By on June 16, 2014

2014 Land Rover range rover evoque front 34

This has never happened to me before. Four different women complimented me on this vehicle. I’m guessing they were somewhere between 25 and 45 years old – it’s really difficult to tell these days. They were all fit, attractive (-ish), wore fancy sunglasses, and carried equally fancy bags which complemented their outfits. They all loved this baby Range Rover. To them, it represented an essential accessory that would complete them. That, my friends, is a marketing success.

2014 Land Rover range rover evoque rear

The Evoque does not sit well with a Land Rover enthusiast such as myself. My earliest television memories are of Camel Trophy races. In college, I spent six weeks driving around southern Africa in a Defender 110. In 2002, I attempted to enter the G4 Challenge. If I could, I would put NATO steel wheels and mud-terrain tires on every big Range Rover in existence. And yet, here I am driving this car that has R A N G E R O V E R written across this hood failing to justify its existence. Clearly, the hotties know something I don’t.

The problem with enthusiasts is that we forget that car companies’ first goal is to be profitable. Rest assured that Jaguar-Land Rover won’t quickly forget their corporate experiences of the past two decades. The good thing is that at the rate they are going they won’t have to worry about it. There are waiting lists for new Range Rovers and the Jaguar F-type is just drop dead gorgeous. With attractive lease rates, the Evoques have been appearing at newly constructed loft style condominiums everywhere.

2014 Land Rover range rover evoque dash interior

No matter what your opinion on Evoque’s styling, it has clearly become part of the Land Rover design language, as seen in the new Range Rover and Range Rover Sport. While the bigger vehicles have more masculine styling, this baby Rover looks striking and athletic, and therefore more appealing to the above mentioned ladies, who are clearly its target customers. Unlike Rovers of the past, this is form-over-function design. The slick sporty exterior lines have opposing effect on interior space, overall utility, and rear visibility, all of which have been Range Rover trademarks for due to their two-box design and large windows.

Front seats are comfortable but legroom and headroom are lacking for back seat passengers. Overall interior materials are nice, but not to the level of the big Range Rovers. The huge panoramic roof gives the cabin a very airy feel, but oddly enough it does not open. The infotainment system is the typical slow and outdated model seen on all JLR vehicles; it Bluetooths, in streams, it navs, it syncs, and it even offers some interesting options which I’d gladly trade for increased ease of use.

2014 Land Rover range rover evoque trunk

Some will find the round pop-up shifter irritating, but now that almost all automakers have switched to electronic shifters, I found it more acceptable. Below it is the AWD Terrain Response system and hill ascent control, which I have not had an opportunity to evaluate – and chances are that neither will most buyers. The rest of center console consists of are two cup-holders, two 12v receptacles, a cubby for your cell phone, and a storage bin capable of storing the fanciest of purses.

The direct-injected 2.0 liter turbo four-cylinder produces 240hp and 250lb-ft. The vehicle feels peppy above 2500rpm, but with the transmission is in D, it likes to up-shift early. This sometimes puts a delay in acceleration, as the transmission will hunt the proper gear out of the nine it has available. Turning the shifter knob to S makes things smoother, but it’s still best to avoid lower engine speeds. There are also paddle shifters but I can’t imagine anyone actually using them.

2014 Land Rover range rover evoque interior details

The 2014 Evoque is rated at 21mpg in the city and 30mpg on the highway, a slight increase from the past model years due to the new nine-speed transmission. Also new is the engine start/stop system, which is one of the most annoying things on any new car, but easily disabled with a press of dash mounted button. My real world numbers achieved on short, traffic infested city runs and enthusiastic highway runs in sport mode resulted in an average of about 22-24mpg.

The starting price for the Range Rover Evoque 5-door is $42,025. The pictured vehicle has the Pure Plus Package, Xenon/LED headlights, cameras everywhere, dub wheels, fancy leather, adaptive cruise control, contrasting black roof and a number of other gizmos. The price for this almost fully loaded Evoque is $59,140, which includes a destination charge.

2014 Land Rover range rover evoque side

The main goal of the Evoque was to attract new customers to the Land Rover dealership; those with smaller budgets, those who do not need a large SUV, and those who never considered a Land Rover before. It has achieved that goal with the lure of brand image, styling, and Posh Spice’s approval. Based on those facets alone, Land Rover will sell each one as fast as they can make them.

 

Kamil Kaluski is the east coast editor for Hooniverse.com. Read his ramblings on eastern European cars, $500 racers, and other miscellaneous car stuff there. 

Land Rover provided the vehicle for this review.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

63 Comments on “Capsule Review: 2014 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque...”


  • avatar
    Kenmore

    Please drop a dumpster on this and finish squashing it.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      I’ve found something more suitable, to calm your nerves.

      http://static.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/images/car-adverts/large/2012/03/15/9595094ae10b0aee7ab0e7427be9ad08-1.jpg

    • 0 avatar
      Waterview

      +1. Nailed it!

      On a separate note, I was reading the customer service comments for a nearby Land Rover dealer here in the Chicago area. Plenty of one-star ratings (out of five) and very negative comments. So other than the poor product reliability and bad service, they must be great vehicles.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        That’s just it – they ARE great vehicles. So great you put up with the BS, because the darned things are just terrific when they work.

        I think the Evoque would look great with about 8″ more height in the windows, but as-is it just looks ridiculous.

        I will also add, that even my 13yo slightly scruffy P38 Range Rover gets more female attention than any vehicle I have ever owned, ever. I have had random women just come up to me at the gas station and complement the thing. The thing is a straight up p-magnet. Shame I am not interested…

  • avatar
    vtnoah

    A buddy of mine who’s family runs probably the largest classic LR Parts company in the US, roversnorth.com, has one of these and loves it. I think it looks cool but I wouldn’t spend $40,000 to $60,000 on one. Maybe as a carmax special though?

  • avatar
    ajla

    In 25 years these will be remembered with the reverence of the Ford Elite or mullet hairstyle.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    The sales mix must be 95% 4-door and 5% 2-door, because I’ve only seen one of them. It’s cool, but a bit stumpy looking. Overall this thing is just too expensive for what it is underneath – an ancient Freelander.

    Also the interior looks cheapo up close. Don’t like the two-tone seat patterns, it’s not British. Too much gloss black plastic trim.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      You may be confusing the old Rover V6 Freelander with the current rest-of-the-world Freelander.

      The Evoque is not based on the Rover-designed 97-06 Freelander (of blown head gasket fame). The Evoke shares a platform with the current Volvo S60/S80 and Land Rover LR2.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        I believe you’re correct on that. Still, it’s a pretty old platform (D2), and thus is related to the Ford 500/Taurus as well. Ha.

        • 0 avatar
          dwford

          The D2 platform was under the old S80 and XC90 and the ford 500/Taurus is based on that. The current S60 is a variant of the Ford Mondeo. This Evoque is a mix of Ford chassis parts, with the 2.0t ecoboost motor from the Escape

          • 0 avatar
            stephenjmcn

            The closest Ford chassis to this (and 06- Freelander) is actually the 05- Ford Focus which the US didn’t get.

          • 0 avatar
            Kyree S. Williams

            The Volvo XC60 is a close relative to the Evoque, and honestly, I’d rather have an XC60 (especially in T6 R-Design trim…yum).

  • avatar
    mnm4ever

    I love classic Land Rovers, even the Discos and the LR3/4 is IMO a “real” Rover. But I like these too, I would lease one. Never would buy it though, I can’t imagine it will be very reliable over the long haul, but if the lease was cheap enough it would be worthwhile.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      Why wouldn’t it be reasonably reliable? It’s a Ford in a party frock! About the only thing British about it is the name. I just don’t get the price, considering you can buy an equally well-equipped Escape for what, 1/2 the price? Then again, I look at what my Range Rover cost some fool 13 years ago and just chuckle. I could see it costing $50K back then, but the thing was nearly *$80K*!

  • avatar

    Seen it – looks good – not impressed.

    I wasn’t impressed with the pop-up shifter in our XJ-L and I’m surely not impressed with this one. One more gimmick device to worry about.

    Not a fan of the infotainment system either.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      I don’t like how shifting the car becomes reliant upon a little whirring motor to lift the dial. Undoubtedly it’s got little plastic gears in there.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      Yep, One day the pop-up shifters will disappear in their consoles, never to rise again. It’s interesting that they went with a BMW-Steptronic-like shifter in the F-Type.

      • 0 avatar
        VenomV12

        I like the XJ, but Jaguar is the last company I would trust with that type of contraption. I can’t wait for them to start getting older and that happening. What the hell are you going to do if that knob does not rise up, you are screwed. Quite frankly with the insurmountable amount of tech going in new cars in the last few years, I am scared to think what is going to happen down the road when serious malfunctions start happening. I personally think people should start investing in basic, older reliable used cars that are easy to fix, I think the value on those will skyrocket over the years when a fried computer or two renders these new cars useless and so expensive they cannot be fixed. The new S-Class, Jesus Christ imagine what that will cost to fix 6 plus years down the road from now.

        • 0 avatar

          Our XJ-L has been reliable – just hitting 40,000 miles.

          No problems out of the shifter, but I have seen XF’s with shifters that failed.

          The W222 S-class really doesn’t have any more motorized parts than the 221. It’s more electronic bus connectors for features such as the heated massagers, perfume atomizer, etc.

          Thing is, when a motor decides to fail, many times you might not notice it. Most of the features on an S-class you don’t use regularly.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    I think these cars are indeed stylish and nicely sized.

    As already mentioned, the price is absurd. And for me at least, Range Rover has possibly one of the worst images in the automotive universe for someone with my mindset… They’re outrageously priced, low quality fashion accessories that break constantly, cost a fortune to repair, with wicked depreciation to top it off… Basically checks zero boxes on my somewhat (too?) sensible list of quality, value, and somewhat reasonable financial sense. Cars for those who want to show the world how much money they can afford to waste. Yes, most cars overall are a stupid financial decision… But it doesn’t mean a buyer should have to flush this much money down the toilet to get something luxurious. Quality of some sort for the money… I can’t find any quality or value in these things.

    And again, for me, the brand screams all flash no substance, including the women it sounds like it attracts. I could use a few finer ladies in my life, but I suspect they would last even less time than the car itself, and they’d probably cost you as much money and heartbreak… I don’t even have money for the car.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      Rover reliability isn’t as bad as it used to be.

      The last of the bad Rovers were the 97-06 Freelander and the final-years Rover V8 Discoveries (up to 2004). Everything designed after the Ford purchase has been reliable enough for a 4 year lease.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        Actually, the BMW-powered L322 Range Rovers (’03-’05, I think) were kind of shitty, too. Once they started using Jaguar parts, things got better. The mechanicals seem solid on the newer Jaguar/Land Rover vehicles; it’s the electronics that tend to pose problems.

  • avatar
    raresleeper

    Blasted 9 speed gearbox! With rotary shifter, eh?

    And if shopping for pricey cute utes, one must Go Like Kardashian (baby Benz) over this, all day, every day.

    That’s one hellaciously expensive CUV.

    If shopping specifically for Landies, I’d rather spring for a very lightly used (fat a$s/obese) LR4, or perhaps even an LR3, over the Evoque.

    But the ladies love it, and it is aesthetically pleasing; therefore, score or the good folks at Tata, perhaps?

    By the way, hill descent on this is useless, like tits on a boar.

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    The designers:

    “What should we do about rear visibility”

    “We could put in a window, so people could see”

    “Nahh, it’s late. I want to go home”

    • 0 avatar
      brenschluss

      The first time I saw one of these in the flesh, the very first thing that stuck out was how truly, hilariously small the rear window is. It doesn’t come across in pictures just how useless it really is.

      Anyone who buys one of these should have to perform a mile-long reverse obstacle course (without cameras) while thinking about what they’ve done. I suspect this will mostly be bought by the type of person who doesn’t use their rear view mirror anyway, though.

      • 0 avatar
        TheyBeRollin

        People don’t really use the windows on cars with rear view cameras. The wedge shape of modern cars makes it futile, anyway.

        This car is very good looking, I must admit. Every time I see one (which is fairly often), I am struck by just how good it looks. Probably very temporal and will look hideous in a decade or two, but I wouldn’t expect a car with a shift dial like that to last beyond a decade or so without constant junkyard trips anyway. There are some cars that are just made to be leased.

  • avatar
    TybeeJim

    When the first came out, I went to the LR dealer in posh Hilton Head. They didn’t have one I could look at much less drive and said one would arrive in 2 weeks but was sold. I would be permitted to look at it. So I drove around the comer and bought a Audi Q5 loaded, for $10k less than your sample. Now, I never look back. Contrary to LR’s reputation, my Q5 has had only 2 oil changes in 2 years and 26k miles. At an average 70 mph, I get 28 mpg. Since I’m a car nut, I’m always checking cars on the road (1500 miles RT on I81 as I type) and I never see Evoques but do see lots of Q5s. Oh yeah, my wife liked the look of the Evoque but loves the Audi.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Part of this is because the Q5 has had years longer on the market, and overall greater dealer supply. LR seems to be constraining their production in the US.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      The A4 and Q5 have a tremendous amount of online documentation as far as maintenance and problems go, and they aren’t that complicated. Both seem solid enough for long-term ownership. Somehow VW Group products don’t scare me as much as BMW, Mercedes-Benz or especially Jaguar and Land Rover. A Q5 or an Allroad may be in the near future for me.

      • 0 avatar
        raresleeper

        Mercedes and BMW scare you, but an Audi Allroad does NOT?

        Ha!!!

        I needed that laugh. Whew…

        Let me catch a breather, so much laughter really drains ya.

        (Tee hee.)

        Methinks your making an exception due to your current condition, Daily Driver Jetta-itis.

        Take off the rosey specs, Kyree. Take them off.

        • 0 avatar
          Kyree S. Williams

          This is funny because that effing Jetta recently left me stranded on the road when the A/C compressor exploded and threw shrapnel into the radiator, puncturing it. Since the repairs from that fiasco, a rather serious power steering leak has also reared itself and two power windows have failed. I literally am anticipating another pricey repair. Unfortunately it’s an automatic, and—even with just 93K miles—I feel like the transmission is about to give up the ghost next.

          So yes, my lack of fear with VW/Audi products largely comes from having already endured a cascade of expensive and crippling failures across more than one product from those brands (what’s the worst they can throw at me?). It’s funny—and, as you point out, it’s downright ridiculous—but it’s the truth. I like my rosey specs. I don’t want to take them off; they make everything look so pretty :P

    • 0 avatar
      hgrunt

      Los Angeles was crawling with Evoques as soon as they came out, of both the two and four door varieties. Not surprising, but also good news for LR in general.

  • avatar
    carguy

    It certainly makes the BMW X3 look like a total bargain which is no small accomplishment. Just about every European, domestic and Japanese competitor offers more for less.

  • avatar
    raresleeper

    James May drove a diesel-powered variant through Death Valley an couldn’t stop gushing about it (ridiculous MSRP be damned?).

    It should be known that (see below)…

    English:Land Rovers::Texans:Ford F-Series

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    All the women who love this thing I guess the Evoque accomplishes what Toyota thought they would with the VENZA. The “Sex and the City” demographic.

  • avatar
    Fred

    Looks pretty, but I kept banging my head getting in it.

  • avatar
    slance66

    My wife loves this. But realistically, when we shopped in this category last year (RDX, Q5, GLK, X3, Evoque, LR2, Escape Titanium) the car that we liked best was the LR2. It does everything the Evoque does, has the same drive-train, much more space, much better visibility (in fact, much better than every vehicle we tested) and costs less. I would say it is pretty underrated at this point.

    The car we liked least was the GLK.

  • avatar
    JohnnieE

    Gentleman!

    Almost everybody writing on this article is a car enthusiast, a purest when it comes to what the key essentials of a car should be.

    I am sure that JLR value your opinions, but knowing that almost all of you view a proper Land Rover as being a vehicle that can cross Africa rather than cross town and pick up the shopping, means that in almost every way this car is not targeted at you.

    The waiting lists are huge and the discounts available are derisory. Whether you like it or not this is the same kind of marketing success that BMW had with their Mini – a car that whilst being lovely and fun to drive, is so much more in demand and so much more expensive than any of it’s apparent competitors, as well as also being almost twice the size of it’s original namesake too :)

    When engineers and marketeers get together, and when they get it right which is often not the case, then I think you just have to take your hat off to them! JLR have found a whole new audience of people around the world who are willing to hand over lots of hard earned cash to buy an Evoque, which despite being a very capable off roader that could probably in four wheel drive guise still cross huge chunks of Africa will almost exclusively be sold as a front wheel drive variant and never set rubber on anything but slick smooth tarmac. They’ve made themselves a new market that didn’t exist before, and vehicles such as the new Jeep Cherokee and Porsche Macan are now busily trying to buy in to it.

    JLR have yet to really put a foot wrong with their new model lines. The real showdown and fight for new customers that I think will be worth looking forward to, is after the disastrous Ford inspired X Type Saloon, when Jaguar enter again the compact executive market and take on the likes of the BMW3, Audi A4 and Mercedes C Class with their new XE model at the end of the year.

    I know in the US you guys rave about the Lexus, but it is a none starter in Europe and most everywhere else in the world, and if a Non-German player enters what is in essence the volume end of the luxury market where the real profits can be made, and if they can succeed, then they’ll really put the cat in amongst the pigeons and it will be great to see the feathers fly.

    J

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      “hard earned cash to buy an Evoque”

      First two words not compute.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      As well, the only cars to come out since new JLR ownership by Tata are the F-Type, and XJ. Since the XJ came about in 09, I’m sure it was largely finished by the time Tata took ownership. The XF was from 08, and the XK already existed since 06. Don’t give them too much credit.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        I give them no credit, it takes many years to spin up a completely new model. The F-type “takes cues” from Jaguar’s 2010 C-X75 plug-in hybrid. Wiki doesn’t list a platform but if you look at the concept they appear to be nearly the same car. Tata officially took over in June 08. Cars debuting in 2010 are designed many year before. Give credit when something brand new developed in say 2012 hits the street.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar_F-Type

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      “I know in the US you guys rave about the Lexus, but it is a none starter in Europe and most everywhere else in the world…”

      Er…not really. I’m not a purist, but most purists here in the States find Lexus’ bread-and-butter models (the ES and RX) to be far more insipid than the Evoque. The new GS is a great sport sedan that’s exactly what the 5-Series should have been, but it goes mostly unappreciated. And the IS’s new styling is too out-there for a lot of people. Honestly, stateside enthusiasts are a bunch of Europhiles…who long for the forbidden fruit of overseas markets (like the VW Scirocco R), or for the simpler, more-mechanical cars of yesteryear (like the E39 M5).

      As far as your Land Rover comment goes, I agree. The styling, the features, the Victoria Beckham endorsements…all of these things have allowed the Evoque to become quite a hot item in the luxury car marketplace, and I applaud Land Rover for that. Just don’t expect *me* to queue up for one…

    • 0 avatar
      raresleeper

      @Johnnie E: Don’t understand your post, Sir.

      Are you saying we should applaud Tata for making $$ off the Evoque?

      Not getting your logic.

      As stated the Evoque is a dreadful value. In typical Range Rover fashion, you’re spending money hand over fist for something “pretty”, with (allegedly) some added off-road capabilities, which in my humble opinion, have yet to really be proven in this case.

      FWIW, I find the LR4 to be particularly striking, especially in earth tones (browns, greens, et cetera); however, I have no real usage for any of Tata’s offerings…

      .. with the exception of a Nano. They would make a great target for honing in with a 50 caliber BMG.

      Most logical consumers wouldn’t dare make an automotive purchase in the same manner in which they would- say- the purchase of a statue.

      Now I’m waiting for droves of twenty-something’s with more plastic than a GMT800 Chevy Avalanche to protest simultaneously: “Nuh-Uh!!”

      This car is a fad. Hot (and “in”) today, gone yesterday.

      • 0 avatar
        hgrunt

        Dreadful value = High profit margins, which is the best any car company can hope for and how luxury car companies survive. They make a vehicle that people with more money than sense want to buy. They aren’t meant for us enthusiasts who pine for AC/PS/Carpet delete packages, and diesel engines with curb weights of no more than 2700 pounds and MSRPs of no more than $16,000.

        I’m impressed with Tata, personally. It feels like they’ve given JLR management wide berth to do what they need to do, and the capital and resources to do so. Under Ford and BMW, it felt like JLR was forced to follow a corporate culture and management processes that were incongruent to what they had been doing before and created a number of very confused products.

        As a die hard enthusiast, I like the RR Sport for no rational reason, other than it’s ridiculousness. Even if I’ll never buy a new RR, or one at all, I think their turaround has been amazing.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        You pose an excellent point. Other Land Rover/Range Rover products (including the cheap-looking first-gen RR Sport) have classic lines and features that will allow them to age gracefully. But how will the Evoque look in ten, fifteen years (assuming any Evoque units are even roadworthy at that point)? I’m one of those people who’d buy a new car (probably a nicer one than an Evoque) and keep it for years, so I’m not interested in something that I think is going to get tiresome to look at over the years.

    • 0 avatar
      Defender90

      As Mr Kaluski says in the article: “The problem with enthusiasts is that we forget that car companies’ first goal is to be profitable. Rest assured that Jaguar-Land Rover won’t quickly forget their corporate experiences of the past two decades.”

      Yes JohnnieE you are right to agree with him, us enthusiasts are a bit unrealistic. And, personally, as a Brit I’m pleased at domestic manufactoring success stories. (Albeit grudgingly in this case).

      However, this is in the short term. Once they stop making the Defender, and they will, Land-Rover won’t actually make land rovers any more. Their range will have no vehicle that would be at home doing an honest job of work in the countryside.
      Now that probably isn’t an immediate problem to the suburban demographic that they’re aiming at, but after a while they’ll realise the brand lacks authenticity in the circles they aspire to, that L-Rs are likely to make people smirk: the equivilant of an over made up woman wearing stilleto heels at a country weekend.

      In fact take away the Defender and that’s already the case. Can you imagine anybody sensible taking modern Evoques, Discoverys or Range-Rovers to use as practical work tools to spend their entire existence in really tough conditions miles from civilisation? The idea is so unlikely as to be ludicrous.

      My tsuspicion is that Evoques only sell so well because at base there is a belief among trend setters that the brand has credibility actually the badge means what it says. What happens once some journo or blogger shouts out that the emperor is wearing no clothes and that goes viral?
      Land-Rover would be stupid in the extreme to give up this inverse halo effect entirely for form over function.

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    The Evoque is a neat car, and I was even able to see out of it without any trouble (and I’m of average height for an American male). The problem is that, even as a lease, it just isn’t that great of a value proposition for what you get. I especially hate the Jaguar/Land Rover corporate nav/infotainment unit, because it’s extremely slow. Better touch-screen systems can be found for less money, like MyLink, UConnect and Hyundai/Kia’s platform (especially the upgraded 2014 system). And of course there’s the ever-present possibility that it will leave you stranded on the road or in the shopping-mall parking lot.

    But hey…you can get the Evoque with a manual transmission in the European market. That has to count for some kind of enthusiast cred…

  • avatar
    bball40dtw

    I had an MKC for a few days and liked it better than the Evoque. I don’t wear giant sunglasses or extremely tight yoga pants though.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      The MKC has a gorgeous exterior. I think it outclasses the Audi Q5 from which it stole much of its looks. But the interior? Dreadful…especially the center console and its uninspired grid of switches. That pattern they’ve put on the door panels looks like it came out of a 1990′s Saturn. Large expanses of dark plastic do little to hide the fact that the crossover was built to a price. For me, those things make the MKC a non-starter.

    • 0 avatar
      Kenmore

      “I don’t wear giant sunglasses or extremely tight yoga pants though.”

      Well, I certainly do but I still want to drop a dumpster on this mutation.

  • avatar
    VenomV12

    One of these POSs was next to me today at the stoplight, I can’t believe it did not breakdown. I would never pick this over a Lexus RX and a whole bunch of other vehicles, most notably the new Macan. It is a disgrace the Range Rover name has been diluted down to this, I am not even happy with the Range Rover Sport sharing the Range Rover name.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      Every second person here “knows” that the Evoque is unreliable, but I haven’t yet heard any real-life stories to confirm.

      They are using a Ford engine, a ZF transmission, and a Haldex driveline. None of these are particularly trouble-prone in other applications.

      Anybody got any hard data on Evoque reliability?

      • 0 avatar
        mnm4ever

        I think by unreliable we are not talking about the actual engine/trans/driveline. Those are traditionally not the problem with a LR product. It’s the electronic bits that they have issues with. One of the reasons I like them is the solid bank vault feel and over built mechanicals. But this car is full of complicated gadgets and historically they break and are expensive to fix. Its also relative, it will probably make it to 80-100k with relatively few issues, so they really haven’t been around long enough to know for sure how it will be.

        But if this is really based on the LR2 then possibly it will be fine even over the long haul. The LR2 has a much better track record than other LRs. It’s no Honda lol but it’s at least a Ford.

      • 0 avatar
        VenomV12

        I think it was Matt Farah last year that was reviewing a brand new Range Rover Sport and the passenger window was broken and I think something else. That Saabkyle04 guy on Youtube has a recent video where he reviews a brand new full size Range Rover Autobiography and the cover for the panoramic roof was broken and hanging down so yeah I would have to say Range Rover reliability is probably pretty sh!t.

  • avatar
    Spartan

    For nearly $60K, you don’t buy a car like this. You lease it. You’d have to be out of your mind to outright purchase this vehicle.

    For this kinda $, if I’m buying outright, I’m buying a Grand Cherokee with every single option and the 3.0L CRD. You’d actually have some change left over.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India