Among the 107 compacts 2019–2023, the 218d xDrive ranks 25th of 103 in Combined consumption (4.7 L/100, behind the Bmw 216d Steptronic), 14th of 95 in Tank range (1085 km, behind the Bmw 216d Steptronic), 75th of 107 in 0–100 km/h (9.0 s, behind the BMW M2).
218d xDrive
150 hp, 9,0 s 0-100 : among the 107 compacts 2019–2023, the 218d xDrive ranks 25th of 103 in Combined consumption, 14th of 95 in Tank range, 75th of 107 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
150hp
350 Nm
0 → 100 km/h
9.0s
VMax 211 km/h
Cons.
4.7L
/100 km
Tank
51L
Full specifications BMW 218d xDrive
Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.
Powertrain
| Architecture | 4 cyl. |
| Displacement | 1,995 cm³ |
| Power | 150 hp |
| Couple | 350 Nm |
| Gearbox | Convertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique |
| Transmission | Integrale (AWD) |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 4.7 L/100km |
| Tank | 51 L |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 9,0 s |
| VMax | 211 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 | 1,545 kg |
| Cd | 0.28 |
| CO₂ WLTP | 125 g/km |
Caralogy Methodology
Performance (0-100, top speed) simulated by the Caralogy physics engine (SCx, Crr, real torque curves). Motorway consumption values estimated from the manufacturer WLTP cycle.
See full methodology →Manufacturer data · WLTP-estimated consumption · Caralogy-simulated performance
Among the 107 compacts, the 218d xDrive ranks (top 25 in segment) in fuel consumption. Caralogy simulates its real-world cost: motorway simulation, consumption simulation and performance simulation.
Tailored to this vehicle?
Good compromise for regular use without available charging infrastructure. 25th of 103 in Combined consumption (4.7 L/100), 14th of 95 in Tank range (1085 km).
Some metrics lag behind the segment. Check the rankings above to identify weak points.
If the priority is Combined consumption, the Bmw 216d Steptronic (1st with 3.9 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the Bmw 216d Steptronic (1st with 1308 km) takes the lead.
Fuel consumption: 4.7 L/100 L/100 (25th of 103 in Combined consumption)
The 218d xDrive consumes 4.7 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 216d Steptronic (3.9 L/100).
Tank range: 1085 km (14th of 95 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the 218d xDrive covers 1085 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1308 km.
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 →Where the 218d xDrive stands against compacts
Comparison across 107 compacts marketed between 2019–2023.
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
The full BMW 2 Series F44 range
Generation F44 launched in 2019. Available versions sorted by energy.
Other versions of the F44
Popular duels involving the 218d xDrive
BMW 218d xDrive: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
1085 km on a full tank (4.7 L/100 on the combined cycle) - 14th of 95 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 Steptronic leads in Combined consumption (3.9 L/100 vs 4.7 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 218d xDrive vs Bmw 216d Steptronic 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.