F22 · GENERATION 2018 · COMPACT
BMWICE

216d

116 hp, 11,1 s 0-100 : among the 99 compacts 2016–2020, the 216d ranks 6th of 97 in Combined consumption, 2nd of 90 in Tank range, 92th of 99 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.

Energy cost · estimate1,10915,000 km · UK mix · home UK £/kWhCustomise →

Power

116hp

270 Nm

0 → 100 km/h

11.1s

VMax 195 km/h

Cons.

4.3L

/100 km

Tank

51L

Sur cette page

Technical identity card

Full specifications BMW 216d

Manufacturer data and values calibrated by the Caralogy simulation engine.

Powertrain

ArchitectureUnknown · 3 cyl.
Displacement1,496 cm\u00b3
Power116 hp
Couple270 Nm
GearboxDual Clutch 6 rapports Automatic
Transmission216d

Consumption

Cons. WLTP4,3 L/100km
Tank51 L

Performance

0 → 100 km/h11,1 s
VMax195 km/h

Dimensions and environment

Length4,354 mm
Wheelbase2,670 mm
Width1,800 mm
Height1,555 mm
Boot468 L
Kerb weight1,420 kg
Cd0.27
CO₂ WLTP112 g/km

Caralogy Methodology

Motorway and performance values calibrated by the Caralogy physics simulation engine (SCx, Crr, real torque curves).

See full methodology →

Manufacturer data · motorway values calibrated by the Caralogy engine

Among the 99 compacts, the 216d ranks (top 6 in segment) in fuel consumption. Caralogy simulates its real-world cost: motorway simulation, consumption simulation and performance simulation.

Caralogy Analysis · tailored to this vehicle

Caralogy Verdict

Suitable for

Good compromise for regular use without available charging infrastructure. 6th of 97 in Combined consumption (4.3 L/100), 2nd of 90 in Tank range (1186 km).

Less suitable for

Some metrics lag behind the segment. Check the rankings above to identify weak points.

Alternatives to consider

If the priority is Combined consumption, the Bmw 216d Gran Coupe (1st with 4.1 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the Bmw 116d (1st with 1209 km) takes the lead.

Fuel consumption: 4.3 L/100 L/100 (6th of 97 in Combined consumption)

The 216d consumes 4.3 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 216d Gran Coupe (4.1 L/100).

Tank range: 1186 km (2nd of 90 in Tank range)

On a full tank, the 216d covers 1186 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1209 km.

Segment positioning

Where the 216d stands against compacts

Comparison across 99 compacts marketed between 2016–2020.

Combined consumption

6eout of 97

4.3 L/100
Min10 L/100 · Bmw M2 Competition
Max4.1 L/100 · Bmw 216d Gran Coupe

Tank range

2eout of 90

1 186 km
Min520 km · Bmw M2 Competition
Max1 209 km · Bmw 116d

0–100 km/h

92eout of 99

11,1 s
Min12,3 s · Hyundai i30 1.5 DPi 110 PS
Max4,4 s · Bmw M140i xDrive

Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)

Cross-energy alternatives

Same needs, different powertrain.

Compare

Popular duels involving the 216d

Take the next step

Find a 216d or value yours

Caralogy receives no commission on these external links.

Frequently asked questions

BMW 216d: what you need to know

Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.

Where does the 216d rank in its segment?#

Among the 99 compacts 2016–2020, the 216d ranks 6th of 97 in Combined consumption (4.3 L/100, behind the Bmw 216d Gran Coupe), 2nd of 90 in Tank range (1186 km, behind the Bmw 116d), 92th of 99 in 0–100 km/h (11.1 s, behind the Bmw M140i xDrive).

What is the range of the 216d?#

1186 km on a full tank (4.3 L/100 on the combined cycle) — 2nd of 90 in autonomie du segment.

How much does the 216d cost to run?#

Running costs depend on your profile (mileage, charging type, city/highway mix). Use the Caralogy consumption simulator for a personalised estimate.

Why not a Bmw 216d Gran Coupe instead?#

The Bmw 216d Gran Coupe leads in Combined consumption (4.1 L/100 vs 4.3 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 216d vs Bmw 216d Gran Coupe duel for a detailed comparison.

How does Caralogy calculate its figures?#

Caralogy does not reproduce manufacturer figures: we recalculate every number through physics simulation, starting from SCx, mass and the power curve. This is why our figures at 130 km/h differ from WLTP. Full methodology on the dedicated page.