F39 · GENERATION 2021 · COMPACT SUV
BMWICE

X2 xDrive18d

150 hp, 9,2 s 0-100 : among the 30 C-SUV 2019–2023, the X2 xDrive18d ranks 8th of 30 in Combined consumption, 8th of 25 in Tank range, 22th of 30 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.

Energy cost · estimate1,77415,000 km · UK mix · home 0,21 £/kWhConsumption →

Power

150hp

350 Nm

0 → 100 km/h

9.2s

VMax 206 km/h

Cons.

5.4L

/100 km

Tank

51L

Technical identity card

Full specifications BMW X2 xDrive18d

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

Powertrain

Architecture4 cyl.
Displacement1,995 cm³
Power150 hp
Couple350 Nm
GearboxConvertisseur de couple 6 rapports Automatique
TransmissionIntegrale (AWD)

Consumption

Cons. WLTP5.4 L/100km
Tank51 L

Performance

0 → 100 km/h9,2 s
VMax206 km/h

Dimensions and environment

Length4,360 mm
Wheelbase2,670 mm
Width1,824 mm
Height1,526 mm
Boot470 L
Kerb weight1,585 kg
Cd0.3
CO₂ WLTP142 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 xDrive18d ranks (top 8 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. 8th of 30 in Combined consumption (5.4 L/100), 8th of 25 in Tank range (944 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 X1 sDrive18d (1st with 4.8 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the Bmw X1 sDrive18d (1st with 1063 km) takes the lead.

Fuel consumption: 5.4 L/100 L/100 (8th of 30 in Combined consumption)

The X2 xDrive18d consumes 5.4 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw X1 sDrive18d (4.8 L/100).

Tank range: 944 km (8th of 25 in Tank range)

On a full tank, the X2 xDrive18d covers 944 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1063 km.

Segment positioning

Where the X2 xDrive18d stands against C-SUV

Comparison across 30 C-SUV marketed between 2019–2023.

Combined consumption8e / 30
5.4 L/100
Min 8.6 L/100 · Cupra Formentor VZMax 4.8 L/100 · Bmw X1 sDrive18d
Tank range8e / 25
944 km
Min 705 km · SEAT Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSGMax 1 063 km · Bmw X1 sDrive18d
0–100 km/h22e / 30
9,2 s
Min 10,7 s · Citroen C5 Aircross PureTech 130 FWDMax 4,9 s · Cupra Formentor VZ

Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)

Cross-energy alternatives

Same needs, different powertrain.

Model family

The full BMW X2 F39 range

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

Other versions of the F39

Compare

Popular duels involving the X2 xDrive18d

Frequently asked questions

BMW X2 xDrive18d: what you need to know

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

Among the 30 C-SUV 2019–2023, the X2 xDrive18d ranks 8th of 30 in Combined consumption (5.4 L/100, behind the Bmw X1 sDrive18d), 8th of 25 in Tank range (944 km, behind the Bmw X1 sDrive18d), 22th of 30 in 0–100 km/h (9.2 s, behind the Cupra Formentor VZ).

944 km on a full tank (5.4 L/100 on the combined cycle) - 8th of 25 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 X1 sDrive18d leads in Combined consumption (4.8 L/100 vs 5.4 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the X2 xDrive18d vs Bmw X1 sDrive18d 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.