Both take 28 minutes from 10 to 80 percent. From there they diverge sharply: the ID.4 travels 445 km observed against the bZ4X’s 375, and costs £35,495 against £52,510 in the UK. The bZ4X answers with all-wheel drive and 0-100 km/h in 5.1 seconds.
What actually differs
- Volkswagen ID.4 Pro goes 70 km further on the observed real-world figure than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh.
- On the EPA highway cycle – the one that decides a long drive – Volkswagen ID.4 Pro is rated 8 km further than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh.
- Volkswagen ID.4 Pro is 6% more efficient than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh, which is what the electricity bill follows.
- Volkswagen ID.4 Pro carries 8 kWh more usable battery than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh.
- Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh is 2 seconds quicker to 100 km/h than the Volkswagen ID.4 Pro.
Every line above is computed from the table below, not written: a difference is only stated where both cars carry that figure from a named source.
| Specification | Volkswagen ID.4 Pro Volkswagen | Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh Toyota |
|---|---|---|
| Market & identity | ||
| Curb weight | 4,716 lb | 4,619 lb |
| Battery | ||
| Cell chemistry LFP tolerates daily charging to 100% and is the most thermally stable; NMC and NCA pack more energy per kilogram. | NMC | NMC |
| Usable capacity The figure every range and cost calculation on this site is based on. | 77.0 kWh | 69.0 kWh |
| Thermal management Active liquid or direct-refrigerant cooling is the strongest single predictor of slow degradation and repeatable fast charging. | liquid-active | liquid-active |
| Pack voltage 800 V architectures hold high charging power for longer and waste less energy as heat. | 352 V | 385 V |
| Capacity loss per year Rate for this vehicle class from published fleet datasets, not a measurement of this model and not a manufacturer claim. | 2.7% / year est | 2.7% / year est |
| Projected state of health at 8 years Modelled from the observed degradation rate at average annual mileage. An estimate, not a measurement. | 78% est | 78% est |
| Range & efficiency | ||
| EPA range US EPA combined cycle, the most conservative of the three official tests. | 291 mi | 288 mi |
| EPA range, city The city half of the EPA combined rating. Usually the higher of the two for an electric car. | 313 mi | 311 mi |
| EPA range, highway The highway half of the EPA combined rating, and the figure to plan a long drive around. | 264 mi | 259 mi |
| WLTP range European combined cycle, typically 15 to 25 percent more optimistic than EPA for the same car. | 355 mi | 321 mi |
| Observed real-world range Mixed-conditions figure from independent testing. This is the number that matters on a road trip. | 277 mi | 233 mi |
| EPA consumption | 29.8 kWh/100 mi | 28.0 kWh/100 mi |
| Real-world consumption | 278 Wh/mi | 296 Wh/mi |
| Charging | ||
| Peak DC power Held briefly, often only inside a narrow state-of-charge window. | 175 kW | 150 kW |
| 10 to 80 percent DC charge time The honest measure of fast-charging speed. | 28 min | 28 min |
| AC onboard charger Sets how fast the car fills up overnight at home. | 11 kW | 11 kW |
| DC connector (Europe) | CCS2 | CCS2 |
| DC connector (US) The plug fitted to the car as sold in the United States. Blank where we have not sourced it for that market. | CCS1 | NACS |
| Performance | ||
| Peak power | 210 kW | 252 kW |
| 0-60 mph | — | — |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.7 s | 5.1 s |
| Cost of ownership | ||
| Base MSRP (US) | $45,095 | — |
| Base price (EU) | €44,990 | €50,990 |
| Est. out-of-warranty pack replacement (US) | — | — |
| Battery warranty | 8 yr | 8 yr |
| Est. 5-year residual value | — | — |
| Safety & risk | ||
| NHTSA overall rating | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| Euro NCAP overall rating | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| Battery or high-voltage recalls | 7 | 0 |
| Battery safety score | ||
| Composite score Our own composite of thermal management, cell chemistry, crash rating and recall record. Formula | 6.5 / 10 | 9 / 10 |
highlighted marks the better figure for that row. Where a car is not sold in a market, its price and official range for that market are blank rather than converted. est marks a modelled value, explained on the methodology page.
Range: 70 km, mostly battery
445 km observed against 375. The ID.4 carries 77 kWh usable against the bZ4X’s 69, and consumes 173 Wh/km against 184. Both factors point the same way, so the gap is wide and consistent: 572 km WLTP against 516, and 291 miles EPA against 288.
Note how narrow the EPA gap is — three miles — against a 56 km WLTP gap. The bZ4X holds up better on the harsher American cycle than its WLTP figure suggests, which is worth knowing if your driving is mostly motorway.
Charging: identical, and both revised upward
28 minutes for both. The ID.4 peaks at 175 kW and the bZ4X at 150 kW; over the window that matters, they are the same car.
That is a real change for the bZ4X. Its first version charged slowly enough to make the car hard to recommend; the 2025 revision roughly doubled peak DC power. If you are reading older comparisons of this car, they are describing different hardware.
Performance and traction
252 kW and 338 Nm through both axles against 210 kW and 545 Nm to the rear only. 5.1 seconds to 100 km/h against 6.7. The bZ4X is the quicker car and the only one of the two with all-wheel drive, which is not the reputation it carries.
It also offers 1.5 kW of vehicle-to-load. The ID.4 offers none.
Recall record
Seven battery, electrical or powertrain campaigns for the ID.4 on the NHTSA record over four model years; none for the bZ4X. Both hold five NHTSA stars and five from Euro NCAP.
Which one should you buy
Buy the ID.4 for 70 km more range at £17,015 less. On the two things most buyers rank first, it wins decisively.
Buy the bZ4X if you want all-wheel drive, the performance, vehicle-to-load, or an untroubled recall record — and if the UK price gap does not apply in your market.
Frequently asked questions
Is the bZ4X still slow to charge?
No. The 2025 revision raised peak DC power to 150 kW and brought the 10-80 percent time to 28 minutes — the same as the ID.4. Older reviews describe the earlier car, which was materially slower.
Which goes further?
The ID.4, by about 70 km observed — 445 km against 375. It has both the larger battery and the lower consumption. On the EPA cycle the two are within three miles of each other.
Which is quicker?
The bZ4X, by a clear margin: 252 kW through both axles and 5.1 seconds to 100 km/h, against the ID.4’s 210 kW, rear-wheel drive and 6.7 seconds.
Where these numbers come from
Figures are credited individually on the ID.4 Pro and bZ4X AWD pages.