Sur 0–100 km/h, X9 gagne (3,88 s vs 4,94 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.
| X9 | X4 M40d G02 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,88 s−1,06 s | 4,94 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,34 s−1,95 s | 13,29 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 22,14 s−2,25 s | 24,39 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 200 km/h | 250 km/h−50 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 4,84 kg/hpbetter ratio | 5,81 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 | X9 | X4 M40d G02 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,15 s | 1,25 stight gap |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,92 s | 2,02 stight gap |
| 0–80 km/h | 3,09 s | 3,53 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,88 s | 4,94 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 4,68 s | 6,72 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,72 s | 11,71 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 9,78 s | 19,89 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,34 s | 13,29 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 22,14 s | 24,39 s |
| Top speed limited | 200 km/h | 250 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 543 hp | Dual Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor AWD MPV |
| Torque | 717 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 630 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 326 hp | 6 cyl |
| Torque | 680 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 895 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed Steptronic |
Off the line, the X9 hits 100 km/h in 3.88 s versus 4.94 s for the Bmw X4 M40d. The instant torque of 717 Nm from the electric motor makes the difference. At this point, the X9 leads by 1.06 s and sits roughly 5 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the X9 is doing 173 km/h against 137 km/h for the Bmw X4 M40d. The gap is 1.02 s. The gap remains stable from the start.
At 400 metres standing start, the X9 crosses the line in 11.34 s versus 13.29 s. The 1.95 s gap represents roughly 89 m of track — a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the X9 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 200 km/h versus 190 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the X9 finishes in 22.13 s versus 24.38 s, with a 2.25 s lead. Despite a higher top speed (250 (i.e. 155 mph — industry threshold) km/h), the Bmw X4 M40d never recovers its launch deficit.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the X9 is capped at 200 km/h, the Bmw X4 M40d at 250 (i.e. 155 mph — industry threshold) 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 7.77 seconds. The 1.06 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, X9 gagne (3,88 s vs 4,94 s).
X9 passe de 0 à 100 km/h en 3,88 secondes (simulation calibrée).
X9 : 543 hp, ratio 4,84 kg/hp. X4 M40d G02 : 326 hp, ratio 5,81 kg/hp.
X9 : 200 km/h. X4 M40d G02 : 250 km/h.