Among the 30 M 2019–2023, the 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer ranks 18th of 30 in Combined consumption (5.4 L/100, behind the Bmw 216d Active Tourer), 18th of 29 in Tank range (944 km, behind the Bmw 216d Active Tourer), 21th of 30 in 0–100 km/h (9.6 s, behind the Bmw 225i xDrive Active Tourer).
218i Steptronic Gran Tourer
136 hp, 9,6 s 0-100 : among the 30 M 2019–2023, the 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer ranks 18th of 30 in Combined consumption, 18th of 29 in Tank range, 21th of 30 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
136hp
220 Nm
0 → 100 km/h
9.6s
VMax 205 km/h
Cons.
5.4L
/100 km
Tank
51L
Full specifications BMW 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer
Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.
Powertrain
| Architecture | 3 cyl. |
| Displacement | 1,499 cm³ |
| Power | 136 hp |
| Couple | 220 Nm |
| Gearbox | Double embrayage 7 rapports Automatique |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 5.4 L/100km |
| Tank | 51 L |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 9,6 s |
| VMax | 205 km/h |
Dimensions and environment
| Length | 4,568 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2,780 mm |
| Width | 1,800 mm |
| Height | 1,608 mm |
| Boot | 645 L |
| Kerb weight | 1,455 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 30 M, the 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer ranks (mid-table) 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.
Some metrics lag behind the segment. Check the rankings above to identify weak points.
If the priority is Combined consumption, the Bmw 216d Active Tourer (1st with 4.0 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the Bmw 216d Active Tourer (1st with 1275 km) takes the lead.
Fuel consumption: 5.4 L/100 L/100 (18th of 30 in Combined consumption)
The 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer consumes 5.4 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 216d Active Tourer (4.0 L/100).
Tank range: 944 km (18th of 29 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer covers 944 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1275 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 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer stands against M
Comparison across 30 M 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 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer
BMW 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
944 km on a full tank (5.4 L/100 on the combined cycle) — 18th of 29 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 Active Tourer leads in Combined consumption (4.0 L/100 vs 5.4 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 218i Steptronic Gran Tourer vs Bmw 216d Active Tourer 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.