test drove Evouge today

:hysterically_laughi Is there proof of that??

kieronf said:

begs the question what will the next Range Rover will look like

Click to expand...

A lot like the Evoque sadly. Same machine gun bunker windows and roofline slanting steeply down to the back. Apparently this is the new visual vocabulary for the RR. Just do a search for L405. Then look at the apparent surge in orders for the last of the current shape L322s. People are planning to buy these and hold on to them as the "last" RR.

*hangs head and sighs while a single tear trickles down*

The only thing they have done wrong is call it by the wrong name, personally I don't like the look, but they have aimed it at a specific market, it price is relevant its looks are relevant ,
In my opinion it should of been named in the region of a freelander sport or EVO or something like that , if they had of called it that and pitched it at the price and capabilities it's got then it would be easier for enthusiasts to accept it in the range , they are probably quite capable of light off road work but to be fair how many people use any thing newer than a p38(in the range rover name) for any thing more than light work?

newt888 said:

The only thing they have done wrong is call it by the wrong name, personally I don't like the look, but they have aimed it at a specific market, it price is relevant its looks are relevant ,
In my opinion it should of been named in the region of a freelander sport or EVO or something like that , if they had of called it that and pitched it at the price and capabilities it's got then it would be easier for enthusiasts to accept it in the range , they are probably quite capable of light off road work but to be fair how many people use any thing newer than a p38(in the range rover name) for any thing more than light work?

Click to expand...

When it brke down on the test drive the sales man said " it should not brake down because it has all FREELANDER mechanicals and they dont brake down ".....make of that what you will but the point is that if it has FREELANDER mechanicals why is it called a RANGE ROVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!

362bkr said:

When it brke down on the test drive the sales man said " it should not brake down because it has all FREELANDER mechanicals and they dont brake down ".....make of that what you will but the point is that if it has FREELANDER mechanicals why is it called a RANGE ROVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

So it's only a Freelander in a new frock at a no doubt inflated price

:hysterically_laughi lol says it all

So are you guys saying Land Rover shouldn't have made the Evoque? No doubt you tutted at the Freelander II? Are you saying Land Rover should only make the rufty tufty Defender 'cos it's got real off road abilities and the rest of the range is pants?

The current demand for "soft roaders" is high, look at how well the Freelander I sold and how many Freelander IIs are about, and selling strong still. I have a late Freelander II TD4 and a P38 V8. I don't take either off road, so am I commiting a crime? They're both very good when the weather is crap, when there is snow on the roads the council won't clear. I lile the commanding driving position of a larger than average car, and enjoy the huge internal space of the P38, all good reasons for owning them. I didn't buy either so I could take them to a 4x4 playground or Greenlaning, so are they being wasted?

Ever since Land Rover realised there was a "posh" market when they dressed up the Range Rover classic, they have exploited it. They created a demand for a prestigious 4x4 and the public lapped it up. I am probably part of the market as I own a P38, I could have bought a tatty Discovery (I did own a Disco II TD5), same space, same engine, but less appeal, and I think many of us who own a P38 know what I'm talking about!

I like the Evoque and I can clearly see where Land Rover are going, they used the Range Rover name to add prestige. A baby Range Rover has been promised for a few years, now it's here. It wasn't the Range Rover Sport, and now there is a clearer line up of a Land Rover Range and a Range Rover range, something Land Rover siad they were going to do a few years ago.

Chutney Ferret.

Alan C said:

So are you guys saying Land Rover shouldn't have made the Evoque?

Click to expand...

No ya fick Bogey.. they is saying it shouldn't be called a Rangey.. cos they don't want their shiny (but crap) tinboxes associated with the Evoque. Always thought Rangey owners were stuck up gits now I know that once again I was right!!

Let's face it, how many new Range Rover or for that matter, Land Rover products actually go off road in their lifetime? It's not until they get much further down their life that owners start venturing although, admitedly, the Freelander 1 is a rare site on off road sites and that might be down to the fact that it falls into the catagory of a lot of 'Off Roaders' don't like them for varying reasons and those people who aren't into Land Rovers/Off Roader who buy them don't have an inkling to try them any further off road than up and down a kerb.
I can't honestly see the L322/L320, Sport, Disco 3/4 being used in earnest with their off road abilities.
Might I also mention that the Range Rover Sport had all the Discovery underpinnings when it wa created but no one pointed and said, why is that called a Range Rover, it should be a Land Rover because it shares some of those parts and the original Discovery used Range Rover Clasic underpinnings so it has worked both ways.
Land Rover have moved away from their origins of producing workman vehicles to producing luxury and prestige vehicles (originally that was ust the one Range Rover model bu now Range Rover is a brand, not a model!) that just happen to be in the mould off what we view as off road vehicles, they produce modern technological advances to still allow them to do their thing in the mud should one ever get stuck trying to get to the local hunt (what, what!) but I'll be honest, if I want to go off roading I prefer big levers making things go 'KACHUNK' than pressing a button and hoping that what ever electronics are doing their job to prevent me from getting stuck. However, that's not to say I wouldn't want a new Range Rover or Land Rover product, because I would, I just happen to realise that I'll use my Series IIa V8 if I want to go green laning or off roading but I'd rather drive to Scotland in a Range Rover or any other new model from their or Land Rovers stables for that matter, if it was free!
And, as one final thing, surely with the way the demonstrator Evoque breaking down on the test drive it shows it really does have Land Rover heritage in it?
Andy.

What the Evoke will have, like the Freelander, is terrific traction, yes there's not enough ground clearance to do much proper offroading, but put proper tyres on the things and both cars will beat any other LR product in low-traction situations, i.e. icy roads and wet grass slopes. In such situations you want relatively low kerb-weight, open-diffs (so you are not compromising your steering) and clever traction control moving torque to the tyre(s) with most grip.

I think the 3 door looks hideous - the 5 door passable. I'd much rather have a Freelander.

StuckAgainSteve said:

What the Evoke will have, like the Freelander, is terrific traction, yes there's not enough ground clearance to do much proper offroading, but put proper tyres on the things and both cars will beat any other LR product in low-traction situations, i.e. icy roads and wet grass slopes. In such situations you want relatively low kerb-weight, open-diffs (so you are not compromising your steering) and clever traction control moving torque to the tyre(s) with most grip.

I think the 3 door looks hideous - the 5 door passable. I'd much rather have a Freelander.

Click to expand...

Keep up FFS the puma defenders have TC. and antistall technology. great for failed hillstarts.

redhand said:

Keep up FFS the puma defenders have TC. and antistall technology. great for failed hillstarts.

Click to expand...

Perhaps one day they'll have hydraulic drive (no diff casings to drag in the snow or mud) also endowing them with fully independent suspension. The Defender is benefiting from technology developed for the "gaylander" - the point is the Defender is great at what it does well. The Freelander is a better road car. I don't see why people have such a downer on it. All this model snobbery is just ridiculous. Land Rover would have gone bust years ago without the Range Rover then Freelander sales. Without those, the Discovery wouldn't exist today. I'd rather see a Evoke with a Range Rover badge then see Land Rover go under altogether. Every farmer I know drives a Subaru anyway!

StuckAgainSteve said:

What the Evoke will have, like the Freelander, is terrific traction, yes there's not enough ground clearance to do much proper offroading, but put proper tyres on the things and both cars will beat any other LR product in low-traction situations, i.e. icy roads and wet grass slopes. In such situations you want relatively low kerb-weight, open-diffs (so you are not compromising your steering) and clever traction control moving torque to the tyre(s) with most grip.

I think the 3 door looks hideous - the 5 door passable. I'd much rather have a Freelander.

Click to expand...

Funny that, on a LR test day with LR drivers, the Gaylander totaly failed the hill climb, the Defender went up no problem but the exhaust fell off and the L322 also went up without difficulty.
If the Gaylander is like the Xtrail, it uses a VCU instead of a centre diff,that means the front wheels have to lose traction and spin before the VCU transfers drive to the rear wheels. Not ideal I would say, the whole idea of 4 wheel drive is to spread the torque across all 4 wheels more or less evenly, so reducing the risk of wheelspin in the first place

Datatek said:

Funny that, on a LR test day with LR drivers, the Gaylander totaly failed the hill climb, the Defender went up no problem but the exhaust fell off and the L322 also went up without difficulty.
If the Gaylander is like the Xtrail, it uses a VCU instead of a centre diff,that means the front wheels have to lose traction and spin before the VCU transfers drive to the rear wheels. Not ideal I would say, the whole idea of 4 wheel drive is to spread the torque across all 4 wheels more or less evenly, so reducing the risk of wheelspin in the first place

Click to expand...

Tell this Freelander owner he lacks traction, going up a slope that defeats many a Disco and Defender alike:

Freelander - Subida complicada.wmv - YouTube

StuckAgainSteve said:

Tell this Freelander owner he lacks traction, going up a slope that defeats many a Disco and Defender alike:

Freelander - Subida complicada.wmv - YouTube

Click to expand...

Even though there's a few failed attempts to get up that hill I'd say they were more likely due to bad driving than the vehicles ability because from the onboard camera footage that hill doesn't look very challenging at all.

barmatt said:

Even though there's a few failed attempts to get up that hill I'd say they were more likely due to bad driving than the vehicles ability because from the onboard camera footage that hill doesn't look very challenging at all.

Click to expand...

Onboard footage is notorious for making hills look tamer, that said, if the “Gay lander” was so crap and the Defender so great surely the driver shouldn't have been able to make that much of a difference? And surely a slope that isn't challenging wouldn't stop a poorly driven Defender? This Freelander sounds like an auto which would help an inexperienced driver, it's all about keeping the thing moving. The vid shows that if ground-clearance isn't the issue the Freelander can hold its own. Must have had half decent tyres on though...

StuckAgainSteve said:

Onboard footage is notorious for making hills look tamer, that said, if the “Gay lander” was so crap and the Defender so great surely the driver shouldn't have been able to make that much of a difference? And surely a slope that isn't challenging wouldn't stop a poorly driven Defender? This Freelander sounds like an auto which would help an inexperienced driver, it's all about keeping the thing moving. The vid shows that if ground-clearance isn't the issue the Freelander can hold its own. Must have had half decent tyres on though...

Click to expand...

I agree in part but an auto freebie with TC is a lot more forgiving on rough ground than a defender/disco with hi/lo box and diff lock if the driver doesn't know how to use them :doh: but I do agree that tyre choice on that terrain could make all the difference................ I've got great off road tyres that have made me look like a hero in the past .

Lol ahh come on guys what does it mater if you dont like it dont buy it but the fact remains land rover as a company could not survive without the revenue these cars provide they are not marketed to climb huge hills they are designed for school runs in snow and carboot sales camping and the like the defender and disco are for the hard work the RR sport if you have the dosh

I test drove the Evoque the other day too ... and I have to say, I was surprised by how much I liked it.

Yes, the look takes getting used to and headroom at the back isn't great and the rear view is limited but in terms of ground clearance, I was told it has the same clearance as the Disco 4 (and it wasn't as easy to climb into as the Freelander).

For what I would use it most days (i.e. what the wife would use it for) it would be a great and very comfortable car to drive ... I do not think it is aimed at the greenlaners (but then how many new Range's ever go off road) but if one takes the fuel consumption into account and the driving position I think it is good value. You don't need to get the full spec version - a lot of the gizmos are never going to be used anyway - and much as people may say they hate it, it does certainly draw attention when you are on the road.

I love my P38 and the space it offers but I do struggle in multi story car parks and when driving around London's narrow streets - I think the Evoque does very well in nailing its target market - and it is surprisingly roomy on the inside and very nice to drive.

There - I've said it. :behindsofa: