Among the 10 E-SUV hybrid 2019–2023, the X6 xDrive30d ranks 4th of 10 in Combined consumption (6.2 L/100, behind the Bmw X5 xDrive30d), 4th of 10 in Tank range (1290 km, behind the Bmw X5 xDrive30d), 9th of 10 in 0–100 km/h (6.1 s, behind the Bmw X5 xDrive40d).
X6 xDrive30d
286 hp, 6,1 s 0-100 : among the 10 E-SUV hybrid 2019–2023, the X6 xDrive30d ranks 4th of 10 in Combined consumption, 4th of 10 in Tank range, 9th of 10 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
286hp
650 Nm · 11 hp elec
0 → 100 km/h
6.1s
VMax 235 km/h
Cons.
6.2L
/100 km
Tank
80L
Full specifications BMW X6 xDrive30d
Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.
Powertrain
| Architecture | 6 cyl. |
| Displacement | 2,993 cm³ |
| Puissance électrique | 11 hp |
| Combined power | 286 hp |
| Couple | 650 Nm |
| Gearbox | Convertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique |
| Transmission | Integrale (AWD) |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 6.2 L/100km |
| Tank | 80 L |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 6,1 s |
| VMax | 235 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 | 2,185 kg |
| Cd | 0.32 |
| CO₂ WLTP | 162 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 10 E-SUV hybrid, the X6 xDrive30d ranks (top 4 in segment) 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. 4th of 10 in Combined consumption (6.2 L/100), 4th of 10 in Tank range (1290 km).
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 X5 xDrive30d (1st with 6.2 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the Bmw X5 xDrive30d (1st with 1290 km) takes the lead.
Fuel consumption: 6.2 L/100 L/100 (4th of 10 in Combined consumption)
The X6 xDrive30d consumes 6.2 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw X5 xDrive30d (6.2 L/100).
Tank range: 1290 km (4th of 10 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the X6 xDrive30d covers 1290 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1290 km.
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 simulator →Long-distance trip
Simulate any motorway trip: time, charging stops, total cost.
Simulate a trip →Chronos & accélération
0-100, 0-200, courbe de vitesse, positionnement segment.
Voir la performance →Where the X6 xDrive30d stands against E-SUV hybrid
Comparison across 10 E-SUV hybrid marketed between 2019–2023.
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 xDrive30d
BMW X6 xDrive30d: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
1290 km on a full tank (6.2 L/100 on the combined cycle) — 4th of 10 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 X5 xDrive30d leads in Combined consumption (6.2 L/100 vs 6.2 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the X6 xDrive30d vs Bmw X5 xDrive30d 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.