G30 · GENERATION 2020 · GRAND TOURER
BMWICE

520i

184 hp, 7,9 s 0-100 : among the 96 grand tourers 2018–2022, the 520i ranks 35th of 96 in Combined consumption, 31th of 94 in Tank range, 93th of 96 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.

Energy cost · estimate1,41915,000 km · UK mix · home UK £/kWhCustomise →

Power

184hp

290 Nm

0 → 100 km/h

7.9s

VMax 235 km/h

Cons.

5.5L

/100 km

Tank

68L

Sur cette page

Technical identity card

Full specifications BMW 520i

Manufacturer data and values calibrated by the Caralogy simulation engine.

Powertrain

ArchitectureUnknown · 4 cyl.
Displacement1,998 cm\u00b3
Power184 hp
Couple290 Nm
GearboxTorque Converter 8 rapports Automatic
TransmissionRWD

Consumption

Cons. WLTP5,5 L/100km
Tank68 L

Performance

0 → 100 km/h7,9 s
VMax235 km/h

Dimensions and environment

Length4,963 mm
Wheelbase2,975 mm
Width1,868 mm
Height1,479 mm
Boot530 L
Kerb weight1,610 kg
Cd0.23
CO₂ WLTP125 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 96 grand tourers, the 520i 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

Caralogy Verdict

Suitable for

Good compromise for regular use without available charging infrastructure. 31th of 94 in Tank range (1236 km).

Less suitable for

Some metrics lag behind the segment. Check the rankings above to identify weak points.

Alternatives to consider

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: 5.5 L/100 L/100 (35th of 96 in Combined consumption)

The 520i consumes 5.5 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 520d (4.3 L/100).

Tank range: 1236 km (31th of 94 in Tank range)

On a full tank, the 520i covers 1236 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1535 km.

Segment positioning

Where the 520i stands against grand tourers

Comparison across 96 grand tourers marketed between 2018–2022.

Combined consumption

35eout of 96

5.5 L/100
Min11.3 L/100 · Bmw M5 CS
Max4.3 L/100 · Bmw 520d

Tank range

31eout of 94

1 236 km
Min602 km · Bmw M5 CS
Max1 535 km · Bmw 520d

0–100 km/h

93eout of 96

7,9 s
Min8,2 s · Bmw 520i
Max3,0 s · Bmw M5 CS

Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)

Cross-energy alternatives

Same needs, different powertrain.

Model family

The full BMW 5 Series G30 range

Generation G30 launched in 2017. Available versions sorted by energy.

Other versions of the G30

Compare

Popular duels involving the 520i

Take the next step

Find a 520i or value yours

Caralogy receives no commission on these external links.

Frequently asked questions

BMW 520i: 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 520i rank in its segment?#

Among the 96 grand tourers 2018–2022, the 520i ranks 35th of 96 in Combined consumption (5.5 L/100, behind the Bmw 520d), 31th of 94 in Tank range (1236 km, behind the Bmw 520d), 93th of 96 in 0–100 km/h (7.9 s, behind the Bmw M5 CS).

What is the range of the 520i?#

1236 km on a full tank (5.5 L/100 on the combined cycle) — 31th of 94 in autonomie du segment.

How much does the 520i 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 5.5 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 520i 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.