Real world mpg

To all those who say stop moaning, you bought a Range Rover so put up with it.

No.

I won't.

It's supposed to do 49.6mpg combined, so it's reasonable to expect it to do so. it is one of the factors that led to this choice of car over say, any other £30-40k 'exec' car.

30% off the mark is not good enough.

Now then, constructively, does anyone have any evidence that landrover claimed that the car would achieve any particular mpg figure?

They will only claim their laboratory generated mpg figures as all manufacturers would. I normally expect 10-15% under the combined figure as a real world expectation. My ex BMW 635 3 litre diesel did 35mpg and was driven quite spirited. As previously mentioned 30% less is out of tolerance.

I expect the lab generated figures to be easily replicated. I can with any other car.

What i am looking for it evidence that LR have themselves claimed the car can do xx mpg.

Thanks gomark. I am really after reading your link. I will take at look at your other recommendation, although no doubt I will feel even more

I really think we Brits complain, but do not follow things through, with varying governments fully aware of this. Having said that, if protests are followed by the not so long ago riots, we would not want that either.

I have long thought that the Americans and French in particular do make their views fully heard and are instrumental in influencing political policies.

Sorry folks, off topic.

---

(01-01-2012 09:18pm)Dave_T Wrote:  To all those who say stop moaning, you bought a Range Rover so put up with it.

No.

I won't.

It's supposed to do 49.6mpg combined, so it's reasonable to expect it to do so. it is one of the factors that led to this choice of car over say, any other £30-40k 'exec' car.

30% off the mark is not good enough.

Hear hear.

My sticker says 18 city 28 hwy. These test are official from the government body responsible for such things here in the states and should be accurate. In my case they are accurate.
Click this link for our page.
MPG for Evoque

Does your government mandate accurate values be registered by the manufacturers?

Ingrn, are you stating your mpg in US gallons? That would mean that you are doing 24 mpg (imperial). Most si4 users seem to be getting what they were expecting...

When I bought my Freelander 2 it was marketted as the most fuel efficient Landrover ever produced, this was one reason I bought it but I was & remained very dissapointed with the consumptiom to the day I sold it.

They have marketted the Evoque as the most fuel efficient RangeRover ever but some of the figures I am reading here are a lot worse than the Freelander 2??

It's been very hard to do - but I've basically had to try and put the fuel economy of my Evoque out of my thoughts. Focussing on it simply diminishes the rather overwhelming strengths of the car - and moaning about it seems to fall upon the deaf ears of those who would think "well you bought a Range Rover for heaven's sake".
That diesel A3 I owned was my one attempt at economy, and it bored the daylights out of me - so here I am, smitten and using more crude. More than I've ever used!

I'm sorry for the dismayed souls out there. Please focus on the vehicle. The reality involves a Premium car, premium dealership network (sarcasm), premium fuel and servicing costs. *Sigh*.

(02-01-2012 02:08am)The Valeter Wrote:  When I bought my Freelander 2 it was marketted as the most fuel efficient Landrover ever produced, this was one reason I bought it but I was & remained very dissapointed with the consumptiom to the day I sold it.

They have marketted the Evoque as the most fuel efficient RangeRover ever but some of the figures I am reading here are a lot worse than the Freelander 2??

My guess for even poorer consumption than the Freelander 2 is that it feels a lot smaller, lighter and more nimble so drivers are probably putting their foot down a bit more and having more fun. I can't think of any other logical explanation.

(02-01-2012 02:28am)Evoqess Wrote:  It's been very hard to do - but I've basically had to try and put the fuel economy of my Evoque out of my thoughts. Focussing on it simply diminishes the rather overwhelming strengths of the car - and moaning about it seems to fall upon the deaf ears of those who would think "well you bought a Range Rover for heaven's sake".
That diesel A3 I owned was my one attempt at economy, and it bored the daylights out of me - so here I am, smitten and using more crude. More than I've ever used!

I'm sorry for the dismayed souls out there. Please focus on the vehicle. The reality involves a Premium car, premium dealership network (sarcasm), premium fuel and servicing costs. *Sigh*.

Yes, we hear you. but for some (I suspect many) the fuel consumption is a real issue, and the fact that you 'dismiss' it doesn't help. We also know that the car is great to drive, but not when you know the size of the resulting fuel bill.

---

As it happens, it would seem that Landrover have advertised these fuel consumption figures, as opposed to repeating the mandatory official test figures.

The April price list contains the figures as "Manufacturers estimated data" - accompanied by a disclaimer that they may not be representative.

The launch "Here + now" flyer provides consumption data with no disclaimers at all.