G32 · GENERATION 2018 · GRAND TOURER
BMWICE

620d Gran Turismo

190 hp, 7,9 s 0-100 : among the 93 grand tourers 2016–2020, the 620d Gran Turismo ranks 16th of 93 in Combined consumption, 16th of 91 in Tank range, 91th of 93 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.

Energy cost · estimate1,61015,000 km · UK mix · home 0,21 £/kWhConsumption →

Power

190hp

400 Nm

0 → 100 km/h

7.9s

VMax 220 km/h

Cons.

4.9L

/100 km

Tank

66L

Technical identity card

Full specifications BMW 620d Gran Turismo

Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.

Powertrain

Architecture4 cyl.
Displacement1,995 cm³
Power190 hp
Couple400 Nm
GearboxConvertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique

Consumption

Cons. WLTP4.9 L/100km
Tank66 L

Performance

0 → 100 km/h7,9 s
VMax220 km/h

Dimensions and environment

Length5,091 mm
Wheelbase3,070 mm
Width1,902 mm
Height1,538 mm
Boot610 L
Kerb weight1,765 kg
Cd0.25
CO₂ WLTP129 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 93 grand tourers, the 620d Gran Turismo ranks (top 16 in segment) 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. 16th of 93 in Combined consumption (4.9 L/100), 16th of 91 in Tank range (1347 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: 4.9 L/100 L/100 (16th of 93 in Combined consumption)

The 620d Gran Turismo consumes 4.9 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw 520d (4.3 L/100).

Tank range: 1347 km (16th of 91 in Tank range)

On a full tank, the 620d Gran Turismo covers 1347 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1535 km.

Segment positioning

Where the 620d Gran Turismo stands against grand tourers

Comparison across 93 grand tourers marketed between 2016–2020.

Combined consumption16e / 93
4.9 L/100
Min 10.8 L/100 · Bmw M5Max 4.3 L/100 · Bmw 520d
Tank range16e / 91
1 347 km
Min 630 km · Bmw M5Max 1 535 km · Bmw 520d
0–100 km/h91e / 93
7,9 s
Min 8,2 s · Bmw 520iMax 3,3 s · Bmw M5 Competition

Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)

Cross-energy alternatives

Same needs, different powertrain.

Model family

The full BMW 6 Series G32 range

Generation G32 launched in 2017. Available versions sorted by energy.

Other versions of the G32

Compare

Popular duels involving the 620d Gran Turismo

Frequently asked questions

BMW 620d Gran Turismo: what you need to know

Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.

Among the 93 grand tourers 2016–2020, the 620d Gran Turismo ranks 16th of 93 in Combined consumption (4.9 L/100, behind the Bmw 520d), 16th of 91 in Tank range (1347 km, behind the Bmw 520d), 91th of 93 in 0–100 km/h (7.9 s, behind the Bmw M5 Competition).

1347 km on a full tank (4.9 L/100 on the combined cycle) - 16th of 91 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 520d leads in Combined consumption (4.3 L/100 vs 4.9 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 620d Gran Turismo vs Bmw 520d 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.