Among the 85 saloons 2019–2023, the 320i xDrive Sedan ranks 48th of 85 in Combined consumption (6.4 L/100, behind the Bmw 420d), 34th of 73 in Tank range (922 km, behind the Bmw 420d), 72th of 85 in 0–100 km/h (7.6 s, behind the BMW M3 Competition xDrive).
G20 · GENERATION 2021 → · SALOON
BMWICE
320i xDrive Sedan
184 hp, 7,6 s 0-100 : among the 85 saloons 2019–2023, the 320i xDrive Sedan ranks 48th of 85 in Combined consumption, 34th of 73 in Tank range, 72th of 85 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
184hp
300 Nm
0 → 100 km/h
7.6s
VMax 230 km/h
Cons.
6.4L
/100 km
Tank
59L
Technical identity card
Full specifications BMW 320i xDrive Sedan
Manufacturer data and values calibrated by the Caralogy simulation engine.
Powertrain
| Architecture | Unknown |
| Displacement | 1,998 cm\u00b3 |
| Power | 184 hp |
| Couple | 300 Nm |
| Gearbox | Torque Converter 8 rapports Automatic |
| Transmission | AWD |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 6,4 L/100km |
| Tank | 59 L |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 7,6 s |
| VMax | 230 km/h |
Dimensions and environment
| Length | 4,709 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2,851 mm |
| Width | 1,827 mm |
| Height | 1,445 mm |
| Boot | 480 L |
| Kerb weight | 1,560 kg |
| Cd | 0.25 |
| CO₂ WLTP | 146 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 85 saloons, the 320i xDrive Sedan 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: 6.4 L/100 L/100 (48th of 85 in Combined consumption)
The 320i xDrive Sedan consumes 6.4 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 420d (4.2 L/100).
Tank range: 922 km (34th of 73 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the 320i xDrive Sedan covers 922 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 xDrive Sedan stands against saloons
Comparison across 85 saloons marketed between 2019–2023.
Combined consumption48e / 85
6.4 L/100
Min 14.9 L/100 · Lexus IS 500 F Sport RWDMax 4.2 L/100 · Bmw 420d
Tank range34e / 73
922 km
Min 500 km · Kia Stinger GT 3.3T AWDMax 1 405 km · Bmw 420d
0–100 km/h72e / 85
7,6 s
Min 8,9 s · Bmw 318d TouringMax 3,5 s · BMW M3 Competition xDrive
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
A4 40 TFSI190 hp · 0-100 7.3 s
S60 B4197 hp · 0-100 8.0 s
XC40 B4197 hp · 0-100 8.3 s
A5 Avant204 hp · 0-100 7.8 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 xDrive Sedan
Frequently asked questions
BMW 320i xDrive Sedan: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
922 km on a full tank (6.4 L/100 on the combined cycle) — 34th of 73 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 6.4 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 320i xDrive Sedan 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.