Among the 88 saloons 2018–2022, the 320d xDrive Touring ranks 13th of 88 in Combined consumption (4.7 L/100, behind the Bmw 420d), 6th of 77 in Tank range (1255 km, behind the Bmw 420d), 64th of 88 in 0–100 km/h (7.4 s, behind the BMW M3 Competition xDrive).
320d xDrive Touring
188 hp, 7,4 s 0-100 : among the 88 saloons 2018–2022, the 320d xDrive Touring ranks 13th of 88 in Combined consumption, 6th of 77 in Tank range, 64th of 88 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
188hp
400 Nm · 11 hp elec
0 → 100 km/h
7.4s
VMax 225 km/h
Cons.
4.7L
/100 km
Tank
59L
Full specifications BMW 320d xDrive Touring
Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.
Powertrain
| Displacement | 1,995 cm³ |
| Puissance électrique | 11 hp |
| Combined power | 188 hp |
| Couple | 400 Nm |
| Gearbox | Convertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique |
| Transmission | Integrale (AWD) |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 4.7 L/100km |
| Tank | 59 L |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 7,4 s |
| VMax | 225 km/h |
Dimensions and environment
| Length | 4,709 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2,851 mm |
| Width | 1,827 mm |
| Height | 1,445 mm |
| Boot | 500 L |
| Kerb weight | 1,765 kg |
| Cd | 0.27 |
| 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 88 saloons, the 320d xDrive Touring ranks (top 13 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. 13th of 88 in Combined consumption (4.7 L/100), 6th of 77 in Tank range (1255 km).
Some metrics lag behind the segment. Check the rankings above to identify weak points.
If the priority is Combined consumption, the Bmw 420d (1st with 4.2 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the Bmw 420d (1st with 1405 km) takes the lead.
Fuel consumption: 4.7 L/100 L/100 (13th of 88 in Combined consumption)
The 320d xDrive Touring consumes 4.7 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 420d (4.2 L/100).
Tank range: 1255 km (6th of 77 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the 320d xDrive Touring covers 1255 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1405 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 320d xDrive Touring stands against saloons
Comparison across 88 saloons marketed between 2018–2022.
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
The full BMW 3 Series G20 range
Generation G20 launched in 2019. Available versions sorted by energy.
Other versions of the G20
Popular duels involving the 320d xDrive Touring
BMW 320d xDrive Touring: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
1255 km on a full tank (4.7 L/100 on the combined cycle) - 6th of 77 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 420d leads in Combined consumption (4.2 L/100 vs 4.7 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 320d xDrive Touring vs Bmw 420d 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.