Among the 83 saloons 2017–2021, the 320i Touring ranks 39th of 83 in Combined consumption (6.1 L/100, behind the Bmw 420d), 27th of 75 in Tank range (967 km, behind the Bmw 420d), 65th of 83 in 0–100 km/h (7.5 s, behind the Bmw M3 Competition).
G20 · GENERATION 2019 → · SALOON
BMWICE
320i Touring
184 hp, 7,5 s 0-100 : among the 83 saloons 2017–2021, the 320i Touring ranks 39th of 83 in Combined consumption, 27th of 75 in Tank range, 65th of 83 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
184hp
300 Nm
0 → 100 km/h
7.5s
VMax 230 km/h
Cons.
6.1L
/100 km
Tank
59L
Technical identity card
Full specifications BMW 320i Touring
Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.
Powertrain
| Displacement | 1,998 cm³ |
| Power | 184 hp |
| Couple | 300 Nm |
| Gearbox | Convertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 6.1 L/100km |
| Tank | 59 L |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 7,5 s |
| VMax | 230 km/h |
Dimensions and environment
| Length | 4,709 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2,851 mm |
| Width | 1,827 mm |
| Height | 1,440 mm |
| Boot | 500 L |
| Kerb weight | 1,570 kg |
| Cd | 0.27 |
| CO₂ WLTP | 138 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 83 saloons, the 320i Touring 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?
Fuel consumption: 6.1 L/100 L/100 (39th of 83 in Combined consumption)
The 320i Touring consumes 6.1 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 420d (4.2 L/100).
Tank range: 967 km (27th of 75 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the 320i Touring covers 967 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1405 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 320i Touring stands against saloons
Comparison across 83 saloons marketed between 2017–2021.
Combined consumption39e / 83
6.1 L/100
Min 12.7 L/100 · Ford Mustang GT S550 450Max 4.2 L/100 · Bmw 420d
Tank range27e / 75
967 km
Min 480 km · Ford Mustang GT S550 450Max 1 405 km · Bmw 420d
0–100 km/h65e / 83
7,5 s
Min 8,9 s · Bmw 318d TouringMax 3,9 s · Bmw M3 Competition
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
A4 40 TFSI190 hp · 0-100 7.3 s
A5 Avant204 hp · 0-100 7.8 s
A5 Avant204 hp · 0-100 7.7 s
A5 Avant TFSI quattro S tronic 150 kW204 hp · 0-100 7.6 s
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
Model family
The full BMW 3 Series G20 range
Generation G20 launched in 2019. Available versions sorted by energy.
Other versions of the G20
Compare
Popular duels involving the 320i Touring
Frequently asked questions
BMW 320i Touring: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
967 km on a full tank (6.1 L/100 on the combined cycle) — 27th of 75 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 6.1 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 320i 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.