RE: Driven: Range Rover Evoque SD4 2.2 Dynamic Coupe

RE: Driven: Range Rover Evoque SD4 2.2 Dynamic Coupe

Author
Discussion

Deva Link

26,934 posts

246 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
insanojackson said:
I am awaiting mine however despite putting a deposit dow six months ago I still have no idea when i might get a car, Like the poster on this topic i am sorely tempted to cancel and get a top of the range yeti.
What's the Yeti leadtime now? It was 12mths earlier this year.

ferdi p

1,519 posts

173 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
Trommel said:
ferdi p said:
Wrong..
The Range Rover evolved in to what it is now, it certainly didn't start out as a Luxury barge
Compare a 1970 Range Rover to a 1970 SIIA and tell me which is the luxurious one ...
Irrelevant..
Range Rovers now compete with Luxury BMW/Audi/Merc's & for years even Rolls Royce (pre Phantom) buyers had turned to them as they were so much more luxurious & better built!
The original Range Rover was targeted at the Farming fraternity!

camel_landy

4,932 posts

184 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
12gauge said:
Oh, im not saying there will be any shortage of mugs with £44k to burn lining up at dealers in the same way theres no shortage of mugs willing to pay £3 a tin of M&S beans that in all likelyhood come from the same factory as 30p tesco value tins of beans.

I would just like the choice of paying £15k for this or £44k for a TDV8 Range Rover that can actually offroad, fit 5 people plus provisions, and tow a boat behind it. This just doesnt add up to a £44k car (to me)
Oh, you can "off-road" an Evoque and it's actually very good! smile

...and remember that £44k is near the top end price wise. You're looking at approx £90k for a FFRR.

However, it sounds like you're not the target Market anyway. If we all liked the same things, it would be a very different world out there.

camel_landy

4,932 posts

184 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
ferdi p said:
Trommel said:
ferdi p said:
Wrong..
The Range Rover evolved in to what it is now, it certainly didn't start out as a Luxury barge
Compare a 1970 Range Rover to a 1970 SIIA and tell me which is the luxurious one ...
Irrelevant..
Range Rovers now compete with Luxury BMW/Audi/Merc's & for years even Rolls Royce (pre Phantom) buyers had turned to them as they were so much more luxurious & better built!
The original Range Rover was targeted at the Farming fraternity!
No, it's not irrelevant and in a way you are both correct as the range rover has evolved over the years.

Yes, the range rover was originally targeted at the farmers but was targeted as something more useable as a car too... And therefore more "luxurious".

Standards were a lot lower 40yrs ago, compared to what they are today. (The SIIA was used so you have something you can reference against).

Edited by camel_landy on Thursday 24th November 17:43

ferdi p

1,519 posts

173 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
Cassius81 said:
ferdi p said:
Cassius81 said:
ferdi p said:
Quite simply there is a huge market for smallish luxury cars at the moment..
The same people who scoff at a 42k Evoque probably laughed at BMW when they launched the new Mini that you could comfortably spec to well over 20k (& they sold in big numbers)

I also dont get the whole 'real Range Rover' argument, what exactly is one of those? what I see is loads of fat business men & mums driving them (& there idea of 'off road' is bumping up the curb outside the local school) !!!

Simple - a real Range Rover is the most upmarket and classiest luxury four wheel drive you can buy (in standard, non-blinged trim, anyway...)

These are neither and hence shouldn't use the name. All in my utterly subjective opinion, obviously...
Wrong..
The Range Rover evolved in to what it is now, it certainly didn't start out as a Luxury barge.. (Gotta admit, they are lovely tho)

We had an early RR in the family in the late eighties - imported it from Saudi actually and they weren't that luxurious, you are right. Brown vinyl seats and a very basic interior.

But I believe you are suggesting that a utilitarian vehicle, which it was to start with, cannot be either classy or upmarket (note, I didn't say luxurious). So I'm not wrong, am I?
Said like that, your clearly not wrong!
I was just making the point that the 'real' RR had never started out as a classy, upmarket utlitarian vehicle (which it is now) smile

ferdi p

1,519 posts

173 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
excel monkey said:
cathalm said:
I struggle to think of another car that ticks so many boxes.
Hmm, how about EVERY OTHER MEDIUM SIZED PREMIUM 4x4 OUT THERE

BMW X3
Audi Q5
Volvo XC60
Mercedes GLK
Lexus RX
All of them can be specced to 40k+
Not one of them has a bespoke interior & all of them are evolutions of another model..

camel_landy

4,932 posts

184 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
excel monkey said:
cathalm said:
I struggle to think of another car that ticks so many boxes.
Hmm, how about EVERY OTHER MEDIUM SIZED PREMIUM 4x4 OUT THERE

BMW X3
Audi Q5
Volvo XC60
Mercedes GLK
Lexus RX
Get them all side by side and then compare... They're good but not that good.

The Evoque is also British and I think you should be immensely proud of that! You should also be immensely thankful coz without a decent manufacturing industry, this country will be FUBAR (we can't survive on service industry alone!)

Buying British products means that my kids have a chance of having a decent future!

J4CKO

41,676 posts

201 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
I bet this will send RRS prices down though, look how many ladies buy them and would probably prefer a smaller, trendier, never, funkier model and here we have it, the RRS looking distinctly old and dated so thousands will be traded in against one, good news if you want an RRS.

Everyone moaning about the price, well it is probably, at the moment and for the foreseeable future probably one of the best cars and cheapest cars to own, it isn't how much you lay out that determines cost, it is how much you get back when you move it on, I would imagine if you spent 44k on one now you would get 44k back for a while yet and then a very shallow depreciation as supply is nowhere near demand, one comes up in the classified and it will be pounced on with people desperate to pay you for it.

I would imagine a lot will be leased for £400/£500 a month or so anyway, which is within reach of a lot of people, especially if desperate to own one, Ill bet people are signing up despite not knowing where they will get the money from.

MrTappets

881 posts

192 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
Wow, this has to be getting close to the worst power:money ratio I can think of, short of a Rolls or an Aston Cygnet. 190bhp for £45k? I can think of better ways of spending the money.

300bhp/ton

41,030 posts

191 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
MrTappets said:
Wow, this has to be getting close to the worst power:money ratio I can think of, short of a Rolls or an Aston Cygnet. 190bhp for £45k? I can think of better ways of spending the money.
But you wouldn't be buying it for speed or power. And £44k is pretty much top of the range and loaded with extras. They start out a lot cheaper. Didn't someone post a £38k Audi A1 recently or something similar. Car prices have risen and in many case bottom of the range to top of the range can be a 100% difference in price.

alexmckie

118 posts

242 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all


Desktop size please.

Trommel

19,157 posts

260 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
ferdi p said:
I was just making the point that the 'real' RR had never started out as a classy, upmarket utlitarian vehicle
That is exactly what it started out as, and exactly what it still should be.


Caspian

5 posts

197 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
That's a lovely tunnel !! Where is it ? Market Harborough ??smile

mig25_foxbat2003

5,426 posts

212 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
Saw one in Cheltenham last weekend. Wanted it immediately. They're absolutely sensational looking cars. I don't care what it drives like, or whether or not it's a "proper" Rangie, or that you appear not to be able to see out of it without the aid of a periscope (certainly, the quality of driving exhibited by the aforementioned chap would seem to bear out the latter theory). I still want one.

swamp

994 posts

190 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
camel_landy said:
excel monkey said:
cathalm said:
I struggle to think of another car that ticks so many boxes.
Hmm, how about EVERY OTHER MEDIUM SIZED PREMIUM 4x4 OUT THERE

BMW X3
Audi Q5
Volvo XC60
Mercedes GLK
Lexus RX
Get them all side by side and then compare... They're good but not that good.
Well I'd like to see a comparison between the Evoque and an X3 30d. On paper the Evoque is rather slow and thirsty.

Ozzie Osmond

21,189 posts

247 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
camel_landy said:
Oh, you can "off-road" an Evoque and it's actually very good! smile
Wossat then? Two wheels up on the pavement outside the Post Office?


David87

6,666 posts

213 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
I love the Evoque and think LR will sell a shedload of them. I do think it's expensive, but it's also lovely. My Dad gets one in March and I can't wait to need to borrow it often.laugh

jdw1234

6,021 posts

216 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
Cassius81 said:
jdw1234 said:
Cassius81 said:
ferdi p said:
Quite simply there is a huge market for smallish luxury cars at the moment..
The same people who scoff at a 42k Evoque probably laughed at BMW when they launched the new Mini that you could comfortably spec to well over 20k (& they sold in big numbers)

I also dont get the whole 'real Range Rover' argument, what exactly is one of those? what I see is loads of fat business men & mums driving them (& there idea of 'off road' is bumping up the curb outside the local school) !!!

Simple - a real Range Rover is the most upmarket and classiest luxury four wheel drive you can buy (in standard, non-blinged trim, anyway...)

These are neither and hence shouldn't use the name. All in my utterly subjective opinion, obviously...
I honestly dont get the difference.

You could by either model in white with ridiculous wheels.

Or you could spec both quite elegantly (dark green, no tints, small wheels for example).

The new 2011 range rover has all the chintz as standard the Evoque has.
The clue is in my last sentence.

I have driven both over long distance and to me there is simply no comparison. One is a posh mid-size SUV with a smart interior, the other a genuine S-class/A8/7 Series rival. But it is all down to personal preference, I guess.
Sorry, skim read your last sentence.

To be fair, I haven't driven an Evoque and altough regular FFRR passenger on airport runs, have never driven one.

What would you choose between similar priced TDV8 FFRR and Evoque if you lived in city?

The Evoque interior seems to make the FFRR interior dated. I think the new version will be a lot more expensive.

To me, I am thinking if you live in the city, the Evoque would make sense if new FFRR is 80-90k base (as opposed to buying a similar priced second hand version).



RJP001

1,131 posts

151 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
Also don't forget the "real" Range Rover is due replacement, a new one coming out in a year or two is there not?

Trommel

19,157 posts

260 months

Thursday 24th November 2011
quotequote all
Caspian said:
That's a lovely tunnel !! Where is it ? Market Harborough ??smile
Wapping railway tunnel, Liverpool.