Even Europe Has No Use for a Range Rover Evoque Three-Door

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

The most attainable Range Rover, and easily the least desirable, will no longer be offered sans rear doors. While the five-door Evoque soldiers on for the 2019 model year alongside its ridiculous convertible sibling, the automaker says there will no longer be a three-door available anywhere on the planet.

It’s just the latest evidence that automakers aren’t interested in shelling out for seldom bought body styles just to satisfy a handful of nonconformist buyers.

Hold on, you’re thinking, hasn’t Jaguar Land Rover already deep-sixed the three-door Evoque? You’re correct, but that decision only affected the North American market, where the Evoque three-door disappeared for the 2018 model year. In Europe and elsewhere, 2019 brings a lineup devoid of anything that could accurately be referred to as a “coupe.”

Actually, if you happen to be one of 999 ultra-wealthy buyers, there technically is a coupe (the SV Coupe) on offer in 2019, but the model’s extreme exclusivity means you won’t find it on many shopping lists.

News of the three-door Evoque’s demise, arriving via Autocar, comes as the automaker readies a second-generation of the compact SUV for a global launch. That model appears next year as a 2020 model, and it seems certain there’ll be no three-door variant. Autocar cites sources who claim 95 percent of the Evoque’s sales came from the traditional five-door model.

“From the 2019 model year, Land Rover has rationalised its Range Rover Evoque bodystyle offering to concentrate on the five-door model and convertible, which account for the majority of sales,” a company spokesman told the publication.

In a land awash with unibody utility vehicles, Range Rover’s long-in-the-tooth Evoque — which appeared in late 2011 as a 2012 model — saw a U.S. sales peak in 2015. Over the first five months of 2018, Evoque sales slipped 45.6 percent in the United States.

[Image: Jaguar Land Rover]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 8 comments
  • Dal20402 Dal20402 on Jun 08, 2018

    One less variant of yappy Shih Tzu to afflict the roads.

  • Big Al from Oz Big Al from Oz on Jun 08, 2018

    I view the Range Evoque as Range Rovers Cadillac moment. The only people who buy them are the most insecure wannabe nickel millionaires around. The Evoque is not a Range Rover, no where's near one. You can buy a Kia or Hyundai CUV that is more desirable. Even the RAV4 is more desirable.

  • MaintenanceCosts If I were shopping in this segment it would be for one of two reasons, each of which would drive a specific answer.Door 1: I all of a sudden have both a megacommute and a big salary cut and need to absolutely minimize TCO. Answer: base Corolla Hybrid. (Although in this scenario the cheapest thing would probably be to keep our already-paid-for Bolt and somehow live with one car.)Door 2: I need to use my toy car to commute, because we move somewhere where I can't do it on the bike, and don't want to rely on an old BMW every morning or pay the ensuing maintenance costs™. Answer: Civic Si. (Although if this scenario really happened to me it would probably be an up-trimmed Civic Si, aka a base manual Acura Integra.)
  • El scotto Mobile homes are built using a great deal of industrial grade glues. As a former trailer-lord I know they can out gas for years. Mobile homes and leased Kias/Sentras may be responsible for some of the responses in here.
  • El scotto Bah to all the worrywarts. A perfect used car for a young lady living near the ocean. "Atlantic Avenue" and "twisty's" are rarely used in the same sentence. Better than the Jeep she really wants.
  • 3-On-The-Tree I’ll take a naturally aspirated car because turbos are potential maintenance headaches. Expensive to fix and extra wear, heat, pressure on the engine. Currently have a 2010 Corolla and it is easy to work on, just changed the alternator an it didn’t require any special tools an lots of room.
  • El scotto Corolla for its third-world reliability.
Next