PDA

View Full Version : Range Rover Introduces Evoque


blitzkrieg79
Jul 1, 2010, 03:53 PM
Hey Guys,

Just wanted to let you know that today, Range Rover introduced its new model named Evoque. There is nothing special about this car except that it freaking looks awesome and looks like a nice accessory to all of the Apple products :P Come to think of it, if Apple were to design a car, it would probably look something like Evoque. Anyway, nice job to Range Rover for actually having the balls to make the concept LRX into actual production vehicle with minimal changes.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/01/live-webcast-2011-land-rover-lrx-reveal-starts-now/

snberk103
Jul 1, 2010, 06:42 PM
Sorry, but I don't see it. I think its rather unattractive, and it certainly doesn't look like a Range Rover anymore. Even if you weren't familiar with the latest version, if you were familiar with the previous versions you could identify the newest model. This looks more like a Nissan.

Sorry ... but I'll pass.

blitzkrieg79
Jul 1, 2010, 07:20 PM
Sorry, but I don't see it. I think its rather unattractive, and it certainly doesn't look like a Range Rover anymore. Even if you weren't familiar with the latest version, if you were familiar with the previous versions you could identify the newest model. This looks more like a Nissan.

Sorry ... but I'll pass.

I guess everyone has a right to their own opinion but look a bit closer, clamshell design, floating roof line, blacked out pillars, nice squared off angles, to me all of it are classic Range Rover traits. I am actually glad they went all modern (revolutionary) instead of just another evolutionary design. This thing looks absolutely NOTHING like any Nissan. Nissan only wish to look this good.

skunk
Jul 1, 2010, 07:29 PM
Idiotic. The RR Sport was bad enough, but this is ridiculous.
RIP Range Rover.

Peterkro
Jul 2, 2010, 04:53 AM
Idiotic. The RR Sport was bad enough, but this is ridiculous.
RIP Range Rover.

Spen King dies (developed RR ) and Victoria Beckham is appointed as design executive,RR is deader than a dead thing.

robbieduncan
Jul 2, 2010, 05:00 AM
The fact that they are willing to ship a 2WD version tells you that this should never have had Land Rover (or Range Rover) badges.

Queso
Jul 2, 2010, 07:54 AM
Only one question from me. Is it narrower than a traditional Range Rover, and therefore much easier to pass when you're filtering through traffic on a motorbike?

dXTC
Jul 2, 2010, 08:19 AM
..RR is deader than a dead thing.

Why am I imagining John Cleese saying this, in that fake French accent from Holy Grail?

Now, about the vehicle itself. Reminds me of the Kia Soul, without the "chopped off" look at the back.
However, 2 doors + hatchback on a "luxury" crossover? How are passengers expected to get in and out of the rear seats comfortably? I don't much like to use the word, but it's appropriate here: Fail.

aloofman
Jul 2, 2010, 09:41 AM
The mechanics will appreciate the change of scenery while repairing it.

blitzkrieg79
Jul 2, 2010, 09:59 AM
Man, I wasn't expecting so much hate from a Mac forum. Anyway, Apple switched to Intel, Porsche started building SUVs, its called progress/risky business decisions in hope of larger profit. Whatever Land Rover/Range Rover was currently (so called classic designs) doing, wasn't really working as company had constant financial trouble, so they had to try something drastically different and I love it. Car will be offered with a 2WD AND 4WD systems, it will be offered in 2 door AND 4 door configurations. Car still has classis Range Rover styling cues, just a more modern interpretation, this car was definitely designed with younger/city audience in mind. What I would like to see is Bowler getting its hands on one of these models, would be cool. Bowler Nemesis is probably the best freaking street legal SUV with real off-road credentials. http://www.bowler-offroad.com/Nem_2009/Nemesis_intro.htm

Melrose
Jul 2, 2010, 10:41 AM
Ugly. It looks like any number of other cheesy crossover "SUVs" on the market right now.

The only one that actually looks that different is that MB one, but even then it looks more like a minivan with four doors.

robbieduncan
Jul 2, 2010, 10:46 AM
Bowler Nemesis is probably the best freaking street legal SUV with real off-road credentials. http://www.bowler-offroad.com/Nem_2009/Nemesis_intro.htm

I doubt Bowler will even touch something like this. They build serious off-road racers. Not serious shopping trolleys for the taste deprived.

snberk103
Jul 2, 2010, 10:52 AM
Man, I wasn't expecting so much hate from a Mac forum. Anyway, Apple switched to Intel, Porsche started building SUVs, its called progress/risky business decisions in hope of larger profit. ...

That's because, imho, those changes made things better. The new RR strikes me as a last gasp effort to make a change, any change. Putting this much money into a new SUV model is also shortsighted, as SUVs are fast becoming obsolete. If RR had wanted something "revolutionary" they should have rolled out a 4WD small car. Not a car that appears to be a gas guzzler (it doesn't really matter how fuel efficient it is, it looks like a gaz gussler).

But, time will tell, eh?

dXTC
Jul 2, 2010, 11:18 AM
Whatever Land Rover/Range Rover was currently (so called classic designs) doing, wasn't really working as company had constant financial trouble, so they had to try something drastically different and I love it. Car will be offered with a 2WD AND 4WD systems, it will be offered in 2 door AND 4 door configurations. Car still has classis Range Rover styling cues, just a more modern interpretation, this car was definitely designed with younger/city audience in mind.

It's nice to know that there will be a 4-door configuration, which will make more sense for the stated younger/city audience. I thus take back my Fail.

Only time will tell whether those target buyers will be able to ignore RR's past reputation. It's not hideous, and definitely has more edge than the company's older designs, but RR may be a little behind the market with this one.

blitzkrieg79
Jul 2, 2010, 11:34 AM
That's because, imho, those changes made things better. The new RR strikes me as a last gasp effort to make a change, any change. Putting this much money into a new SUV model is also shortsighted, as SUVs are fast becoming obsolete. If RR had wanted something "revolutionary" they should have rolled out a 4WD small car. Not a car that appears to be a gas guzzler (it doesn't really matter how fuel efficient it is, it looks like a gaz gussler).

But, time will tell, eh?

The changes were for better BUT no one really knew that at the time when switch happened. I remember perfectly fine when Apple announced the switch from PowerPC to Intel, most of Apple fan boys were not too thrilled about it. Sure that over time the change was for the better but at the time of the switch a lot of people were questioning Apples decision.

Anyway, going back to RR, their 2010 sales are up but for the most part company with its classical and being afraid to be risky mentality wasn't really making money for the good past couple of years. It has been in BMWs hands, then Fords, now TATAs, it can not survive on its own. One thing I gotta hand down to Land Rover for Evoque is that designers had some balls and the bean counters didn't strip the LRX concept into unrecognizable production model. This is probably the first time where a production vehicle stayed very true to its concept.

Lord Blackadder
Jul 2, 2010, 02:20 PM
Oh no, a soft-roader! :(

Whatever happened to the trucks Land Rover supposedly makes?

I hate egg-shaped soft-roaders. Just wait till Ferrari jumps on this execrable bandwagon. That will be the day my love for automobiles truly dies...

skunk
Jul 2, 2010, 03:16 PM
It is basically an utterly pointless posemobile for twats. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing.

OllyW
Jul 2, 2010, 03:25 PM
It is basically an utterly pointless posemobile for twats.

At least the England football squad are back home in time for the launch. :D

snberk103
Jul 2, 2010, 04:46 PM
The changes were for better BUT no one really knew that at the time when switch happened. I remember perfectly fine when Apple announced the switch from PowerPC to Intel, most of Apple fan boys were not too thrilled about it. Sure that over time the change was for the better but at the time of the switch a lot of people were questioning Apples decision.
...


However, I am not an RR fanboy .... just someone who could be their target demographic. When Apple switched processors I thought the move was interesting, and could see the logic to it. I was not an Apple fanboy back then either.

Companies tend to discount most of the noise that comes out of the fanboy press. Not enough of them to make a difference to sales (and they'll buy in anycase). Its the disinterested customer that matters (especially when your market share is dropping and for the most part everybody in your target demographic is driving something else Ask all of your non RR fan friends what they think. If the most of non-RR fans like it, then they may have a winner. If most of your non-RR fan friends don't like it.....

By the way - that was also one of the worst PR videos I've seen. After a minute of watching a stupid white box, I got disinterested and clicked through to the end. If you have RR stock, I would start selling short if that is the best that they can do. Really.

LazersGoPEWPEW
Jul 2, 2010, 04:48 PM
Let me know when they make a dependable vehicle that doesn't require ridiculously expensive parts to make repairs then I'll be interested. I think Range Rovers are very capable offroad vehicles but they just don't stay together very well.

I'll stay with my trusty XJ.

I like the way this one looks though. :D

Lord Blackadder
Jul 2, 2010, 06:49 PM
I've never been a fan of SUVs, but as long as they were essentially trucks with passenger space they still made sense for certain consumers. Now that the market is flooded with soft-roaders I think we've really reached a low-point. Why are carmakers filling the market with blobby, half-assed 4x4ish monstrosities that are crap both off the road and on it? And why on earth are people buying them? People complained that their trucks were too trucklike, so engineers made them more carlike - yet they are still fatter and wobblier than a car, and now no longer really a capable truck either.

Nowadays, there is very little most SUVs can do that can't be done better by a minivan/MPV, especially the AWD models. :rolleyes:

I'd love to fill a containership with Porshe Cayennes, BMW X5s, Nissan Muranos, This LR turd and other similar vehicles and use them to plug that damned hole in the Gulf of Mexico.

Sorry if I offend, but I'm massively opinionated about autos. ;) feel free to ignore.

flopticalcube
Jul 2, 2010, 06:53 PM
The world does not need another Chelsea tractor.

leomac08
Jul 2, 2010, 06:57 PM
Hmmm it looks like a BMW X6 but smaller....looks tank like...:D

I'm a huge SUV fan too

I drive a Toyota highlander which is a mixed of a crossover and SUV

Signal-11
Jul 3, 2010, 10:18 PM
Oh no, a soft-roader! :(

Whatever happened to the trucks Land Rover supposedly makes?

I hate egg-shaped soft-roaders. Just wait till Ferrari jumps on this execrable bandwagon. That will be the day my love for automobiles truly dies...

Land Rover still makes Defenders. Okay vehicles. Will get you where you gotta go. OTOH, it's a Land Rover, so it'll likely break down, so it's not going to be able to bring you back.

Mexbearpig
Jul 3, 2010, 11:05 PM
Come to think of it, if Apple were to design a car, it would probably look something like Evoque.

Pshh. Not sure if you watched the same video. It comes in white :rolleyes:.

fun173
Jul 5, 2010, 07:36 PM
Range rover designer " Yea, yea that looks good. Now lets get the hacksaw and do a roof chop"

Its pretty cool

There is only one car you can post on a mac forum and have no one dislike,

A BMW i think there nice but im not a BMW fanboi

mk1ap
Jul 10, 2010, 09:52 PM
I don't like it at all.

carlgo
Jul 11, 2010, 10:18 AM
Ok, I read the remarks and then looked at the photo/video. There is nothing good at all about this.

It looks like a cartoon car. They will probably use rodents to advertise it. It looks like one of those ruinous French designs that just about killed Alfa. Oooh, we're unconventional and zany...!

JediZenMaster
Jul 11, 2010, 02:12 PM
It looks like the bastard child of a renault and an hummer.

RawBert
Jul 11, 2010, 02:56 PM
Here in LA, any time I see a Range Rover on the road, the drivers NEVER use their blinker to change lanes... Ever! I cannot stand that.

BTW, it looks like the 2012 jeep grand cherokee.

Jaro65
Jul 11, 2010, 06:13 PM
Spen King dies (developed RR ) and Victoria Beckham is appointed as design executive,RR is deader than a dead thing.

Indeed. Having Victoria Beckham there was pretty silly. Nothing but an empty marketing in order to attract an audience for whom the vehicle was never intended for in the first place.

Signal-11
Jul 11, 2010, 07:25 PM
Indeed. Having Victoria Beckham there was pretty silly. Nothing but an empty marketing in order to attract an audience for whom the vehicle was never intended for in the first place.

Dude, what are you talking about?

This is exactly the market for which all Land Rovers other than the Defender have been intended for the past couple decades. It's LR's off-tarmac prowess is the marketing. No one who actually needs a capable, reliable vehicle takes Land Rovers seriously.

Toyota's 4WD offerings are superior to Land Rover's in any and every way that actually counts. This leaves only one market for these things - celebrities sold on the image.

djellison
Jul 11, 2010, 07:42 PM
Here in LA, any time I see a Range Rover on the road, the drivers NEVER use their blinker to change lanes... Ever!.

That's not unique to Range Rover drivers in LA. It's the norm. It's so bad I almost feel like I'm doing something rude or naughty when I use my blinkers on the freeway.

abijnk
Jul 12, 2010, 12:02 AM
That's because, imho, those changes made things better. The new RR strikes me as a last gasp effort to make a change, any change. Putting this much money into a new SUV model is also shortsighted, as SUVs are fast becoming obsolete. If RR had wanted something "revolutionary" they should have rolled out a 4WD small car. Not a car that appears to be a gas guzzler (it doesn't really matter how fuel efficient it is, it looks like a gaz gussler).

But, time will tell, eh?

This is more equivalent to Apple shipping windows PCs if you ask me...

mac88
Jul 12, 2010, 12:07 AM
The mechanics will appreciate the change of scenery while repairing it.

Agreed. My friend had a Range Rover and it was always in the shop for transmission problems. Mechanic told him that the brand as a whole is known for having faulty transmissions.

Jaro65
Jul 12, 2010, 06:07 PM
Dude, what are you talking about?

This is exactly the market for which all Land Rovers other than the Defender have been intended for the past couple decades. It's LR's off-tarmac prowess is the marketing. No one who actually needs a capable, reliable vehicle takes Land Rovers seriously.

Toyota's 4WD offerings are superior to Land Rover's in any and every way that actually counts. This leaves only one market for these things - celebrities sold on the image.

Well, I agree that that's what LR vehicles represent now. No doubt about that. But...that was not the original intent behind the development of these vehicles. That's all I'm saying.

Synchromesh
Jul 19, 2010, 11:33 AM
Agreed. My friend had a Range Rover and it was always in the shop for transmission problems. Mechanic told him that the brand as a whole is known for having faulty transmissions.

He should've told him that "brand a as a whole is known to be unreliable junk" nowadays. From what I hear many people complained about their RRs failing quite often. These guys used to be good at simple reliable off-roaders but not any more.

skunk
Jul 19, 2010, 12:16 PM
The one thing that hasn't gone on my Range Rover is the transmission. Funny, that. Perhaps it appreciates being used properly - for carrying a ton of building materials, going off road and towing large commercial vehicles.