BMW 520i Touring
190 hp, 7,8 s 0-100 : among the 4 grand tourers hybrid 2023–2027, the 520i Touring ranks Combined consumption, Tank range, 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
- Power
- 190 hp
- 310 Nm, dont 18 hp elec
- 0 → 100 km/h
- 7.8 s
- VMax 222 km/h
- Cons.
- 6.8 L
- /100 km
- Tank
- 60 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
- 1,998 cm³
- Electric power
- 18 hp
- Combined power
- 190 hp
- Couple
- 310 Nm
- Gearbox
- Convertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique
Consumption
- Cons. WLTP
- 6.8 L/100 km
- Tank
- 60 L
Performance
- 0 → 100 km/h
- 7,8 s
- VMax
- 222 km/h
Dimensions and environment
- Length
- 5,060 mm
- Wheelbase
- 2,995 mm
- Width
- 1,900 mm
- Height
- 1,515 mm
- Boot
- 570 L
- Kerb weight
- 1,775 kg
- Cd
- 0.26
- CO₂ WLTP
- 153 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 4 grand tourers hybrid, the 520i Touring ranks in fuel consumption. Caralogy simulates its real-world cost: motorway simulation, consumption simulation and performance simulation.
Tailored to this vehicle?
Optimised urban and peri-urban trips with no charging to manage.
Home charging access not leveraged. If you have a dedicated outlet, a PHEV would allow daily commutes in pure electric mode.
If the priority is Combined consumption, the BMW 520d Touring (1st with 5.9 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the BMW 520d Touring (1st with 1017 km) takes the lead.
Fuel consumption: 6.8 L/100 L/100 (Combined consumption)
The 520i Touring consumes 6.8 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the BMW 520d Touring (5.9 L/100).
Tank range: 882 km (Tank range)
On a full tank, the 520i Touring covers 882 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1017 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 520i Touring stands against grand tourers hybrid
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
The full BMW 5 Series G60 range
Generation G60 launched in 2024. Available versions sorted by energy.
Other versions of the G60
Popular duels involving the 520i Touring
Continue with the BMW 520i Touring
The same car, from other angles.
BMW 520i Touring: 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 Touring rank in its segment?
Among the 4 grand tourers hybrid 2023–2027, the 520i Touring ranks Combined consumption (6.8 L/100, behind the BMW 520d Touring), Tank range (882 km, behind the BMW 520d Touring), 0–100 km/h (7.8 s, behind the BMW 540d xDrive Touring).
What is the range of the 520i Touring?
882 km on a full tank (6.8 L/100 on the combined cycle) - Tank range.
How much does the 520i Touring 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 Touring instead?
The BMW 520d Touring leads in Combined consumption (5.9 L/100 vs 6.8 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 520i Touring vs BMW 520d Touring 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.