The Quickest Cars We've Ever Tested, Ranked by 0–60

> The list, and the caveat: Here are the quickest cars we've measured — and an honest explanation of why this ranking, entertaining as it is, tells you remarkably little about which cars are actually good. Electric drivetrains have compressed the top of this chart so severely that 0–60 has become one of the least informative numbers in motoring. > > Rankings compiled from tests in this section. Update as new tests are added.

The rankings

Compiled from instrumented tests published in this section. Figures attributed to originating tests; see individual articles for full conditions.

| Rank | Car | 0–60 mph | Quarter mile | Notes | |---|---|---|---|---| | 1 | Ferrari 849 Testarossa | just over 2.0 sec | — | 1,036 bhp PHEV | | 2 | Mercedes-AMG SL63 S E Performance | 2.5 sec | 10.4 sec @ 135 mph | 805 hp, 4,811 lb | | 3 | BMW M5 CS (F90) | 2.6 sec | 10.6 sec @ 130 mph | the outgoing car | | 4 | McLaren W1 | 2.7 sec | — | 1,258 hp, 217 mph | | 5 | BMW M5 PHEV (G90) | 3.0 sec | 10.9 sec @ 130 mph | 717 hp, 5,390 lb | | 6 | Rivian R2 Performance | 3.6 sec | — | 656 hp electric SUV | | — | More to be added as tested | | | |

Full test conditions for each car appear in its individual article. Comparing figures across different tests, outlets, conditions and surfaces carries real caveats — which is precisely the point of the discussion below.

Why this list matters less than you think

Rankings like this are enjoyable, and we're not pretending otherwise. But instrumented testing carries an obligation to explain what numbers mean, and 0–60 has become a genuinely poor measure of a car's quality. Here's why.

1. Electric drivetrains have compressed the entire chart. Instant torque and all-wheel traction let heavy, expensive EVs post figures that once belonged exclusively to hypercars. A 4,811-pound convertible now does 2.5 seconds. That achievement is real, but it means the number no longer distinguishes what it used to.

2. The differences are imperceptible. The gap between 2.5 and 2.7 seconds is two tenths — a margin no human can reliably feel, and one that varies more with surface temperature, tyre condition and driver technique than with the cars themselves. Ranking cars by intervals nobody can perceive is entertaining, not informative.

3. Traction, not power, now sets the limit. At the sharp end, launch performance is governed by how much grip the tyres can find in the first 60 feet. That's why all-wheel-drive EVs dominate this chart while some far more powerful rear-drive cars sit lower. The McLaren W1 makes 1,258 hp and ranks below an SL63 making 805, purely because it drives only its rear wheels — a deliberate engineering choice made in service of driving purity, not lap-time headlines.

4. It measures a scenario nobody experiences. A standing-start, full-throttle launch on a prepared surface with launch control engaged is not driving. Rolling acceleration (50–75 mph, or 40–80 km/h) is what you actually use to overtake, and the rankings look quite different by that measure.

5. It says nothing about whether a car is good. The M5 comparison in this very list is the clearest illustration: the older, lighter, cheaper F90 M5 CS is quicker than its heavier PHEV successor. Which is the better car depends on refinement, electric range, agility, running costs and what you want — none of which appears in a 0–60 figure.

The numbers we'd rather you looked at

If you're using instrumented data to choose a car, these tell you far more:

Braking (70–0 mph / 100–0 km/h). Safety-critical, genuinely differentiating, and consistently under-reported. Heavy EVs in particular deserve scrutiny here.

Rolling acceleration (50–75 mph). The overtaking measurement you actually use, and where torque delivery and gearing show their true character.

Repeated-run consistency. One heroic launch means little; five consistent ones reveal thermal management and genuine capability. Measure the fifth run.

Lateral grip, with context. Skidpad figures are useful, but a 1.02 g result on 305-section Michelins tells you about the tyres as much as the chassis.

Real-world economy and range. For most owners, the 75-mph highway economy figure will affect their life far more than any acceleration number.

Weight. Increasingly the most revealing single figure in modern motoring — it drives braking, agility, tyre wear, efficiency and feel. Our M5 test is a case study in what mass costs.

The bottom line

We'll keep this ranking updated because it's genuinely interesting, and because measuring things properly matters. But we'd be doing you a disservice if we presented it as more meaningful than it is.

0–60 has been compressed by electrification into a narrow band of imperceptible differences, governed largely by traction, measuring a scenario nobody encounters, and revealing almost nothing about whether a car is worth owning. The most powerful car on this list ranks fourth. The car that ranks third is the outgoing version of the car that ranks fifth.

If you take one thing from this section, let it be this: look at the braking distances, the rolling acceleration, the repeated-run consistency and the weight. Those numbers will tell you far more about a car you'll live with than the one everybody quotes.

• Electrification has compressed 0–60 times so severely that the metric now distinguishes far less than it used to
• Differences of two tenths are imperceptible to drivers and vary more with conditions than between cars
• Traction, not power, limits launch performance — the 1,258 hp rear-drive McLaren W1 ranks below an 805 hp all-wheel-drive SL63
• The clearest illustration: the older, lighter F90 M5 CS (2.6 sec) is quicker than its heavier PHEV successor (3.0 sec)
• More useful numbers: braking distance, rolling acceleration, repeated-run consistency, real-world economy and — above all — weight

Key takeaways

• Electrification has compressed 0–60 times so severely that the metric now distinguishes far less than it used to
• Differences of two tenths are imperceptible to drivers and vary more with conditions than between cars
• Traction, not power, limits launch performance — the 1,258 hp rear-drive McLaren W1 ranks below an 805 hp all-wheel-drive SL63
• The clearest illustration: the older, lighter F90 M5 CS (2.6 sec) is quicker than its heavier PHEV successor (3.0 sec)
• More useful numbers: braking distance, rolling acceleration, repeated-run consistency, real-world economy and — above all — weight