- With standard equipment
- With safety pack
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Find more information in the Rating Validity tab of the assessment
-
See More
![]()
93% -
See More
![]()
84% -
See More
![]()
70% -
See More
![]()
58%
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Passenger
Driver
Rear Passenger
Driver
Car
Pole
Rear Seat
Front Seat
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Passenger
outboard
center
![]()
Fitted to the vehicle as standard![]()
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option![]()
Not Available
-
i-Size CRS
-
ISOFIX CRS
-
Universal Belted CRS
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed
Difficult
Safety critical| Seat Position | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Front | 2nd row | |||
| Passenger | Left | center | Right | |
| Maxi Cosi 2way Pearl & 2wayFix (rearward) (iSize) |  |
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi 2way Pearl & 2wayFix (forward) (iSize) | |
|
|
|
| BeSafe iZi Kid X2 i-Size (iSize) | |
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi Cabriofix & FamilyFix (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
| BeSafe iZi Kid X4 ISOfix (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
| Britax Römer Duo Plus (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
| Britax Römer KidFix XP (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi Cabriofix (Belt) | |
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi Cabriofix & EasyBase2 (Belt) | |
|
|
|
| Britax Römer King II LS (Belt) | |
|
|
|
| Britax Römer KidFix XP (Belt) | |
|
|
|
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed
In the frontal offset test, protection of the neck of the 10 year dummy was rated as marginal, based on readings of tensile forces. Otherwise, protection of both child dummies was good or adequate. In the side barrier test, protection of both dummies was good for all critical body areas, and was the same in the repeat test of the X4. The front passenger airbag can be disabled to allow a rearward-facing child restraint to be used in that seating position. Clear information is provided to the driver regarding the status of the airbag and the system was rewarded. All of the child restraint types for which the car is designed could be properly installed and accommodated in the car.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Head Impact 19.5 Pts
Pelvis Impact 0.0 Pts
Leg Impact 6.0 Pts
| System Name | Person warning with City light braking function | ||
| Type | Auto-Brake with Forward Collision Warning | ||
| Operational From | 5 km/h | ||
| Additional Information | Defaults on for every journey; operates in low ambient light | ||
| PERFORMANCE | | |||
| Autobrake Function | |||
| Avoidance | Mitigation | ||
|
Running Adult crossing from Farside
|
Collision avoided up to 35 km/h | Impact mitigated up to 60 km/h | |
|
Walking Adult crossing from Nearside -25%
|
Collision avoided up to 35 km/h | Impact mitigated up to 60 km/h | |
|
Walking Adult crossing from Nearside -75%
|
Collision avoided up to 25 km/h | Impact mitigated up to 45 km/h | |
|
Running Child from behind parked vehicles
|
Collision avoided up to 25 km/h | Impact mitigated up to 45 km/h | |
The X3 and X4 have an 'active', deployable bonnet. Sensors detect when a pedestrian has been struck and actuators lift the bonnet to provide greater clearance to the hard structures in the engine compartment. BMW showed that the system worked robustly for different pedestrian statures and across a wide range of speeds. Accordingly, the car was tested with the bonnet in the raised position. Test results were good or adequate over most of the bonnet surface. The protection provided to pedestrians' legs was good at all test locations. However, the protection provided to the pelvis was poor at all locations. In tests of its pedestrian detection, the autonomous emergency braking system performed adequately, with collisions avoided or mitigated in several test scenarios and speeds.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
| System Name | Manual Speed Limiter |
| Speed Limit Information Function | N/A |
| Warning Function | Manually set |
| Speed Limitation Function | Manually set (accurate to 5km/h) |
| Applies To | All seats | ||
| Warning | Driver Seat | Front Passenger(s) | Rear Passenger(s) |
| Visual | |
|
|
| Audible | |
|
|
|
|||
| System Name | Front-end collision warning with light braking function | |||
| Type | Forward Collision Warning with Auto-Brake | |||
| Operational From | 5 km/h | |||
| Additional Information | Default On | |||
| Performance | | ||||
| Autobrake Function Only | Driver reacts to warning | |||
| Operational Speed | 5-85 km/h | 5-250 km/h | ||
| Approaching a stationary car | See AEB City | Crash avoided up to 65km/h.Crash speed reduced up to 80km/h. | ||
| Approaching a slower moving car | Crash avoided up to 70km/h. | Crash avoided up to 80km/h. | ||
| Following a car at short distance | ||||
| Car in front brakes gently | Avoidance | Avoidance | ||
| Car in front brakes harshly | Mitigation | Mitigation | ||
| Following a car at long distance | ||||
| Car in front brakes gently | Avoidance | Avoidance | ||
| Car in front brakes harshly | Avoidance | Avoidance | ||
The autonomous emergency braking system performed well in tests of its functionality at highway speeds, with collisions avoided or mitigated in all scenarios. A seatbelt reminder system is standard for the front and rear seats, as is a driver-set speed limiter.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model BMW X3 2.0d, LHD
Body Type - 5 door SUV
Year Of Publication 2017
Kerb Weight 1825kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - all X3s and X4s
Class Small SUV
Safety Equipment
Note: Other equipment may be available on the vehicle but was not considered in the test year.
![]()
Fitted to the vehicle as standard![]()
Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety pack![]()
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option or as part of the safety pack![]()
Not available![]()
Not applicable
Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety packVideos
Rating Validity
Variants of Model Range
| Body Type | Engine & Transmission | Model Name/Code | Drivetrain | Rating Applies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LHD | RHD | ||||
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 diesel | X3 xDrive20d* | 4 x 4 |  |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.0 petrol | X3 xDrive30i | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 petrol | X3 sDrive20i | 4 x 2 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 petrol | X3 xDrive20i | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.0 diesel | X3 xDrive30d | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.0 petrol | X3 M40i | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 diesel | X3 sDrive18d | 4 x 2 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.0 diesel | X3 M40d | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | battery electric | iX3 | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 petrol | X4 xDrive20i | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.0 petrol | X4 xDrive30i | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.0 petrol | X4 M40i | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 diesel | X4 xDrive20d | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.5 diesel | X4 xDrive25d | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.0 diesel | X4 xDrive30d | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.0 diesel | X4 M40d | 4 x 4 | |
|
* Tested variant
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
The BMW X4 shares a platform with the BMW X3, tested in 2017, and many tests from that assessment are valid for the X4. However, the side structure is different so additional side impact tests have been done to verify that the performance of the X4 is at least as good as the X3. Those tests showed performance that was at least as good as the X3 so the 2017 star rating of the BMW X3 can be considered valid also for the X4.
Share
The passenger compartment of the X3 remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger. BMW showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different positions. All critical body regions of the passenger dummy were well protected in this test. In the full-width rigid barrier impact, protection of both the driver and rear passenger was good or adequate, except the chest of the rear dummy, protection of which was rated as marginal, based on chest compression. The X3 scored maximum points in the side barrier test, with good protection of all critical body areas. The X4 also provided good protection to all critical body regions in this test. In the more severe side pole test, dummy readings of rib compression indicated marginal protection, while that of other body areas was good. In the pole test of the X4, protection of all critical parts of the body was good. Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injury in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric assessment of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection. The autonomous emergency braking system scored maximum points in tests of its functionality at the low speeds at which many whiplash injuries are caused, with collisions avoided at all test speeds.