+- babyRR.com - The Range Rover Evoque Forum (https://babyrr.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Regional Discussions (/Forum-Regional-Discussions)
+--- Forum: Australia & New Zealand (/Forum-Australia-New-Zealand)
+--- Thread: Range Rover Evoque Si4 vs. BMW X3 20i vs. Audi Q5 2.0TFSI Test Wheels Mag April 2012 (/Thread-Range-Rover-Evoque-Si4-vs-BMW-X3-20i-vs-Audi-Q5-2-0TFSI-Test-Wheels-Mag-April-2012)
Pages: 1 2
RE: Range Rover Evoque Si4 vs. BMW X3 20i vs. Audi Q5 2.0TFSI Test Wheels Mag April 2012 - Bomberboy - 22-03-2012 07:35am
Looks like everyone's petrified to get sued for copyright infringements here...
Final outcome;
RR Evoque 7.5/10
Pro's; Concept car looks, plush interior, fun to drive.
Con's; High price, tricky rear seat access, expensive options.
BMW X3 7/10
Pro's; Spacious interior, ride/handling balance for SUV, economy potential.
Con's; Performance, below par fitments, expensive options
Audi Q5 6.5/10
Pro's; Interior quality, excellent seats, gets better as speed rises
Con's; Disappointing low speed dynamics, thirst, gearbox can be jerkey
They tested a $115,000 Evoque vs $78,000 Q5 and $67,000 X3
Last paragraph reads something like "Evoque's visual appearance supported by dynamics that complement design stands alone in segment, expense - Yes, but for many appearance overrules objectivity."
Interesting points in the article;
- They recroded a 0-100km time of 7.0 secs while noting that this was a 1780kg Evoque where without some of the options it could be as light as 1640kg (You would've thought RR would have been quoting a 6.5-6.8 sec time, but in fact quote 7seconds plus)
- Estimated 3 year resale of 63.5%
- Speed indicated at 100km/h was 99
RE: Range Rover Evoque Si4 vs. BMW X3 20i vs. Audi Q5 2.0TFSI Test Wheels Mag April 2012 - chiggy - 22-03-2012 07:43am
this is what I don't understand.
"They tested a $115,000 Evoque vs $78,000 Q5 and $67,000 X3"
half the options available on the evoque aren't available on the other two... how can you compare the two? or is the comparison based purely on the size of the car...
At least if the specs were somewhat similar... like what harm was there in using a Pure Si4? at least it helps to compare cost as well because people who don't know much about the evoque would just think it makes no sense to pay that much for an evoque and won't even look into it cause they will be blown away by the price of the car... although thats positive news for us... the fewer the better.
RE: Range Rover Evoque Si4 vs. BMW X3 20i vs. Audi Q5 2.0TFSI Test Wheels Mag April 2012 - TiTan - 22-03-2012 07:55am
(22-03-2012 07:43am)chiggy Wrote: At least if the specs were somewhat similar... like what harm was there in using a Pure Si4?
I think they were testing petrols against each other, and the article says something along the lines of "the only petrol available for test was..."
So it may be that LR made a decision to only provide a top spec model. Maybe LR knew they were never going to win a price comparison battle so they decided to provide a loaded up model and win on everything else. Just a theory.
RE: Range Rover Evoque Si4 vs. BMW X3 20i vs. Audi Q5 2.0TFSI Test Wheels Mag April 2012 - sethor - 22-03-2012 08:22am
It was one of their press/demo cars, Wheels would have been restricted on choice. They also wanted a 5 door but had to use the coupe.
RE: Range Rover Evoque Si4 vs. BMW X3 20i vs. Audi Q5 2.0TFSI Test Wheels Mag April 2012 - TiTan - 22-03-2012 10:48pm
I think they also described it as the Audi TT of SUV's, which I found amusing given I am selling my TT to buy an Evoque
