Before the deluge of UK prices I thought I would share what I thought was some interesting information.
In this week’s Autocar they have their 50 greatest road tests of all time and there at number 9 is the original Range Rover from 1970. Here are some stats that I thought were interesting.
Original 1970 Range Rover Length 4420 width 1778 height 1778 and Wheel Base 2540 Av 14mpg 0-60 13.9 secs 1758Kg £2002
Evoque 2011 Range Rover Length 4365 width 1965 height 1635 and Wheel Base 2660 Av 44mpg 0-60 8.9 secs 1758Kg £??????
So not so much a Baby Range Rover as a modern update of the very Original!
Sounds like you are a real fan...
It really is a shame that the new Evoque is so wide. It's not much narrower than a FFRR/Disco4/RRS, which is going to leave me with a problem.
The FFRR was a pain to park in spaces as it was so wide. Something I hoped the smaller Evoque would change.
My wife refused to drive the FFRR as the width meant she couldn't get in a parking space and open the door and couldn't get down our counrty lanes without brushing the hedges as a car passed in the other direction.
It looks like for us the width, which is noticably more than many longer vehicles is going to render it unsuitable for us for practical reasons.
I have to say I am a bit dissapointed.
It's even short enough to fit in our garage, as long as you then climb out of the drivers door window dukes of hazzard stylee.
Believe or not the Freelander2 is wider than both the FFRR and the RRS.................. fatboy!
Fox I have the same problem regarding garages, garage is plenty wide enough for the cars once they are inside, but i cannot get them through the door, and due to the construction of the garage I cannot make the door wider either, the only way to get more width is to change the rather nice wooden up and over door I have now for one of those awful sectional GRP panel doors I replaced with the wooden one! The only Land Rover I have owned since 1996 that would fit through the doors no problem was the Freelander1 I owned
Tim, I just think LR/RR are missing out by making all the cars so wide.
I thought the Evoque was to fill a hole in the range where they have been getting bigger and bigger with each generation. But for general day to day use it's not much better if you actually need to put it in a car park and get the door open.
Our current vehicle is a sensible family sized car, nothing tiny. But a lot easier than the FFRR was I had to park.
The Evoque is only 14cm longer than our Skoda Yeti, but it's 17cm wider I believe.
Looks like we'll be keeping the current car for practical reasons...
...... another interesting fact .....the Evoque is the same height and width as a Roll Royce Phantom........ however its quite a bit shorter and approx £245,000 cheaper (before options). Who says the Evoque is overpriced. Bargain.
That's not that interesting.
Does anyone know the width without mirrors?
I've checked against our Mondeo and its only 15mm wider than that with mirrors our and folded?
Dave
I like the fact it is "wide" as it gives the feeling of greater space. The other benefit is that it will fit in my garage whereas my Landcruiser won't.
Ok, this might interest everyone but I came across these figures the other day which made me do a bit of a double take.
First was the total sales of Audi Q3 in 2011.... The first Q3's rolled off the production lines in June 2011.... so a little before the Evoque ...... according to Wikipedia.
Total sales of Audi Q3 in 2011 = 9,288 ..... worldwide!
With Evoque deliveries hitting approx 40,000+ (PhilSkill) by the end of the year ... that’s quite a margin the Evoque has opened up for a car it’s supposed to compete with.
The other figures from Audi that also surprised me were the Q5 vs A4 sales.
I always assumed the A4 was their “bread & butter” car as a result outsold all other models but with sales of 176,000 for the Q5 vs 204,000 for the A4 it shows the Q5 isn’t far behind.... which surprised me.
As the Audi Q5 sells in the same price space as the Evoque I suppose sales of 150 -200k pa could be possible.