+- babyRR.com - The Range Rover Evoque Forum (https://babyrr.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Range Rover Evoque Discussions (/Forum-Range-Rover-Evoque-Discussions)
+--- Forum: My Range Rover Evoque (/Forum-My-Range-Rover-Evoque)
+--- Thread: 2.0 vs 2.2 engine (/Thread-2-0-vs-2-2-engine)
2.0 vs 2.2 engine - yosser395 - 08-06-2016 10:02pm
5000 miles on my 2.0 Evoque now and I am still struggling to like this new engine. Fuel consumption is 44mpg which is only 2mpg more than my last 2.2 evoque. The engine is noticeably down on power especially on hills and is definitely noisy at higher RPM. Don't believe all that landrover say about this new engine being lighter.....they forget to mention that you have to carry 18 litres of adblue around with it which makes it a similar weight to the 2.2. My opinion is the 2.2 was a better engine....just a shame emissions legislation killed it off! Out of pocket also as the 2.2 would pay me 12p a mile vs 10p on the 2.0.
RE: 2.0 vs 2.2 engine - Steve D - 09-06-2016 07:42am
My only experience of the 2.0 engine was when I had a loan DS while mine was in for repair. In the DS I felt it was very underpowered and that was just with me and the wife in it. I remember thinking what it would have been like fully loaded and towing a caravan. We had it for 5 days and when we got our Evoque back it felt like we were driving a sports car!
RE: 2.0 vs 2.2 engine - XFullFatTim - 09-06-2016 09:32am
Regarding the extra weight of having to carry AdBlue - the 2016MY RRS also has an AdBlue tank but the weight of the vehicle is the same as before because LR has chosen to fit a smaller diesel tank................ Could you check that the Evoque hasn't had a similar reduction in fuel tank capacity to cater for the AdBlue tank.