BMW X6 M50i
530 hp, 4,3 s 0-100 : among the 19 E-SUV 2019–2023, the X6 M50i ranks 8th of 19 in 0–100 km/h, 13th of 19 in Top speed, 5th of 19 in Power-to-weight, behind the only Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
- Power
- 530 hp
- 750 Nm
- 0 → 100 km/h
- 4.3 s
- VMax 250 km/h
- Cons.
- 10.8 L
- /100 km
- Tank
- 83 L
Full specifications
Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.
Powertrain
- Architecture
- 8 cyl.
- Displacement
- 4,395 cm³
- Power
- 530 hp
- Couple
- 750 Nm
- Gearbox
- Convertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique
- Transmission
- Integrale (AWD)
Consumption
- Cons. WLTP
- 10.8 L/100 km
- Tank
- 83 L
Performance
- 0 → 100 km/h
- 4,3 s
- VMax
- 250 km/h
Dimensions and environment
- Length
- 4,935 mm
- Wheelbase
- 2,975 mm
- Width
- 2,004 mm
- Height
- 1,696 mm
- Boot
- 580 L
- Kerb weight
- 2,240 kg
- Cd
- 0.34
- CO₂ WLTP
- 249 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 19 E-SUV, the X6 M50i ranks (mid-table) in acceleration. Caralogy simulates its real-world performance: motorway simulation, performance simulation and consumption simulation.
Tailored to this vehicle?
Demanding drivers: 5th of 19 in Power-to-weight (237 hp/t). 5th of 19 in Power-to-weight (237 hp/t).
Frequent urban trips with stop-and-go. At 10,8 L/100 km on the combined cycle, consumption rises in the city without electric assistance. An HEV or PHEV would be more economical for this use profile.
If the priority is 0–100 km/h, the Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT (1st with 3.2 s) takes the lead. If the priority is Top speed, the Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT (1st with 299 km/h) takes the lead.
Acceleration: 4.3 s 0-100 (8th of 19 in 0–100 km/h)
In pure acceleration, the X6 M50i ranks 8th of 19 in 0–100 km/h, 1.1 s off the reference Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT (3.2 s).
Top speed: 250 km/h (13th of 19 in Top speed)
Top speed of 250 km/h. The segment reference reaches 299 km/h.
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 X6 M50i stands against E-SUV
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
The full BMW X6 G06 range
Generation G06 launched in 2020. Available versions sorted by energy.
Other versions of the G06
Popular duels involving the X6 M50i
Continue with the BMW X6 M50i
The same car, from other angles.
BMW X6 M50i: 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 X6 M50i rank in its segment?
Among the 19 E-SUV 2019–2023, the X6 M50i ranks 8th of 19 in 0–100 km/h (4.3 s, behind the Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT), 13th of 19 in Top speed (250 km/h, behind the Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT), 5th of 19 in Power-to-weight (237 hp/t, behind the Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT).
How much does the X6 M50i 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 Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT instead?
The Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT leads in 0–100 km/h (3.2 s vs 4.3 s). The choice depends on your priorities: check the X6 M50i vs Porsche Cayenne Turbo GT 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.