Was MPG a major factor when choosing your RRE?

Having reached the 3000 mile mark, I seem I be averaging only 28.6 mpg. Fair enough it's urban driving, but I thought in this present day, manufacturers would have caught on to give real world MPG. I am now lead to believe that all manufacturers over exegerate the figures to boost their sales. Realistically, a 10% off the figures stated would suffice. I now consider the urban MPG stated to be my real world rural MPG. In other words, I will never reach the stated combined or stated rural mpg in my car.
So, just a poll to see if MPG was a major factor in your decision to buy the Evoque compared to, lets say the Audi Q3 or the BMW X1.
What other factors made your decision for the Evoque?

I think this has been done to Death with the Real World MPG Thread!!

Yes. A significant factor, but I seem to only average 21 mpg.

No. Sold a full size truck.

(09-03-2012 12:14am)THEMACS Wrote:  I think this has been done to Death with the Real World MPG Thread!!

This is a slightly different thread. It's asking for opinion and factors in choosing the Evoque. MPG included. The MPG was a large factor into my decision for buying the Evoque. What was yours?

I reset Trip B yesterday and have been driving with my normal heavy-ish foot on windy roads and my mpg has risen from the 'from collection' figure of 29ish to 31. I urge u all to reset one of your trips to see what figures that starts giving you.

MPG was a SIGNIFICANT factor in my decision!

I had a Kuga (superb car over the 3 years i owned it) which was averaging around 36-38 MPG and when I saw that the Evoque was supposed to get nearer 50 it placed in nicely in my "affordability" bracket. This meant that even if it did a fair few less MPG than stated, the money I saved on fuel would counter-balance the additional purchase price of the Evoque compared to a new top-end Kuga.

I am aware that there are some quite wealthy members on this forum, but I can assure you that I am not one of them. The Evoque was a massive decision for me and a spent a lot of time working out the estimated running costs, insurance, MPG, depreciation etc.....to justify to myself that I could afford to purchase and run the car.

So, when I am getting 33-35 MPG after 4000 miles, it is not only disappointing, but when you take the rise in fuel into account it soon starts to chip away.

Having said that, I love car and I am confident that it will hold it's value very well, so I may make the money back when it comes to selling anyway, so maybe happy days after all in the long run.

Not part of my decision at all to be honest.

Couldn't afford a Range Rover Sport and always loved the RRS.

When the LRX concept was announced a couple of years ago... I knew this was the first Range Rover I would be getting and it just looks fantastic and what pushed me to get it a bit more was the pleasant drive plus the technology and options as well.

(09-03-2012 12:14am)THEMACS Wrote:  I think this has been done to Death with the Real World MPG Thread!!

sorry of that bores you!! However for some it was THE major factor, and the fact that we have been misold is a major concern.
Nice if you can afford a fuel tanker to follow you round, but some of us can't.

---

It was THE factor in my case. Long distance commute, and not by choice but at the behest of HM Forces, so had to lose a stunningly magnificent RRS to get better mileage. It is better, but only just.

Other : CO2 emissions are really low in comparison to other SUVs, especially the 2WD, what benefits in the company tax.
and besides that: it looks stunning !!