BMW X2 sDrive18i

Petrolcompact SUVGENERATION F39, 2018

140 hp, 9,6 s 0-100 : among the 30 C-SUV 2016–2020, the X2 sDrive18i ranks 13th of 30 in Combined consumption, 20th of 26 in Tank range, 24th of 30 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.

Power
140 hp
220 Nm
0 → 100 km/h
9.6 s
VMax 205 km/h
Cons.
5.8 L
/100 km
Tank
51 L

Full specifications

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

Powertrain

Architecture
3 cyl.
Displacement
1,499 cm³
Power
140 hp
Couple
220 Nm
Gearbox
Double embrayage 6 rapports Automatique

Consumption

Cons. WLTP
5.8 L/100 km
Tank
51 L

Performance

0 → 100 km/h
9,6 s
VMax
205 km/h

Dimensions and environment

Length
4,360 mm
Wheelbase
2,670 mm
Width
1,824 mm
Height
1,526 mm
Boot
470 L
Kerb weight
1,474 kg
Cd
0.28
CO₂ WLTP
132 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 30 C-SUV, the X2 sDrive18i ranks (mid-table) in fuel consumption. Caralogy simulates its real-world cost: motorway simulation, consumption simulation and performance simulation.

Tailored to this vehicle?

Caralogy Verdict
Suitable for

Good compromise for regular use without available charging infrastructure.

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 X1 xDrive18d (1st with 4.3 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the BMW X1 xDrive18d (1st with 1419 km) takes the lead.

Fuel consumption: 5.8 L/100 L/100 (13th of 30 in Combined consumption)

The X2 sDrive18i consumes 5.8 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the BMW X1 xDrive18d (4.3 L/100).

Tank range: 879 km (20th of 26 in Tank range)

On a full tank, the X2 sDrive18i covers 879 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1419 km.

Where the X2 sDrive18i stands against C-SUV

Comparison across 30 C-SUV marketed between 2016–2020.
Combined consumption13e / 30
5.8 L/100
Min 8.6 L/100 · Cupra Formentor VZMax 4.3 L/100 · BMW X1 xDrive18d
Tank range20e / 26
879 km
Min 765 km · Kia Sportage 1.6 T-GDi 177 4WDMax 1 419 km · BMW X1 xDrive18d
0–100 km/h24e / 30
9,6 s
Min 11,8 s · Nissan Qashqai 1.2 DIG-T 115 XtronicMax 4,9 s · Cupra Formentor VZ

Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)

Cross-energy alternatives

Same needs, different powertrain.

The full BMW X2 F39 range

Generation F39 launched in 2018. Available versions sorted by energy.

Other versions of the F39

Popular duels involving the X2 sDrive18i

Continue with the BMW X2 sDrive18i

The same car, from other angles.

BMW X2 sDrive18i: 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 X2 sDrive18i rank in its segment?

Among the 30 C-SUV 2016–2020, the X2 sDrive18i ranks 13th of 30 in Combined consumption (5.8 L/100, behind the BMW X1 xDrive18d), 20th of 26 in Tank range (879 km, behind the BMW X1 xDrive18d), 24th of 30 in 0–100 km/h (9.6 s, behind the Cupra Formentor VZ).

What is the range of the X2 sDrive18i?

879 km on a full tank (5.8 L/100 on the combined cycle) - 20th of 26 in autonomie du segment.

How much does the X2 sDrive18i 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 X1 xDrive18d instead?

The BMW X1 xDrive18d leads in Combined consumption (4.3 L/100 vs 5.8 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the X2 sDrive18i vs BMW X1 xDrive18d 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.