Evoque MPG ISSUES!!!!
Discussion
They can only publish the figure determined on the standard test.... The New European Drive Cycle... NEDC.
It allows apples for apples comparison but fail real world due to low average speed, only seconds at motorway speed and slower than typical acceleration such that the test is appropriate for all vehicles.
It allows apples for apples comparison but fail real world due to low average speed, only seconds at motorway speed and slower than typical acceleration such that the test is appropriate for all vehicles.
The Evoque is well down on LR figures on a flat road 33mph test for 15 mins. 50mpg.
The BMW was actually above BMW figures at 56mpg
The LR had to have two runs as the first was 45mpg and had to be gently coaxed to get 50mpg in a driving style that would be impossible to sustain. The BMW did it with what could be used every day.
This is not meant to be a comparison between marques, just an indication that it doesn't appear to be an issue across all manufacturers.
The BMW was actually above BMW figures at 56mpg
The LR had to have two runs as the first was 45mpg and had to be gently coaxed to get 50mpg in a driving style that would be impossible to sustain. The BMW did it with what could be used every day.
This is not meant to be a comparison between marques, just an indication that it doesn't appear to be an issue across all manufacturers.
sunnydude said:
I had a Land Rover RR Evoque 2.0-litre turbo (petrol) engined one in Dynamic form (20" wheels) last year, and I literally got no more than 16 mpg. That was mostly in town driving, but still.
Mine uses 10.5 l/100km which is just under 27mpg - that's in 12k KM of mixed use with quite a lot of short trips so I'm not too unhappy with that result really. I do have 19" wheels not 20" though.If you think the Evoque is bad though, try a Fiat 500 TwinAir - they do 39mpg everywhere, although I did get that down to 36mpg on a drive from Zürich to Stuttgart at fairly high speed.
As far as the tests go, they are not representative of the real world in several ways, for example there are parts of the test which simulate being stopped in traffic so if the car has stop-start then zero fuel is used. It then accelerates very gently up to a set speed where it sits for a period of time before slowing or accelerating again. You can see how the test is done here, but it is clear it doesn't include any sharp braking, acceleration, or cruising at any speed above 100kph, and barely goes above 80kph at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_European_Driving...
The old test was even worse though, that just involved driving at a steady 30, 50 and 70mph (or similar) and publishing the results.
Out of interest I tried the test of cruising at 33mph although I didn't have a full 4 miles of road available to me. My car is a Disco Sport 2.2 auto so very similar to the Evoque. the result was 58.4 mpg on the trip computer. Everyday motoring is very different; I've just completed a 1300 mile trip to Geneva and back and overall I got about 34 mpg calculated on fuel used and miles covered; my trip computer is near enough 10% optimistic. Best acieved on the trip was 42.4mpg over 80 miles and not exceeding the 90kph limit. Travelling on the autoroute at 130kph returned 31/32 mpg.I checked the Autocar road test results for the DS and their overall figure was 33.9mpg. I'm quite comfortable with these figures and didn't really expect much more from a heavy automatic 4x4.
Tim
Tim
KarlMac said:
Can we have a bit of a reality check? We're complaining about 2 tonne + SUVs only getting 40+ mpg?
Except its 1.6 tonne or are you using the same calculator that LR use in which case it needs new batteries... Maybe LR would be advised to add a clear disclaimer in their brochure that their mpg figures are test results that definitely cant be obtained by users. That would of course apply to other manufacturers too.
V6Pushfit said:
Except its 1.6 tonne or are you using the same calculator that LR use in which case it needs new batteries...
Maybe LR would be advised to add a clear disclaimer in their brochure that their mpg figures are test results that definitely cant be obtained by users. That would of course apply to other manufacturers too.
All manufacturers do have disclaimers somewhere in the brochure. Maybe LR would be advised to add a clear disclaimer in their brochure that their mpg figures are test results that definitely cant be obtained by users. That would of course apply to other manufacturers too.
Sure, the Evoque is bad, but there are worse cars out there - TwinAir powered Fiats, 1.0 EcoBoost Focus, 5 cylinder Focus ST...
V6Pushfit said:
Except its 1.6 tonne or are you using the same calculator that LR use in which case it needs new batteries...
Maybe LR would be advised to add a clear disclaimer in their brochure that their mpg figures are test results that definitely cant be obtained by users. That would of course apply to other manufacturers too.
Errr......Maybe LR would be advised to add a clear disclaimer in their brochure that their mpg figures are test results that definitely cant be obtained by users. That would of course apply to other manufacturers too.
camel_landy said:
Personally, I couldn't give a f
k!
I'm of the opinion that if you're worrying so much about running costs, you're driving the wrong car. You should have bought a cheaper car, to offset the running costs.
M
True. I have miserable Gets at work spending their whole life talking about MPG. It seem to be the new motoring highlight. According to the majority of the car buying public good mpg means good car. k!I'm of the opinion that if you're worrying so much about running costs, you're driving the wrong car. You should have bought a cheaper car, to offset the running costs.
M
bigkeeko said:
camel_landy said:
Personally, I couldn't give a fk!
I'm of the opinion that if you're worrying so much about running costs, you're driving the wrong car. You should have bought a cheaper car, to offset the running costs.
M
True. I have miserable Gets at work spending their whole life talking about MPG. It seem to be the new motoring highlight. According to the majority of the car buying public good mpg means good car. k!I'm of the opinion that if you're worrying so much about running costs, you're driving the wrong car. You should have bought a cheaper car, to offset the running costs.
M
Its about being told a load of ste by manufacturers.
If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
te by manufacturers. If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
V6Pushfit said:
Its about being told a load of ste by manufacturers.
If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
No, it's about following the tests which are defined by the regulatory authorities to allow figures to be repeatable and comparable. If you drive like a baboon with a grenade up your bottom you will get 19mpg, if you are a hyper-miler with a lot of economy driving training you will beat the numbers.te by manufacturers. If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
If the economy is a big issue maybe you should take an eco-driving course to adapt your style to get more miles out of the fuel you put in. With effort you will be able to get a lot closer to the numbers, some of the best eco-drivers can beat the published figures by 25% in real-world conditions. The main issue is that most people accelerate and brake too harshly, don't read the road properly and don't anticipate far enough ahead, and I suspect if you worked on this your economy would improve.
V6Pushfit said:
Its about being told a load of ste by manufacturers.
If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
You really are like a dog with a bone with this aren't you?te by manufacturers. If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
All manafacturers are required to complete a pre determined test and publish those results, do you expect them not to try and achieve the most flattering result that they can?
How close a member of the public can get to these results will depend on how and where they drive. I suggest that next time you buy a car you do a bit more research before you part with your hard earned, it will save you an awfull lot of stress.
V6Pushfit said:
Its about being told a load of ste by manufacturers.
If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
Maybe they make the mistake of thinking people are not a bit thick? te by manufacturers. If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
It is the same for every car out there.
Only you know how you drive, so if it is a concern test it properly. It isn't rocket science.
jamiebae said:
V6Pushfit said:
Its about being told a load of ste by manufacturers.
If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
No, it's about following the tests which are defined by the regulatory authorities to allow figures to be repeatable and comparable. If you drive like a baboon with a grenade up your bottom you will get 19mpg, if you are a hyper-miler with a lot of economy driving training you will beat the numbers.te by manufacturers. If you order from a menu then you should expect to get that thing, I doubt anyone would be happy ordering 'great cod almighty' in the local pub and getting a fish finger even if there's a disclaimer that fresh fish is seasonal
LR and other should know better and the disclaimer on their brochure is totally misleading it should clearly say 'never' get the figures.
The Evoque doesnt match up to users reasonable expectations of mpg (ie anywhere near it) given LR figures. Simples.
If the economy is a big issue maybe you should take an eco-driving course to adapt your style to get more miles out of the fuel you put in. With effort you will be able to get a lot closer to the numbers, some of the best eco-drivers can beat the published figures by 25% in real-world conditions. The main issue is that most people accelerate and brake too harshly, don't read the road properly and don't anticipate far enough ahead, and I suspect if you worked on this your economy would improve.
Gassing Station | Land Rover | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff