BMW 520d
190 hp, 7,3 s 0-100 : among the 93 grand tourers 2016–2020, the 520d ranks 8th of 93 in Combined consumption, 8th of 91 in Tank range, 78th of 93 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
- Power
- 190 hp
- 400 Nm
- 0 → 100 km/h
- 7.3 s
- VMax 235 km/h
- Cons.
- 4.6 L
- /100 km
- Tank
- 66 L
Full specifications
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
- 190 hp
- Couple
- 400 Nm
- Gearbox
- Convertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique
- Transmission
- Propulsion
Consumption
- Cons. WLTP
- 4.6 L/100 km
- Tank
- 66 L
Performance
- 0 → 100 km/h
- 7,3 s
- VMax
- 235 km/h
Dimensions and environment
- Length
- 4,936 mm
- Wheelbase
- 2,975 mm
- Width
- 1,868 mm
- Height
- 1,479 mm
- Boot
- 530 L
- Kerb weight
- 1,595 kg
- Cd
- 0.24
- CO₂ WLTP
- 121 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 methodologyManufacturer data · WLTP-estimated consumption · Caralogy-simulated performance
Among the 93 grand tourers, the 520d ranks (top 8 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. 8th of 93 in Combined consumption (4.6 L/100), 8th of 91 in Tank range (1435 km).
Some metrics lag behind the segment. Check the rankings above to identify weak points.
If the priority is Combined consumption, the BMW 520d (1st with 4.3 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the BMW 520d (1st with 1535 km) takes the lead.
Fuel consumption: 4.6 L/100 L/100 (8th of 93 in Combined consumption)
The 520d consumes 4.6 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the BMW 520d (4.3 L/100).
Tank range: 1435 km (8th of 91 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the 520d covers 1435 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1535 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 simulatorLong-distance trip
Simulate any motorway trip: time, charging stops, total cost.
Simulate a tripTimes & acceleration
0-100, 0-200, speed curve, segment position.
See the performanceWhere the 520d stands against grand tourers
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
The full BMW 5 Series G30 range
Generation G30 launched in 2017. Available versions sorted by energy.
Other versions of the G30
Popular duels involving the 520d
Continue with the BMW 520d
The same car, from other angles.
BMW 520d: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
Where does the 520d rank in its segment?
Among the 93 grand tourers 2016–2020, the 520d ranks 8th of 93 in Combined consumption (4.6 L/100, behind the BMW 520d), 8th of 91 in Tank range (1435 km, behind the BMW 520d), 78th of 93 in 0–100 km/h (7.3 s, behind the BMW M5 Competition).
What is the range of the 520d?
1435 km on a full tank (4.6 L/100 on the combined cycle) - 8th of 91 in Tank range.
How much does the 520d cost to run?
Running costs depend on your profile (mileage, charging type, city/highway mix). Use the Caralogy consumption simulator for a personalised estimate.
Why not a BMW 520d instead?
The BMW 520d leads in Combined consumption (4.3 L/100 vs 4.6 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 520d vs BMW 520d duel for a detailed comparison.
How does Caralogy calculate its figures?
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.