Among the 99 compacts 2016–2020, the 220i ranks 50th of 97 in Combined consumption (5.8 L/100, behind the Bmw 216d Gran Coupe), 44th of 90 in Tank range (879 km, behind the Bmw 116d), 45th of 99 in 0–100 km/h (7.4 s, behind the Bmw M140i xDrive).
F22 · GENERATION 2018 → · COMPACT
BMWICE
220i
192 hp, 7,4 s 0-100 : among the 99 compacts 2016–2020, the 220i ranks 50th of 97 in Combined consumption, 44th of 90 in Tank range, 45th of 99 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
192hp
280 Nm
0 → 100 km/h
7.4s
VMax 229 km/h
Cons.
5.8L
/100 km
Tank
51L
Technical identity card
Full specifications BMW 220i
Manufacturer data and values calibrated by the Caralogy simulation engine.
Powertrain
| Architecture | Unknown · 4 cyl. |
| Displacement | 1,998 cm\u00b3 |
| Power | 192 hp |
| Couple | 280 Nm |
| Gearbox | Dual Clutch 7 rapports Automatic |
| Transmission | 220i |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 5,8 L/100km |
| Tank | 51 L |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 7,4 s |
| VMax | 229 km/h |
Dimensions and environment
| Length | 4,354 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2,670 mm |
| Width | 1,800 mm |
| Height | 1,555 mm |
| Boot | 468 L |
| Kerb weight | 1,405 kg |
| Cd | 0.28 |
| CO₂ WLTP | 133 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 220i ranks (mid-table) 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.
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: 5.8 L/100 L/100 (50th of 97 in Combined consumption)
The 220i consumes 5.8 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 216d Gran Coupe (4.1 L/100).
Tank range: 879 km (44th of 90 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the 220i covers 879 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1209 km.
Go beyond this analysis
Recalculate everything for your own profile with the three physics simulators that power this page.
Running cost for your profile
Adjust mileage, driving mix and charging type to estimate your annual energy budget.
Launch simulator →Long-distance trip
Simulate any motorway trip: time, charging stops, total cost.
Simulate a trip →Chronos & accélération
0-100, 0-200, courbe de vitesse, positionnement segment.
Voir la performance →Segment positioning
Where the 220i stands against compacts
Comparison across 99 compacts marketed between 2016–2020.
Combined consumption50e / 97
5.8 L/100
Min 10 L/100 · Bmw M2 CompetitionMax 4.1 L/100 · Bmw 216d Gran Coupe
Tank range44e / 90
879 km
Min 520 km · Bmw M2 CompetitionMax 1 209 km · Bmw 116d
0–100 km/h45e / 99
7,4 s
Min 12,3 s · Hyundai i30 1.5 DPi 110 PSMax 4,4 s · Bmw M140i xDrive
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
S60 B4197 hp · 0-100 8.0 s
XC40 B4197 hp · 0-100 8.3 s
A3 allstreet204 hp · 0-100 6.4 s
A3 Sedan204 hp · 0-100 6.3 s
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
Compare
Popular duels involving the 220i
Frequently asked questions
BMW 220i: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
879 km on a full tank (5.8 L/100 on the combined cycle) — 44th of 90 in autonomie du segment.
Running costs depend on your profile (mileage, charging type, city/highway mix). Use the Caralogy consumption simulator for a personalised estimate.
The Bmw 216d Gran Coupe leads in Combined consumption (4.1 L/100 vs 5.8 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 220i vs Bmw 216d Gran Coupe duel for a detailed comparison.
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.