Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review

The new Range Rover Evoque signals the beginning of a new era for the iconic British brand. As the smallest, lightest and most efficient Range Rover to date, the Evoque shows that even a brand as historic as Land Rover can make an irresistible compact SUV, so long as it’s done right.

From the outside, I am yet to meet a single human being that thinks the Range Rover Evoque is unattractive. If I do eventually come across such a person, I would have to question their taste (and sanity). It’s, truly, stunning. It looks fantastic in photos but to see it on the road as it screams past you or as it sits hovering in your rear-view mirror (with its cat-eye style day time running lamps), it’s a work of art.

The attention to detail and meticulous design characteristics that have gone into styling the Evoque are nothing short of remarkable. In the car industry it’s often the case that designers will come up with an amazing concept and the engineers will then give them 100 reasons why it can’t be made that way and eventually dumb it down to mediocrity. In the case of the Range Rover Evoque, the designers had the upper hand.

The first time we saw the Evoque was in the form of the Range Rover LRX concept in 2008. If you put the original concept and an Evoque side by side, it’s almost as if they simply made it as it was in concept form. There has been little compromise on design; the Land Rover team knew they were on a winner so they insisted the engineers work within the boundaries of the concept design. This is the same philosophy that Apple employs when it creates a new product – driven by designers and not engineers. For that reason, the Range Rover Evoque had already won half the battle before it even went to war.

Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review

There has been over 37,000 pre orders for the Evoque worldwide, which is astonishing as none of the buyers had properly inspected the goods they are buying. 10,000 Australians have shown strong interest and more than 200 have already put their money down. This sort of pre-order interest is not common to many brands, let alone Range Rover.

It would almost not matter what the engineers had put under the skin because as most would agree, half the decision in buying a car is made on looks alone. Thankfully though, the Range Rover Evoque packs a winning package all around.

Based on the Freelander platform, the Evoque is a compact SUV that is at its best around suburbia. Range Rover allowed us to test its off-roading ability rather substantially but given we spent most of our time crossing rivers and climbing slippery hills on 20-inch alloy wheels wrapped in low profile tyres, it’s pretty evident that despite having great 4WD ability, it’s unlikely many owners will ever use it. Which is why there is a two-wheel drive version coming next year.

Lets be honest, Land Rover may make the Defender, but the Evoque is a different beast all together. Die hard fans will say the company has gone soft, but in fact, it’s simply creating what the market wants, which is what smart companies do. Range Rover currently has an 80:20 male to female skew of buyers that are generally over 40 (for Range Rover Sport) or 50 (for Range Rover Vogue). For the Evoque, Range Rover expects buyers in the 35-45 year old bracket with a 50:50 male to female split. That’s not to say this is a girl’s car (far from it), but given the aesthetically pleasing design, it’s understandable why it would be as popular for men and women.

Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review

Although it’s based on the Freelander platform (which itself is from the days when Land Rover was owned by Ford), the engineers have had to alter its characteristics substantially. For a start, it has been lowered by 27mm yet it has gained 12mm of ground clearance. To be able to create a coupe like silhouette and maintain a usable amount of head room, the engineers have worked some magic. To give you an example, a Range Rover Evoque five door with a panoramic sunroof has equivalent headroom to a Range Rover Sport. When you look at the two models side by side, that’s not something that appears even remotely possible.

There are two different body shapes for the Evoque: three-door coupe and five-door. It should be pretty obvious which shape is right for you, sure the three-door has a slightly lower roofline and looks more sporty but not only does it cost an additional $1,500 (don’t ask why having two less doors costs more money!), it’s also rather impractical.

You’d buy it if you were single or a couple without children, but if you had a regular reason to use the back seats, I would recommend the five-door. It’s not that the two rear seats are useless in the coupe (a no cost option to have three seats), it’s the issue of getting in and out of them. The angle of the front doors and the way the front seats move forward doesn’t leave you with much room to get in and out of the back. This is one of the downsides of letting designers have their way, but frankly, when you actually sit in the back there is ample room, even for tall adults.

Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review

The five door, in my humble opinion, makes much more sense. It’s still a very attractive car but its usefulness is significantly higher than the coupe. The rear doors are some of the smallest I’ve ever seen on an SUV, but allow enough opening to easily get in the back seats. My initial thoughts prior to driving an Evoque were that you’d be pressed for legroom for the rear seats but that’s far from true as there’s oodles of both head and leg room. In fact, when optioned with the enormous Panoramic sunroof, the sense of openness is uncanny.

During the media presentation Range Rover’s public relations team made a big fuss about how great the Evoque rides and behaves on challenging roads. It’s something I hear pretty much all the time from all car companies. But after more than five hours behind the wheel, I realised they were right.

Leaving the Opera house for our drive programme to Chateau Elan in the Hunter Valley, dynamic mode was engaged (which turns all the instruments a purposeful glowing red) and it was time to test out the Evoque’s much talked about handling characteristics.

It’s good to remember that not all Evoques are created equal, as there are three different flavours: Pure, Prestige and Dynamic. As you can probably guess, the Dynamic variants are the ones with the more sporty nature (they are differentiated with the rear Evoque badge being in red, rather than silver). There are also two different engine choices: petrol or diesel. The 177kW 2.0-litre turbocharged petrol is my pick of the bunch but diesel lovers will be pleased with the 2.2-litre turbodiesel, which is available in three variations (eD4, TD4, SD4) offering different power and torque configurations. The eD4 front-wheel drive model won’t arrive here till next year, so it wasn’t tested and I spent the majority of the time in an SD4 and Si4 petrol.

Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review

First in line was an SD4 Dynamic five-door, which was optioned with a $1,950 Adaptive Dynamic pack. With 140kW and 420Nm of torque, the SD4 is not short on pulling power but it still takes 8.5 seconds for 0-100km/h dash. In Sydney’s famous traffic, the six-speed automatic works well in slow driving conditions but can present a bit of turbo lag getting off the line. Once we hit some mountainous terrain on the way to Hunter Valley, the SD4 came to life. Engage dynamic mode and the steering tightens up and the throttle becomes far more sensitive. This is an excellent way to enjoy a spirited drive, but the question comes back to why you picked a diesel if you wanted a dynamic sports car?

You see, I am a huge fan of diesels, I really am. But once in a while a vehicle comes along that is desired on emotion rather than need or logic. In which case, going for efficiency doesn’t make all that much sense. In front-wheel drive configuration, a diesel Evoque (manual) uses just 5.0L/100km. That’s a whole litre less than the Toyota Hybrid Camry! So if you’re going for fuel efficiency, diesel is hard to beat. By the time you get to the TD4/SD4 automatic, that figure jumps to 6.5L/100km. Again, that’s pretty darn impressive. But hear me out, because the 177kW 2.0-litre petrol only uses 8.7L/100km. Merely 2.2L/100km more than its equivalent diesel, and let me tell you, it’s a hell of a lot more fun.

Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review

If you’re going to buy a car with your heart, one that you love looking at, wouldn’t you like it to have the performance to match its menacing looks? 177kW and 340Nm of torque may not mean all that much, but 0-100km/h times drop to 7.6 seconds and the responsiveness and overall feel of the engine changes dramatically.

Once I found myself behind the wheel of an Evoque Si4, there was no turning back. Power, agility and a great exhaust note to match, sorry diesel fans, but this is the Evoque to get. All of a sudden the ride and handling made a lot more sense, Range Rover was right, this does handle very well for an SUV. You can push it really hard into corners and it grips and powers out like a four-wheel drive rally car. I liken its behaviour to the BMW X6, which despite its SUV status, goes around corners like an M3.

Better still, there is no turbo lag in the petrol and it gets off the line with ease. Gear changes are smooth and you can make use of the steering-wheel mounted paddle shifters, if you must.

Once the ride and handling part of the road test was over, I spent some time in the passenger seat (both front and rear) to inspect the Evoque’s interior. If you’re thinking the baby Range Rover is nothing but a tarted up Freelander 2. It’s not. It’s a proper Range Rover. The interior is top notch; I would easily give it the status as best in class. There is delicate craftsmanship employed throughout the cabin from the dash to the seats and even the roof lining. If you opt for the technology pack (which you have to if you’re buying a Pure for the time being), it’s also not lacking technological features.

Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review

An 8″ high-resolution touchscreen with (satellite navigation is $3,400 as a stand alone option) coupled to a 380 watt Meridian sound system is enough to entice you to pull over to enjoy your music. If you’ve never heard of Meridian Audio before, they’re not exactly your everyday consumer brand. They make speakers for home theatre systems that cost about $65,000+… each. Of course that’s not the same speaker system employed in the Evoque, but it’s pretty darn good nonetheless. Sync it up via Bluetooth and you can even have your iPhone wirelessly stream your favourite playlist.

If you’re picky, you’ll be pleased to know there is an almost endless range of customisation opportunities available. There’s also a heap of options and most of them are not too expensive (apart from keyless entry for the Pure, which at $1,495 is pushing its luck). Options are just inexpensive enough to make you go “I might as well” – which is why the $49,990 entry price for the base model eD4 Pure manual is a little deceiving. The top of the range Si4 Prestige auto retails for $75,895.

There’s a good deal of storage space inside the cabin and the $1,020 price tag for the power tailgate is worth it, just for the convenience.

Apart from all the electronic nanny controls which will help you in preventing an accident, driver and passenger airbags, knee airbags, and side curtain and thorax airbags will be there to protect you in case you do.

Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review

There’s a lot more that remains to be said about the Range Rover Evoque, but if its looks alone haven’t convinced you, I highly recommend taking it for a test drive. Just remember, if you’re going to start customising your Evoque down to small detail, you might be waiting a while for your delivery.

Chances are that you already know if you’re going to buy this car, none of its competitors are a match when it comes to styling and road presence – and for most of us, that is reason enough. The coupe is an impractical choice that only a few can make, but the five-door (particularly in petrol) is the most pleasant compact SUV I’ve driven to date. It’s gorgeous inside and out and drives like a sports car. You really can’t ask for more.

It’s more than fair to say that the new Range Rover Evoque sets an almighty high benchmark for luxury compact SUVs.

Range Rover Evoque: (Coupe Variants additional RRP $1,500)

eD4 110kW 6 Speed Manual 2WD (available July 2012)

  • eD4 Pure 6 Speed Manual 2WD -$49,995
  • eD4 Dynamic 6 Speed Manual 2WD -$63,495
  • eD4 Prestige 6 Speed Manual 2WD – $65,495

TD4 110kW 6 Speed Manual 4WD

  • TD4 Pure 6 Speed Manual 4WD -$53,395
  • TD4 Dynamic 6 Speed Manual 4WD -$66,895
  • TD4 Prestige 6 Speed Manual 4WD -$68,895

SD4 140kW 6 Speed Manual 4WD

  • SD4 Pure 6 Speed Manual 4WD -$57,395
  • SD4 Dynamic 6 Speed Manual 4WD -$70,895
  • SD4 Prestige 6 Speed Manual 4WD -$72,895

Si4 177kW 6 Speed Automatic 4WD

Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
Range Rover Evoque Review
  • Si4 Pure 6 Speed Automatic 4WD -$60,395
  • Si4 Dynamic 6 Speed Automatic 4WD -$73,895
  • Si4 Prestige 6 Speed Automatic 4WD -$75,895

Key Option Prices

  • 6 Speed Automatic Transmission with Drive select and Paddle Shift (TD4/SD4 only) -$2,480

Option Packs

  • Pure Tech Pack (Mandatory fit to Pure models until November Production) -$4,500
  • Prestige/Dynamic Tech Pack – $5,900
  • Dynamic Plus Pack – $7,200

Individual Options

  • HDD Navigation including 4×4 information and hard disc drive audio server. $3,400
  • Park Assist $1,090
  • Power Tailgate $1,020
  • Metallic Paint $1,300

  • SWE

    Saw one in metal in Linköping, SWE. Awesome looking beast!

    All car makers should make their production model like their concept counterparts.

    • Catteryguy

      I like the price too!

    • Igomi Watabi

      You know, I’ve seen a couple on the street, and they do look great, but not as great as I expected. Photography flatters them a little

  • vic

    Excellent. 10/10
    instant classic

    • cd

      Absolutely – the 3 door with those red seats is super!

      Fantastic looking in the photos and in real life as well. If only all cars looked this good.

    • sakegaby

      …where would the tow truck industry be without Land Rover !!!
      BTW the car has complementary 3 year 24h free towing!!!
      …and quick get the oil pan under the engine!!!
      “Instant classic” lol

  • vic

    Refreshing to see a concept make it into production relatively unscathed..

  • Mark

    I actually saw that white one in Macquarie Park a few weeks ago. Absolutely stunning. Great proportions. Looks even better than some of the Hyundai stuff coming out at the moment!

    Wonder if the other Range Rover models will take on some of this new DNA..

    • Kampfer

      You comparing Hyundai to Range Rover is enough to make Hyundai management happy – or Range Rover management sad… 😉

      P.S. I have to say the Evoque looks much, much better than Great Wall X200.

  • Sumpguard

    Awesome looking car (from a Sportage owner) This car has the rear end the Sportage deserves.

    Great work Range Rover.

    • Paulo

      From a Sportage owner?! Not what relevance that has. Sure Kia have made huge improvements in their latest vehicles. They needed to. But a Sportage is no where the same league as this Range Rover.

      • Lars

        Obviously, don’t forget that Sportage is 40% cheaper!

        • Sumpguard

          The comment was related to styling (quite clearly) with the Sportage regarded as one of the best looking compact SUV’s . Despite that fact I still think KIA could have put a bit more time into getting the rear end better sorted. Hence the original post.

          Lars summed the rest up perfectly regarding the price aspect v’s segment.

          Of course there is also still the issue of reliablity to be proven which has dogged some of their vehicles such as the Freelander mk1.

          • manda

            The Evoque is a luxury SUV. As for reliability – there is no more an issue than Kias of the same era as the Freelander Mk1

        • johno

          sportage makes evoque an even better buy when you consider the price.

  • Barneyridge

    I was one that pre ordered without seeing one of driving it. Another thing is given the fuel consumption of the diesel it does not attract the luxury car tax to $75k, the petrol model kicks in at the lower level of $57k (not sure of the exact numbers).

    You might say the options are rather inexpensive but once you start adding them the base price starts getting up there. You can easily get the drive away price up to $80k +. Carsales already has on optioned up for over $100k

    • Alborz Fallah

      Hi Barney,

      Great to hear and dare I say, great choice. You’re right, the options do add up (which is why I’ve put the options list in the negatives) however, I think they are reasonable priced compared to other European rivals.

      As for the LCT, yes, that’s true and I did think about it. This is why the price difference between diesel and petrol (SD4,SI4) is similar, however, if I was the one buying, I’d go with the petrol.

    • ozedude

      I had a look at one of these. All geared up to be impressed.

      Couldn’t help but think as i walked away, “you have to be kidding”.

      The price for what you are getting is ridiculous. Enjoy your new clothes emperor.

  • iNoob

    Had one of these coming up from behind yesterday – looked nice indeed. BUT found it amusing that when the driver indicated the day light led on that side of the headlight dimmed (while the other headlight was still bright) – thought that made it look like a faulty =P..

    • Jumbo

      Nah iNoob, They are meant to do that. All Audis do it as well. The idea behind it is to make the indicator on that side more visible.

      • iNoob

        thanks for pointing that out Jumbo =)

  • Leigh

    So the petrol engine is actually the Ford EcoBoost ? Don’t theft have an engine of their own?

    • TonyB

      Variants of the engine is shared across a number of cars including Ford Mondeos and Volvo S60/V60/XC60. Its supposed to be coming in the Ford Falcon. I’ve sampled it in several of the Volvos and I like it. Even though I’m also a diesel convert I like this engine. Of interest – if I’m reading the specs correct on the LR website – the diesel models only have a 55 or 58 litre fuel tank (our little C30 T5 has a bigger tank), while the petrol models is much larger at 70 litres. Not sure that is a misprint. If its correct, the petrol might have more range than the diesels.

  • James

    We bought a new Freelander a few years ago and the engine ceased about 4 weeks outside of warranty.
    We do not trust land rover and never will again.

    • John of Perth

      Has to be a nagging consideration – if it was built by any of the Germans I’d have one in a heartbeat – I liked the Freelander 2 – drove it etc and good ride etc but head opted for the Xtrail instead – reliability being my greatest concern especially 1,000 clicks from the city.

      Good luck however to LR – perhaps with the Indians in charge, they might improve – BMW or Ford could not do it. Is it because of where they are made – good design & engineering but indifferent quality control ?

      • ozedude

        I’m with you John (namesake) as different as they are couldn’t justify paying this much for a mini “Ford”.

        Despite the multitude of “testers” depicting this as an offroad vehicle, i wouldn’t take this off-road in a blind fit. The front overhang alone makes this laughable.

        I tried to like it but i just couldn’t.

        • mark

          “… it’s more capable over the rough stuff than the current Freelander. This is thanks to its higher ground clearance, shorter front and rear overhangs and lower kerbweight.” Autocar

          If you think a car like this (or an X1, Q3 etc etc etc) is designed primarily as an off-road car THEN I suppose you have a point.

          But as designed – is it fit for purpose? Absolutely.

          As regards reliability…..

          “Land Rover has not exactly been a byword for reliability in the past. However, the Evoque is built at the old Jaguar X-Type factory in Halewood, which did earn a golden reputation” 5FWD

          My Jag is an X-Type – 4.5 yrs old and solid as teak.

          So – who knows – maybe the days of questionable quality are on the reverse of the Mercedes curve?

          • Thrillhouse

            So YOU’RE the guy that bought the X-Type. Thanks for stopping by.

    • mark

      We had 3 Volvos, 2 Hondas, 5 BMW, 3 Mercedes, 2 Vauxhalls and a Land Rover Discovery.

      Fully serviced through the main Dealers as part of our Company Car arrangement.
      Over 3 years – no problems with the Discovery – AT ALL.

      Two Mercedes required new Gearboxes and all three had terrible issues with their emu.
      Two of the BMW’s had serious engine issues – one finally had the engine replaced. Rear suspension links seemed to be another major problem with BMWs. One of them (5 series) ate tyres every few thousand miles – turned out there was a problem with one of the many electronics managing traction etc.

      The electrics in one of the Hondas gave out – required the whole dash removed.
      The two Vauxhalls were stolen – regularly.

      The Volvos were nearly fault free – except for a willingness to blow bulbs regularly – they were continuously having the brake/reversing/indicator and headlight bulbs replaced.

      I have had my first Jaguar for 4 years now – fault free from new. My brother in Law bought a 6 yr old Jaguar S-type for half the money my nieces fiance bought a same aged 330 diesel BMW. Both one previous owner – both fsh. Jaguar – fault free – BMW so many problems he’s vowed to never buy one again.

      Every manufacturer has ups and downs in quality (Toyota’s issues in the US come to mind) – to write off one manufacturer because of a problem is a bit stupid. I never have bought a new car without checking for extendable warranties – AND I always look up what major issues the model has had – before I buy I get the dealer to agree to extend the Warranty to make sure those things are covered.

      It’s a Sad fact that the Western World wants “quality” products as cheap as possible. Therefore so much of what we buy is built by little better than slave labour working 12 hour shifts in the far east.
      That goes for sub components of cars as much as anything else.

  • Barneyridge

    Alborz, cheers it is a great car. Test drove last week and extremely happy with the choice. The other thing with the options is the for some options you are made to get a pack or something else, for example to get the rear camera you have to get front parking aid.

    Problem is the wait now, place my order in Sept and likely delivery is Feb/Mar

    • James

      Just make sure you have extended new car quality warranty

      like Allianz.

  • Marcus

    I checked out both coupe & 5 dr at the Melbourne motor show and was impressed by the cabin presentation, mech’ spec, and overall design, however the rear visibility in both was terrible. The Evoque seems to be the worst of many recent designs that sacrifices the safety aspect of good rear vision for absolute styling purity. While a rear camera is useful it doest help at all in situations such as changing lanes in traffic where you need a good over shoulder view in addition to mirrors. Just as well there is a stack of active safety devices for when you manage to cause an accident, too bad for the other road users though!

    • mark

      Have you ever driven a Van? Truck? Or Towed something? Put too much gear in the back or had the rear seats full of large people?

      Rear visibility through a rear screen is overrated – if it wasn’t all big rigs would have a hole through the rear container right to the back! No Ferrari would be road legal – or lambo or Audi R8 etc

      Good Mirrors however are essential. And if you are worried about parking – get sensors and cameras.

      Nit picking is all well and good – but really? Rear visibility?

      • Douglas9305

        I also worry about rear visibility in vehicles. I agree, when towing my van I don’t have great rear visibility – but it doesn’t make me feel safer. Great visibility leads to increased awareness – it is a REAL issue.

  • Biker

    If you take a TD4 Pure @ $53 895 and add the following:
    Tech Pack $4500
    Clearview pack $1700
    Auto gearbox $2480
    Panoramic roof $1000
    Navigation $3400
    Cost = $66 975
    add GST = $73 672

    Even without adding anything, the base model will not cost you anything under $60 000 not including on-roads & dealer delivery.

    Then again, beauty always comes at a price 😉

    • Matty B

      Those prices all include GST.

  • Barneyridge

    Biker, the stamp duty, rego and on roads are approx $6k on top of that

  • Jacob

    I am one of the few who DONT like its looks.

    Range Rover Sport? Yes please.

    A 4WD that looks like an elephant sat on its roof? No thanks.

    • AW

      Same here – I’m not a fan after seeing a few on the road. And I doubt any of these will leave the showroom at their RRP. Look on Carsales, there are already 4 that are over $100k – the highest being $116k!

      Used Range Rover Sport – absolutely now that there are some for less than basic starting price of this thing.

      I’m a fan of Land Rover, but not this thing. I could think of other cars I’d buy if I needed an SUV – Q5 or X3 or RR Sport (even a Freelander over an Evoque) otherwise a nice 5 Series Wagon will do the job nicely.

  • Mark

    This an the GT-R account for about 70% of the reviews coming out of CA

  • idiotic drivers are on rise

    The placement of the navigation screen is a bit weird as one has to look down which is not sensible because the focus should be on the road.

    • http://www.caradvice.com.au/ Alborz Fallah

      The placement of the screen is a little on the low side however the current road or sat nav instructions are also clearly displayed in the centre instrument cluster which is just a glance away.

      • idiotic drivers are on rise

        Thanks for clarifying that !

  • G

    Cool – it’s good to see the ladies now have a choice between the golf GTI and this

  • G

    Sportage? Lolololololo

  • G

    I had to read it again… Kia Sportage – lolololololololo – can you do my wife’s hair next week?

  • Barneyridge

    Take nothing away from the sportage, I think it is now the second best looking suv. Just like many car CEO’s have said there biggest threat in the coming years is Hyundai MC. Well worth taking yourself to a dealer and have a look at their products, many would be surprised

  • Barneyridge

    Take nothing away from the sportage, I think it is now the second best looking suv. Just like many car CEO’s have said there biggest threat in the coming years is Hyundai MC. Well worth taking yourself to a dealer and have a look at their products, many would be surprised.

  • Golfschwein

    It would be my first choice in the class. Just beautiful!

  • Leigh

    Still can’t beat the Territory as it is very good everything. Having driven many of the new Soft roadera recently I just can’t go past the new Territory for the overall package. It really does make me wonder how Ford can make a car as great as this on such a small budget. It is miles ahead of junk like the Captiva and as good if not better overall than cars worth twice as much.

    • manda

      Talk about seeing things through blue oval glasses – good at everything?! Terrible fuel consumption from its old engine, bland styling that’s been copied from other makers and a cheap looking, poor quality interior. It may be around a bit longer, but this thing will disappear like its fugly old sister the Falcododo. Time to stop flogging a dead horse.

      • Igomi Watabi

        I’ve always thought the territory was bland looking, so I’m with you, manda. I’ve never understoof it’s appeal over a Falcon wagon (RIP).

        • Igomi Watabi

          “Understood”, before I get drucified for my poor typing

          • Igomi Watabi

            haha, I can’t win

    • Scott

      I laughed so hard I nearly fell off my chair.

  • ianm

    The pre -orders sum it up…its a WINNER with LOOKS..bring it on,can,t wait for 12 months down the track,with normal Rangee market values at approx 40% drop,it suddenly looks like a GREAT surf wagon.

    • Thrillhouse

      Not really. Surf wagons tend to keep going for years longer than they probably should. No chance of that happening with a Rangie.

  • ohyea

    another compact suv.. wow

    people want to have exciting things

  • Leigh

    Manda you obviously haven’t even seen one if you think it that. You probably think a Great Wall or a Captiva are good. Why don’t you actually go look at one and even drive then if you know anything about cars at all, which from your anti Ford comments you don’t, you will see and feel how good it is, like all of the experts do.

    • manda

      Wow Leigh – are you one of the “experts” with your amazing assumptions?? I have in fact had a little experience with this vehicle, as I have one as a company car and travel in excess 40,000kms annually. Sure it has some really good characteristics, but fuel economy is appalling. And the development of rattles and flimsy switch gear prove quality is not what it should be

  • http://www.serenaus.com.au Huw

    Dear Writer,
    I’ll have you know that there are a lot of “the few” out here in driver land who like and desire TWO door coupe style cars with hatch backs.

    Frankly it seems pointless having four doors on most cars when MOST only contain one person, maybe two. Not everyone is breading like rabbits these days.

    Not to mention that most famillies have to vehicles. One for each partner in the marriage. Need I go on with the obvious.

    We NEED MORE coupes (two doors + hatch back)in this country at all levels.
    (keep your dozen kids to yourself)

  • Liam

    The Evoque made my shortlist along with the Golf R. It sounds weird but the comparison makes sense to me.

    The Evoque gives me more room and off-road, the Golf R gives me performance and track days. This is how I saw it. Brand cache isn’t important to me.

    Test drove both;
    SD4 impressed but you need options to get the full effect so $75k on road. Golf R with options was $57k on road.

    Married in my 30’s with just a dog, I don’t really need the Evoque’s room and I’m not sure if I’d use the off-road. Plus a $18k difference and my decision was made for the Golf R.

    If I had a bit more money or kids, I would have chosen the Evoque.

  • STP

    Awesome looks and great performance (Si4)… but it doesn’t come cheap.

  • Leigh

    Yeah manda sure u have one They haven’t been out long enough to do 40000 klms !!!

    • Igomi Watabi

      seriously? I mean SERIOUSLY?

  • Damien

    I’m also one of the people that placed and order with deposit back before they arrived based largely on what I saw at the Motorshow.

    Having driven both the petrol and the diesel cars last week (and very happily confirming my order once I was finished) I have to say the diesel is the better engine for mine. I know everyone will have their own preference but for me it was a great engine with plenty of power, was smooth and quiet but most of all it was just super consistent.

    The petrol at its best was just brilliant, but get it at the wrong rev range in the wrong gear like when coming out of a slow corner and it could just bog down and go nowhere. For spirited driving its great but how many of us do that all day every day. I found the performance was just a bit hit and miss.

    To drive around town the SD4 a much better experience and the difference in between the two at their best was pretty minimal really. And I’m a V8 driver from way back so its not like I don’t get the performance thing.

  • Ant

    They dont come cheaply. Priced a 4 door pure on wend $66K A bit expensive?

  • M

    Visited the local LR/Jag deal to see one yesterday, the main thing that struck me is how solid these lines are now, there was an XJ on the floor next to the Evoque with an XF next to a Defender. It is quite amazing how far JLR has moved in the last 10years when the latest RR was introduced with the help of BMW then Ford. The Evoque was brilliant to look at, the dealer then told me about the next three all new models being released by JLR, their huge sales for the XJ in China etc. Sir W Lyons will be resting more easily again…

  • HaplessPossum

    Can someone tell me if this would be a better buy than a Volvo XC60?

    • M

      XC60 is larger in the rear seat and the boot area – I believe the XC60 would be a more practical proposition – the RR is more responsive to drive and arguably more capable on ltd off road work. We have an XC70 in our work fleet – it has been far less reliable than the RRSport we also have – in fact the Sport has been so far – faultless.

      • TonyB

        As “M” says – they really are different classes of vehicles. The Evoque is a compact SUV (competitors the X1 and the coming Q3) while the XC60 is a mid-sized SUV (competitors Q5, X3 and FL2).

        • Scott

          Not having a go at you Tony, but isn’t the Evoque bigger than an Audi Q5? I’ve driven the Q5 (almost bought one) and I’m test driving the Evoque tomorrow. I did pop my head in one (Evoque) last week, and it seemed like the cabin was a lot more spacious than a Q5.
          We’re trading up from an Audi A4 and I know the Q5 sits on the same chassis.

  • HJP

    I have SUVs in general but this one is an exception for me. Superb styling and it really stands out in traffic.

    • HJP

      Whoops wrong spelling. I meant that I hate SUVs in general but this one is an exception for me.

  • Andrew Juma

    I like the front, but the rear not so much. Would rather buy a 2 year old Range Sport though.

    • Jerrycan

      Styling apart, there is literally a tonne of difference between these two vehicles.

  • Wp

    I’ve always prefered the design of the sorento over the sportage.. The front of the sportage is just too busy and the rear of the sorento, especially the lights are amazing!

  • A-Train

    for me, this is the best looking automobile on the road today.

  • Heath

    watch as they sell squillions !

    what a beautiful car

  • Flabby Chap

    For $80k I’d get a Landcruiser. 3 years later sell it for $70k.

    • NICK

      Im with u mate

  • NICK

    Looks like a pile of poo range rover make bad cars so do lamborghini

  • Scott Kelley

    Great review, made me go and buy one!’

  • barters

    I’m interested, but for that price I’d want some more size.

    When you start talking 85K, I’m instantly thinking a 3 litre diesel X3. The 3.0D BMW engine is in my opinion the pinnacle at the moment. Great efficiency and awesome performance.

  • smithers01

    Beautiful car . . . could you get two seats added in the back to make a ‘7 seater’?

  • Brad

    Really have to wonder about the petrol over the diesel theme in reviews of this car, driven V8’s all my life and never considered buying a diesel until now. Fully intended to buy the turbo petrol. It constantlys surges looking for the right gear in the auto, its fizzy, lacking composure and a pain in the neck around town. Nothing resembling the smooth, unfussed linear power delivery of the SD4. One minute its leaping forward the next its bogged down going nowhere.
    Having driven both if I had to buy the petrol or nothing then nothing it would be.

  • Flabby Chap

    The best Range Rover Evoques are the 2WD models.

  • Sarah

    I’m not the typical person that is interested in the range rover evoque, I’m a single 23 year old female and I absolutely love the 5 door variant, I’ve been admiring the evoque on the landrover website for about 2 months now and now that it has come out I have only seen one out on the streets which is disapointing. The one thing turning me off is the price which I know is typical for range rover’s, just means I need to start saving :)

  • Scott

    Well I test drove both the petrol Si4 and diesel Sd4 the other day, I have to say I’m a little bit disappointed. A couple of people have noted how the petrol engine is a bit jerky through the rev ranges and I agree. It also tends to die in corners and take a moment to pick up speed again. The diesel is the smoother engine, but it’s still slow off the mark initially – like all diesels. I also did find the tiny back window more distracting than i thought I would.

    The si4 petrol in Prestige is $84100 onroad – the SD4 diesel in Prestige is $83500 (in NSW) For me, just adding Satnav, Panoramic sunroof and a reversing camera, pushed the car to over $90k (oh, and to buy the reversing camera, you HAVE to buy front sensors too – bumps it to about $1300 as a cost option) Roof rails and cross bars are also not included; another $1300 (approx)

    Just on the Satnav; I got lost on my test drive (believe it or not) so I thought this was a perfect chance to try the navigation. I put in the dealers address and waited for the route to calculate. It did, but once the Satnav started, the music suddenly came off and on, then some satnav, then the DVD playing a movie! The audio kind of jerked around between the three things, and the satnav never did guide me back, i ended up finding the dealership after a few wrong turns down side streets.

    From the looks of the vehicle, I had my heart set on buying one. After driving it, I’ve decided to go with an Audi Q5 – an SUV that drives and feels like a car on the road. I know the drivability wouldn’t be a big issue to everyone, but if you have to have a family SUV (like we do) I at least want something I enjoy driving! The Q5 is the only SUV that’s been a pleasure to drive for me. (and includes the roof rails/cross bars as standard)

    Im honestly not trying to bash the Evoque – I love it for what it is. But the two things that turned me off the most were the overall drivability and the expensive cost options. (the audio issue did worry me too) I know the Q5 options are far from cheap, but since they’ve been out for a few years, I can at least source a second-hand one that has lots of options built-in for my budget (the low $80s)

    Just my 0.02c



  • Diego Compass

    Great car, went to see one in the showroom yesterday. Still have to take it for a drive though.
    Only thing keeping my dad from buying one is that we used to have two cabrio’s about 4 months ago.. Mine is already gone and so would his if he buys the Evoque.
    So it’s a battle between the Volvo c70 and the Evoque. I’d go for the latter without even thinking about it, but unfortunately it’s my dad’s choice. Another problem is the long delivery date, being July 2012 already..

  • Mark

    I had my Evoque now for a few months and the interior quality is atrocious.  It does look great but everything is loose and there are many rattles.  The stereo produces quality sound which is handy as it is required to drown out the rattles from the poorly designed and.or assembled vehicle.  Land Rover have been less than helpful in identfying and rectifying these defects.

  • Bowl

    Where can I download hi-def photos?

Range Rover Evoque Specs

Car Details
Body Type
New Price
Private Sale
$44,990 - $51,130
Dealer Retail
$44,030 - $52,360
Dealer Trade
$34,600 - $40,900
Engine Specifications
Engine Type
Engine Size
Max. Torque
420Nm @  1750rpm
Max. Power
110kW @  4000rpm
Pwr:Wgt Ratio
Bore & Stroke
Compression Ratio
Valve Gear
Drivetrain Specifications
Drive Type
Final Drive Ratio
Fuel Specifications
Fuel Type
Fuel Tank Capacity
Fuel Consumption (Combined)
5.7L / 100km
Weight & Measurement
Kerb Weight
Gross Vehicle Weight
Not Provided
Ground Clearance
Towing Capacity
Brake:1800  Unbrake:750
Steering & Suspension
Steering Type
Turning Circle
Front Rim Size
Rear Rim Size
Front Tyres
235/55 R19
Rear Tyres
235/55 R19
Wheel Base
Front Track
Rear Track
Front Brakes
Rear Brakes
Front Suspension
MacPherson strut, Coil Spring, Gas damper, Anti roll bar
Rear Suspension
MacPherson strut, Coil Spring, Gas damper, Anti roll bar
Standard Features
Control & Handling
Traction Control System
Trip Computer
Sound System with 11 Speakers, Premium Sound System
Rear Spoiler, Xenon Headlights
Power Windows
Side Airbags
Optional Features
Reversing Camera, Satellite Navigation
Service Interval
12 months /  15,000 kms
36 months /  100,000 kms
VIN Plate Location
Rear Lower Engine Compartment
Country of Origin
United Kingdom