difference. Despite the faster sprint time, the Q7 SUV is 3 m further along the track at this moment: stronger low-speed acceleration offsets a slower run beyond 100 km/h.
At 200 metres, the ID.4 GTX is doing 128 km/h against 117 km/h for the Q7 SUV. The gap is 0.19 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the ID.4 GTX crosses the line in 14.48 s versus 15.11 s. The 0.63 s gap represents roughly 25 m of track - two to three car lengths.
Past 400 metres, the ID.4 GTX continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 175 km/h versus 162 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the ID.4 GTX finishes in 26.83 s versus 28.09 s, with a 1.25 s lead. Despite a higher top speed (226 km/h), the Q7 SUV never recovers its launch deficit.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the ID.4 GTX is capped at 180 km/h, the Q7 SUV at 226 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 11.95 seconds. The 0.92 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Over 0–100 km/h, ID.4 GTX wins (6,15 s vs 7,07 s).
ID.4 GTX goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 6,15 seconds (calibrated simulation).
ID.4 GTX: 299 hp, ratio 7,33 kg/hp. Q7 SUV: 231 hp, ratio 9,09 kg/hp.
ID.4 GTX: 180 km/h. Q7 SUV: 226 km/h.