RE: Range Rover Evoque facelift
Thursday 21st April 2016
It was bound to happen eventually, but you may have noticed the Range Rover Evoque hasn't been SUV flavour of the month recently. There have been all kinds of new models, both direct competitors and otherwise, that have taken attention away from the baby Range Rover. Would you believe it's now five years old, with 520,000 cars sold.
Of course it's on 20-inch wheelsAs part of the latest (very mild) facelift, the Evoque now receives the 10.2-inch InControl Touch Pro infotainment system from the Jaguar F-Pace and a new 'Low Traction Launch', which apparently "further cements Range Rover Evoque's outstanding all-terrain capability." If the name sounds familiar then that's because the F-Pace also has a 'Low Friction Launch'; they're most likely the same system, benefitting low speed acceleration on slippery surfaces.
Range Rover Evoque facelift
Half a million cars sold and it's time for the special editions!
Of course it's on 20-inch wheels
The biggest news as far as this facelift is concerned is the new 'Ember' special edition. No, this is not an SVR in disguise, instead a near-£50K flagship that "showcases Evoque's bold design". Based on the HSE Dynamic, it comes only in Santorini Black with Firenze Red accents. The theme is continued inside, it rides on 20-inch wheels and there's a new 'Evoque' badge for the back. Marvellous. It will be available for a three-month period this summer at £47,200, with first deliveries due in September. Just the thing for making an impression at the start of 2016-17 school year.
There's nothing drastic in this update then, but with the Evoque still proving popular it's not really surprising. That being said, the success of cars like the Macan Turbo, Mercedes GLA45 and Audi RS Q3 surely won't have escaped Land Rover's attention. The larger SVR has been received very well after all...
 |
 |
 |
 |
Discussion
David87 said:
tyrrell said:
As said before great car let down by under powered engine
Indeed. I reckon a specced-up Convertible would be getting on for £65k, yet can be powered with the 180PS Ingenium diesel. Can anyone think of a slower car for more money? 
Er, it goes to sixty in 9.3 seconds. I remember when that was a passable fast hatch kind of time, sure its expensive and not ballistically fast but for the target market it is perfectly adequate and can be had with more powerful engines.
Not sure a lot pf PH actually has experienced "underpowered" and it seems to mean "doesnt crush your intrnal organs as much as I would like"
As for "Low Traction launch", well, that will be handy, like all Launch Controls, probably just b
ks for us chaps to play with once, then forget, I mean "Launch", its a bloody car not the Queen Mary or a Saturn 5 Rocket.The Mrs has one with the 190bhp Ford unit and it's adequately quick for what it is. It's far quicker than her previous Disco 4 and it's a rocket ship next to the Disco 3 before that. I'd have preferred her to have had the petrol version but they are thin on the ground. It has to be said though, it is a damn good car. Guess that's why they are so popular.
sunnydude said:
I used to have an si4 dynamic (2 litre petrol) version. Fantastic cars, really nice to drive - just needed bigger/faster engines!!!!!
I dont get the hate for them on here, they look good and the owners love them, I think Evoque is a pretty good car name as well, they really do need to do an Evoque R with say 350 bhp to take it to the Macan and SQ5, but I suppose they would if the customers said they wanted one enough, to most owners as long as it keeps up with traffic and they dont noticve it is slow, then they wont care, any extra performance would cost more and they would more than likely never use it.J4CKO said:
Er, it goes to sixty in 9.3 seconds. I remember when that was a passable fast hatch kind of time, sure its expensive and not ballistically fast but for the target market it is perfectly adequate and can be had with more powerful engines.
We've got one with the new diesel and it doesn't feel slow at all, either from rolling or standstill. And the stats say 8.5s to 60 which isn't that bad! Pintofbest said:
J4CKO said:
Er, it goes to sixty in 9.3 seconds. I remember when that was a passable fast hatch kind of time, sure its expensive and not ballistically fast but for the target market it is perfectly adequate and can be had with more powerful engines.
We've got one with the new diesel and it doesn't feel slow at all, either from rolling or standstill. And the stats say 8.5s to 60 which isn't that bad! Sheepshanks said:
Pintofbest said:
J4CKO said:
Er, it goes to sixty in 9.3 seconds. I remember when that was a passable fast hatch kind of time, sure its expensive and not ballistically fast but for the target market it is perfectly adequate and can be had with more powerful engines.
We've got one with the new diesel and it doesn't feel slow at all, either from rolling or standstill. And the stats say 8.5s to 60 which isn't that bad! Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff