I · GENERATION 2022 · COMPACT SUV
SEATICE

Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG

190 hp, 6,8 s 0-100 : among the 26 C-SUV 2020–2024, the Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG ranks 25th of 26 in Combined consumption, 21th of 21 in Tank range, 4th of 26 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.

Energy cost · estimate2,36315,000 km · UK mix · home 0,21 £/kWhConsumption →

Power

190hp

320 Nm

0 → 100 km/h

6.8s

VMax 220 km/h

Cons.

7.8L

/100 km

Tank

55L

Technical identity card

Full specifications SEAT Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG

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

Powertrain

Architecture4 cyl.
Displacement1,984 cm³
Power190 hp
Couple320 Nm
GearboxDouble embrayage 7 rapports Automatique

Consumption

Cons. WLTP7.8 L/100km
Tank55 L

Performance

0 → 100 km/h6,8 s
VMax220 km/h

Dimensions and environment

Kerb weight1,480 kg
Cd0.34
CO₂ WLTP178 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 26 C-SUV, the Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG ranks (in the bottom third) 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

C-SUV among the best in segment: 4th of 26 in 0–100 km/h (6.8 s).

Less suitable for

Frequent urban trips with stop-and-go. At 7,8 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.

Alternatives to consider

If the priority is Combined consumption, the Bmw X2 sDrive18d (1st with 4.8 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is Tank range, the Bmw X2 sDrive18d (1st with 1063 km) takes the lead.

Fuel consumption: 7.8 L/100 L/100 (25th of 26 in Combined consumption)

The Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG consumes 7.8 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Bmw X2 sDrive18d (4.8 L/100).

Tank range: 705 km (21th of 21 in Tank range)

On a full tank, the Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG covers 705 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1063 km.

Segment positioning

Where the Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG stands against C-SUV

Comparison across 26 C-SUV marketed between 2020–2024.

Combined consumption25e / 26
7.8 L/100
Min 8.6 L/100 · Cupra Formentor VZMax 4.8 L/100 · Bmw X2 sDrive18d
Tank range21e / 21
705 km
Min 705 km · SEAT Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSGMax 1 063 km · Bmw X2 sDrive18d
0–100 km/h4e / 26
6,8 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 SEAT Ateca I range

Generation I launched in 2016. Available versions sorted by energy.

Other versions of the I

Compare

Popular duels involving the Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG

Frequently asked questions

SEAT Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG: what you need to know

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

Among the 26 C-SUV 2020–2024, the Ateca 2.0 TSI 190 FR 4Drive 7DSG ranks 25th of 26 in Combined consumption (7.8 L/100, behind the Bmw X2 sDrive18d), 21th of 21 in Tank range (705 km, behind the Bmw X2 sDrive18d), 4th of 26 in 0–100 km/h (6.8 s, behind the Cupra Formentor VZ).

705 km on a full tank (7.8 L/100 on the combined cycle) - 21th of 21 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.

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.