Range Rover Evoque - style over substance?

Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
538
Hi folks,

I've been looking at small SUV / cross-over SUV and came across the Evoque. Seems like a very nice interior, mpg is pretty good too. I'm even tempted to get the Dynamic with MagneRide suspensions. Talk some sense into me, thanks!!

Of course if you have positive experiences with the Evoque, pls share them too.
 
I have never driven one but I see plenty on the road over here. They are really small, much smaller than they look in the photos.
 
I haven't driven one either but there are plenty of them about here as well. In the beginning when they came out I thought they were kind of cool but 18 months down the line they are starting to look a bit dated. For me personally I would prefer one of these -

2014-GLK-CLASS-SUV-GALLERY-029-GOE-D.jpg
 
have read of the reviews on dogandlemon.com before you buy any car. It will give you a new perspective.:thumbup:
 
I test drove one. It's about the same price as my V6 Highlander with trimmings. That said I went with the Highlander. My criteria was rock solid reliability, acceleration over sporty handling, big front seats and good cargo space. The Evoque was very nice but didn't hit on the order of my criteria and wish list. All in all all of the range rovers had some of the top seats in terms or comfort equaling BMW and that Nissan Murano I sat in and Infinity's. This was over Lexus, Audi, MB, Toyota.

The Evoque had more sport than SUV feel which is ultimately why I didn't like it. Plus I thought that eventually I might get tired of the styling. Lastly it lacked the cargo space that I like and wasn't as punchy as the Highlander. I've test drive a ton of SUV's before buying the Highlander and I had a Rav before that which maybe its an illusion but felt like it had more cargo space. That or the Rav's cargo hull was just easier to access.

I would seriously consider an Audi A3 AWD Turbo station wagon, Nissan Murano or Suburu station wagon if you want a compact or the V6 Rav4 which has a monster engine in it, the thing is fast -period. This is coming from someone who has owned nearly every brand of inline 4 and Vtwin from 99-2005 600's, 750s on up to 1000s.

My most liked test driven SUVs that are compact to medium size of those that I test drove have been the Ford Explorer (utlimately too big) (almost got that over the Highlander), Range not enough cargo space and the cockpit was sports car-ish and cramped which is why I didn't like the Acura MDX (no leg room at all), X5 (horrible reliability reviews), MB (not enough substance and the seats sucked and were Euro stiff), Audi Q5/Q7 (really comfortable, fast not awesome reliability reviews, so I couldn't justify extra money). I also test drove a Lexus but it wasn't enough to justify the extra 8 grand for it.
 
We almost went for the Audi as well it was in the running but it got rated horribly for side impact tests. As you see below, the Chevy Equinox (test drove nice but smaller), Terrain and Highlander were the only rated to be Top Safety plus...

DETROIT (AP) - Only two of nine midsize SUVs got the highest rating in crash tests done by an insurance industry group.

The Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain, both made by General Motors, received the highest "good" rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The Toyota Highlander got the second-best "acceptable" rating in tests of 2014 models.

But the Jeep Grand Cherokee, Toyota 4Runner and Ford Explorer got "marginal" ratings, while the Kia Sorento, Mazda CX-9 and Honda Pilot all were rated "poor."

The ratings are based on six crash test measurements done by the institute. Only the Equinox and Terrain got "good" ratings in a front overlap crash that mimics what happens when a car's front corner collides with another vehicle or an object like a utility pole. In the test, 25 percent of a vehicle's front end on the driver's side strikes a rigid barrier at 40 mph.

The test, instituted in 2012, is more difficult than the U.S. government's frontal crash test, in which a car strikes a rigid barrier head-on at 35 mph. IIHS says hitting only part of the front end makes it harder for cars to manage the energy from a crash. The test "continues to challenge manufacturers more than a year and a half after its introduction," the institute said in a statement.

The institute uses its crash test scores to prod automakers into adding safety devices or making their cars more crash-resistant.


The institute said the Equinox and Terrain, which are almost identical, were modified by GM in the new model year to strengthen their front structure and door-hinge pillars. In tests, the Equinox driver's space was well-maintained, and the crash dummy's movement was well-controlled, the institute said.

The institute changed its requirements for vehicles to get the "Top Safety Pick-Plus" designation this year. To earn that, vehicles must get "good" ratings in four crash tests, "good" or "acceptable" in the overlap test, and they must have available a front crash prevention system that either warns the driver of a crash or stops the vehicle with automatic braking.

Of the nine midsize SUVs, only the Equinox and Terrain and the Highlander qualified for "Top Safety Pick-Plus."

The Honda Pilot was the worst performer of the group, largely because the driver's space was seriously compromised in the overlap test, the institute said.

Honda said in a statement that with each redesign, the Pilot has been a leader in light-truck safety and driver-assist technologies "and we are committed that it will continue to do so in the future."

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 
Thanks for the replies. I agree the styling is a bit trendy and may look dated in a few years. What attracts me is the plush interior. By comparison the X3 is a great SUV all around but the inside feels too bare/minimalistic. I want to use this car on long road trips and comfort becomes a priority. What are your picks for creature comforts?

BTW I'm asking around a few land rover dealerships for quotes and one surprised me. They asked for my zip and then said they won't compete in that area. They didn't even offer me a quote beyond the advertised MSRP on their website. I found that extremely odd. has anyone encountered this before?
 
Back
Top