+- babyRR.com - The Range Rover Evoque Forum (https://babyrr.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Range Rover Evoque Discussions (/Forum-Range-Rover-Evoque-Discussions)
+--- Forum: General (/Forum-General)
+--- Thread: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR (/Thread-2x-Evoque-v-2x-FFRR)
2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - Spiderman - 13-10-2011 02:01am
Yesterday I visited Stratstone Perth and conducted an exercise as I was in 2 minds to get a new FFRR to replace my current one, I also has an itch to scratch regarding the Si4 Petrol Evoque as its performance should be on par with my 4.2 s/c FFRR, but after 2 accompanied prior test drives I remained unconvinced.....until today that was, read on!
I arranged to meet Tim from this forum at Stratstone's and naturally we turned up in our own Dynamic SD4s, wonderful cars as we have both extensively & exhaustively reported on, after a hello and a look round each others cars, his Coupe & my 5 Door, I was given the keys to their coupe Si4 demonstrator and off we went on the usual test route.
Now my reporting style is never going to get a job on Top Gear, well 'some say' not as a writer anyway, but, my previous findings differed somewhat this time, there was very little lag on take off or foot down, it dropped 2&3 gears seamlessly, it was to say a very memorable test drive indeed, the Si4 engine is a pocket rocket in the Evoque, it's not as growly or guttural sounding as I'd like, but, then again it has at least 2 litres & 2 cylinders less than any car Ive owned in the last 10 years, but, for a 2 litre turbo it is very impressive and I can only think it was better 3rd time round as almost 1,000 miles has perhaps loosened up the engine a tad; Tim was suitably impressed.
The amazing thing is that after one month of driving my current SD4 diesel, and being perfectly happy with this engine, I have now changed my next 2 Evoque orders, for my wife and I, to the Si4 engine as a result of today's 3rd test drive, as I really felt and enjoyed the instant surge and I'll have much, more fun in the Si4 longer term for absolute certainty and in my real world use it will only mean circa 6mpg less; as despite using a fairly leaden boot today I still returned an impressive 23mpg overall and in my SD4 I'm only achieving 28mpg, but I suspect this is down to the fact nearly all of my journeys are cross country or short ones!
When we came back I took out their FFRR 4.4 litre TDv8 as it was & note I said was, sighted on my radar and straight away it wallowed and pitched in a way I had forgotten all RRs do, it was a very unsettled drive after an Evoque and it just reinstated to me, and to Tim, what a truly fantastic handling car the Evoque really is and given the choice both of us would choose the Evoque over this FFRR, despite it feeling quite regal and special to sit in, but it wasn't special enough as we both feel the RRE is today's Best of Breed LR product and if you recall the fact that we have owned & driven just about every LR product between us going back some 30 years this is said with a degree of experience and relevance, so 1 nil to the Evoque then!
Unfortunately Tim couldn't join me for the test drive in the next FFRR, the 5 litre Supercharged, the Daddy if you like! It's supersonic compared to my 4.2 litre Supercharged, it's still a special place to be in, it handles better than the 4.4 TDV8 above, it sounds amazing, but and this should be a bigger but, I will take the RRE over another FFRR every time now as it's a proper game changer, as a drivers car it's better than any LR product out there, I'm not saying it's better off road as that would be foolish, it just doesn't have the ground clearance and the lack of a low range rules this out & if you need 7 seats then its not going to fulfil your brief, but in all other respects, from the looks, the drive, through to the internal fit and finish the Evoque has moved the game on and I suspect that elements of the Evoque will be carried into the new FFRR and it will be all the better for it.
In conclusion, all I want to say is Stratstone's thanks for the test drives and usual excellent hospitality and to LR a huge well done, what a cracking car the Evoque truly is & if LR can sort out it's current supply issues, restore goodwill promptly and then also deliver the customer service levels that I know they can deliver on, then for sure, they will have a world beater on their hands as without question the Evoque is a fantastic, fantastic product and I for one am already looking forward to receiving our next two Evoques as unfortunately I am not going to replace my FFRR with another as there is simply no need for this after my back to back driving experiences today!
Evoque 2, FFRR 0
Tim, over to you for your added comments!
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - vinda - 13-10-2011 03:07am
Wow. Can't believe that. Makes me chuffed to have an evoque on my drive even more. But now really want the petrol engine. My initial order was the si4 but changed to sd4 after advice from here and economy figures. No real regrets but very curious on the si4 performance/ride etc.
Maybe I'll wait for the rumoured 300+ bhp version!
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - Spiderman - 13-10-2011 03:19am
The ride is same, although turn in and response from the front end is quicker as the Si4 engine is circa 40kg lighter than the SD4.
Dont get me wrong, I still am very happy with my current SD4, it's just I know I'll have my next Evoque for longer and I'll enjoy the Si4 even more so it makes sense for me to go this route & if they ever take out a high performance model then I'll be one of the 1st on the list and I'll enjoy that one even more for sure!
As a drivers driver I can honestly say that these are amazingly capable & highly enjoyable cars...
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - mark_n - 13-10-2011 04:13am
I expect the power delivery of the Si4 is quite different and the engine needs to be rev'd quite hard both to get through the turbo lag and to keep the power up. Interesting the gap in real world consumption is not that great though would depend on driving conditions and style. With your stig-like pretentions, I expect you were caning it quite hard.
What is the change to Si4 going to do to your delivery times?
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - Evoqess - 13-10-2011 06:32am
Oh my, we really have to keep these details to ourselves or no other vehicles will be sold in 2012!!
Fantastic review Spiderman. Your opinion of the Si4 just reinforces my decision
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - alibeau - 13-10-2011 08:04am
(13-10-2011 06:32am)Evoqess Wrote: Oh my, we really have to keep these details to ourselves or no other vehicles will be sold in 2012!!
Fantastic review Spiderman. Your opinion of the Si4 just reinforces my decision
+1
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - kevoque - 13-10-2011 08:20am
+1 Good to hear glad I didn't ask the question yesterday to change to diesel as was going to see if it would speed up delivery
Thanks for the feedback!
Kev
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - GibEvoque - 13-10-2011 08:52am
(13-10-2011 04:13am)mark_n Wrote: I expect the power delivery of the Si4 is quite different and the engine needs to be rev'd quite hard both to get through the turbo lag and to keep the power up. Interesting the gap in real world consumption is not that great though would depend on driving conditions and style. With your stig-like pretentions, I expect you were caning it quite hard.
What is the change to Si4 going to do to your delivery times?
I think nowadays turbo technology has advanced so much that turbo lag is barely noticeable, the torque curves are now much lower down the rev range, than during the 80's & 90s. I am more convinced of this as virtually all manufacturers have gone down this route, even BMW's M division.
I have experience of this with a 1.4 turbo Fiat bravo which has 190bhp, and the response is instantaneous. i also have drive several VAG products with the TSI engine, and it often feels the same as the VR6 engines, just lack the nice rumble.
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - mark_n - 13-10-2011 08:55am
I'm quite sure the existing FFRR appears long in the tooth now and we all know that there's a new one coming which looks like an Evoque on steroids. Porsche had shown the way how to build a high performance, great handling, full size SUV (even the styling is better in the second generation).
The Evoque is going to have its work cut out once the Cajun appears though with so much carried over from the next gen Q5, it's likely to look more like a badge engineering exercise than have the freshness of the Evoque.
RE: 2x Evoque v 2x FFRR - XFullFatTim - 13-10-2011 10:05am
What impressed me even more in the Evoque v FFRR contest was the ride/ handling set-up of the Evoque - it walked all over the FFRR. I have been driving Range Rovers with air suspension since 2003 and yesterday Spiderman took me over a good selection of good dual carriageway, A roads and country back roads north of Perth. The FFRR is feather pillow, soft, wafty and very rolly-polly on bends. The Evoque was orthopaedic feather pillow, firm enough to remain flat in the corners but also soft enough that we didn't feel road imperfections that we most certainly did feel in the FFRR, both cars interestingly ride on the same 20" rubber. The skill of JLR's Mike Cross in tuning the Evoque's suspension is remarkable. IIRC FFRR has a more advanced version of the RRS's electro-hydraulic Dynamic Response but without the Dynamic setting on the TR, but Magneride is miles better at controlling the cars movements when pressing on. Interestingly there wasn't a noticeable change in the ride in the Si when the TR was set to Dynamic mode, it was more the changes to the steering and the gearbox that were evident.
SD Evoque v Si Evoque - If my driving were more town driving and short run (<5-6miles at a time ) style then I would not hesitate to change my SD4 for an Si4 - there is no worry about regenerating the DPF and the point and squirt ability is fantastic, BUT if does have to be "set-up" to blast. The Si4 is pretty limp if it drops out of the power band and really if you want to play boy racers you HAVE to drive in S mode of the auto box and use the paddles to keep the revs up. One thing that Spiderman found was that if you do venture toward the redline in S mode and using paddles, the gearbox WILL shift up automatically, which I have had happen in my Sd4 but he had not. Also impressive was when Spiderman set the car up to go and then nailed it the only way you knew it had dropped several gears was the engine note, and the very rapidly approaching next corner, up/ down changes were very very smooth and very fast. The Evoque also has a steering delicacy that will be a revelation to those who are used to driving Land Rovers and Range Rovers.
Roll on the beefed up Evoque. There is a mention of it in this week's Autocar - that there is at least one in existence and it is being used by one of the senior engineers at LR for evaluation. The magazine mentions that with no sports car heritage JLR are having a problem giving it a name ................... LR no need, you have a badge already just call it the Evoque HST, make it available in Ford's Cosworth Blue with white wheels and a white contrast roof , no extra body bits, charge £48k for it and you will again have a supply problem!
So Evoque Si4 is no 2nd class Evoque compared to the SD4, it is the Evoque for those who enjoy driving fast on twisty back roads and don't mind paying a small fuel cost penalty. A manual gearbox is probably unnecessary as the gear changes are so good in the auto, however it would be nice to have the option for those who like their sporty cars to have a stir the cogs gear box.
Evoque v FFRR - no contest, the Evoque's build and finish are up there with the FFRR. OK space is an issue in the Evoque and I doubt I would want to drive 500 miles in a day in a Si4 due to the ever present engine hum that is far more muted in the SD4 and FFRR. Two things both of us picked up within seconds of getting into the TDv8 FFRR was how much more comfortable the Dynamic and Dynamic Plus seats are compared to the FFRR's - there is more under thigh support and the front seat swabs were longer in the Evoque - now I'm 5ft 7" and Spider well over 6ft tall and both of us noticed it immediately. The Evoque's seats have all their bolstering in the right places to stop you sliding around too. While the FFRR seats were soft and cosseting they are so wide you slide around all over the place as the car rolls round corners. I miss the arm rests from the FFRR and they were the only things stopping us from sliding out of the chairs in rapid cornering but I can live without them now I have adjusted the way I sit in the Evoque. There are four areas where the FFRR has the Evoque well and truly beaten though - the "regal" experience of being in it, the view out is still the best in the world through the acres of glass, the ability to carry and haul loads and the off road ability.
If LR can make the next generation FFRR as off road capable as the current one and retain the handling and comfort of the Evoque then they will have a very expensive winner on their hands. It also means the relevance of the RRS comes into question as it is reported to going to be a 7 seater - competing directly with Disco4. Doesn't make sense