[sali]

I will go for Evoque. It looks better than X3!

[X35D For Me]

Originally Posted by sali

I will go for Evoque. It looks better than X3!

Then you'll be making a big mistake. The X3 is a far better driving experience than the Evoque - believe me I've bought the X3 and driven the Evoque over a number of miles. As for the Evoque loking better than the X3, I think opinion is fairly didvided over that one and once you start to see more Evoques about, you'll begin to realise it's too small for it's huge wheels, looks like it's been crushed from above and has wheel arches at the front that are ridiculously overly large.

[Fatal Flash]

I mean I'm not surprised to see all the criticism since we're all on a BMW forum, but as a previous BMW owner, who now turned to the RRS, I'm pretty sure our 328xi wagon will be swapped with an Evoque in the coming months...

The design and creativity of the Evoque is absolutely beautiful. Moreover, if you purchase the luxury package interior [I know BMW has this too], the finish simply does not compare. The dependability factor of LR has long been extinct, with the newest models being extremely reliable.

Yes, absolutely, the X3 is roomier, and probably drives better [I do need to test drive both], but how do the two fair regarding (say both are optioned vehicles) with the suspension/offroad capabilities when you consider the liquid-magnetic suspension LR introduced with this car?

While pricing my RRS and an X5 at the same value, the interior of my vehicle is like a Bentley compared to the X5...I'm also a huge fan of the suspension capabilities and exterior styling which unfortunately made me sway away from my beloved brand, but that's LR's stronghold anyway.

I'm not shooting down the X3, but bringing up other factors. For my mother though, conversation between an X3 and an Evoque right now is currently a topic of debate...good to see this thread. It'll make me head back to the dealer to check out how the new X3 drives.

The old one was bleh...

[nonagon]

Originally Posted by Fatal Flash

I mean I'm not surprised to see all the criticism since we're all on a BMW forum, but as a previous BMW owner, who now turned to the RRS, I'm pretty sure our 328xi wagon will be swapped with an Evoque in the coming months...

The design and creativity of the Evoque is absolutely beautiful. Moreover, if you purchase the luxury package interior [I know BMW has this too], the finish simply does not compare. The dependability factor of LR has long been extinct, with the newest models being extremely reliable.

Yes, absolutely, the X3 is roomier, and probably drives better [I do need to test drive both], but how do the two fair regarding (say both are optioned vehicles) with the suspension/offroad capabilities when you consider the liquid-magnetic suspension LR introduced with this car?

While pricing my RRS and an X5 at the same value, the interior of my vehicle is like a Bentley compared to the X5...I'm also a huge fan of the suspension capabilities and exterior styling which unfortunately made me sway away from my beloved brand, but that's LR's stronghold anyway.

I'm not shooting down the X3, but bringing up other factors. For my mother though, conversation between an X3 and an Evoque right now is currently a topic of debate...good to see this thread. It'll make me head back to the dealer to check out how the new X3 drives.

The old one was bleh...

It's a matter of taste. For me, the Evoque looks cool and has an interesting interior but is too small to be completely practical - it's actually even shorter than an X1. The coupe seems especially impractical. It's likely the RR has better offroading capability but on-road performance is nowhere near the X3 35i.

Regarding suspension, I think the suspension in the X3 is excellent. I have an M Sport with DHP (which has deletes sport suspension) but with DHP set to Sport it feels tight and sporty - damped and solid without too much body roll but not crash-bang hard. In normal mode, it is a bit soft but good. I think for most people the X3 would be an easier vehicle to live with. However, I agree the Evoque is a very compelling package and I bet you'd be happy with it.

[Want the thrill]

Just saw the Consumer reports current magazine and they have the RR Evoque at the bottom of the list for reliability. First place for reliability was the Acura RDX followed by the new X3. I'm glad I went with the X3.

[Filski]

I have driven both and there is no doubt that the X3 is better behaved on bitumen. But get off that and especially sand, mud or anything with bumps and the evoque will go places the x3 cannot.

Performance wise, you can really only compare the 20d, any of the 35s are speed machines with superior acceleration, but offroad levels things again here.

Interior finishes on the x3 are bland unless you have $$$$ to spend on options. Here the evoque is much better value with full leather, pano roof and camera (+other options) costing roughly the same as a 20d with leatherette.

Space is about the same front and back with a smaller boot a drawback. Indicatively I should still fit a mtb on rails in the back, though I do ride a small frame.

I'm close to deciding on the evoque but haven't completely made up my mind. Superior offroad ability is the only thing that swayed me, if it weren't important it'd have been the x3.

[Ural]

Evoque looks cool, and there is something missing in X3's design that I am still trying to figure out. Anyway, the equivalent of the X3 in LR range to compare with should be the Freelander, not the Evoque.

[n55x3]

After experiencing both vehicles inside and out I've gotta say the RRE interior is really nice, definitely a step above the X3 it feels in quality but I'd still pick the X3 any day. Mainly because the X3 is so much better handling on road and to be honest I think the X3 would be even more capable off-road than the RR (looking forward to seeing some off-road only comparisons in the future). The X3 actually has better approach and departure angles (X3 = 26*, 23* versus RRE = 25*, 22*) and same fording depth.

To me the RR just seems like an on road only mall cruiser, and a slow one at that. I think the N55 X3 hits 60 mph almost 2 seconds quicker than the RRE all while the X3 sees similar MPG numbers or maybe even better. I've read a few RRE reviews that are showing sub 20 mpg avg during their several day tests.

The other odd thing is the RRE is probably more in line size wise with the X1 but the price tag can reach $55k pretty quick. You can get a nicely optioned X3 for much less than that.

[johnbmw6]

Originally Posted by sali

I will go for Evoque. It looks better than X3!

Be prepared for "reliability issues" , good luck.

[krnnerdboy]

Curious as to what people are referring to when they superior Offroad capability? I'm still undecided and I understand that the evoque has Offroad capable traction controls, but seriously is anyone here thinking they're going to take their car to an Offroad park or even an ohv area?

Granted this was the reason why I sold my x5, but I do take my suv in the dunes, haul my dirtbikes, and take in on some 3 star trails, meaning low range and lockers are a must

[sfax]

Originally Posted by Fatal Flash

I mean I'm not surprised to see all the criticism since we're all on a BMW forum, but as a previous BMW owner, who now turned to the RRS, I'm pretty sure our 328xi wagon will be swapped with an Evoque in the coming months...

The design and creativity of the Evoque is absolutely beautiful. Moreover, if you purchase the luxury package interior [I know BMW has this too], the finish simply does not compare. The dependability factor of LR has long been extinct, with the newest models being extremely reliable.

Yes, absolutely, the X3 is roomier, and probably drives better [I do need to test drive both], but how do the two fair regarding (say both are optioned vehicles) with the suspension/offroad capabilities when you consider the liquid-magnetic suspension LR introduced with this car?

While pricing my RRS and an X5 at the same value, the interior of my vehicle is like a Bentley compared to the X5...I'm also a huge fan of the suspension capabilities and exterior styling which unfortunately made me sway away from my beloved brand, but that's LR's stronghold anyway.

I'm not shooting down the X3, but bringing up other factors. For my mother though, conversation between an X3 and an Evoque right now is currently a topic of debate...good to see this thread. It'll make me head back to the dealer to check out how the new X3 drives.

The old one was bleh...

Thanks for posting. It's good to see opinions of people who haven't gone for BMW and it's an interesting read but this statement doesn't make any sense at all to me

The dependability factor of LR has long been extinct, with the newest models being extremely reliable.

I quite like the look of the Evoque but it simply isn't comparable to the X3 because of its size as I understand it. X1 maybe. Maybe I need to get in one to check. I also don't like the back at all - it looks ridiculous frankly

Proper Range Rovers like the Vogue are awesome and if money was no object....

Not convinced on RRS or the Evoque personally

[bluedevils]

Originally Posted by sfax

it's an interesting read but this statement doesn't make any sense at all to me

The evoque is not made in the traditional land rover plant. It is made at the jaguar plant in halewood england. The new jags received awards from JD powers for their reliability. The LR2's (made at halewood) reliability jumped up considerably from the freelander it replaced. Reliability is unknown with the evoque. It has the potential to be good and should not be judged on previous range rover/land rovers made at other factories.

[sfax]

Originally Posted by bluedevils

The evoque is not made in the traditional land rover plant. It is made at the jaguar plant in halewood england. The new jags received awards from JD powers for their reliability. The LR2's (made at halewood) reliability jumped up considerably from the freelander it replaced. Reliability is unknown with the evoque. It has the potential to be good and should not be judged on previous range rover/land rovers made at other factories.

OK, good to know, I didn't know this to be fair and I keep an open mind as I'm new to BMW and have heard a lot about how unreliable LRs are. I'm still not sure on how the newest models can be "extremely reliable" though. Reliable as in when they are new they don't go wrong? Or are we talking 5+ years?

[Fatal Flash]

Originally Posted by sfax

OK, good to know, I didn't know this to be fair and I keep an open mind as I'm new to BMW and have heard a lot about how unreliable LRs are. I'm still not sure on how the newest models can be "extremely reliable" though. Reliable as in when they are new they don't go wrong? Or are we talking 5+ years?

See my response below In my opinion (everyone is different), reliability is up to 70k, 4-5 years. At that point, all different things can begin to fail depending on the certain type of vehicle. It's a roll of the die.

Originally Posted by bluedevils

The evoque is not made in the traditional land rover plant. It is made at the jaguar plant in halewood england. The new jags received awards from JD powers for their reliability. The LR2's (made at halewood) reliability jumped up considerably from the freelander it replaced. Reliability is unknown with the evoque. It has the potential to be good and should not be judged on previous range rover/land rovers made at other factories.

Correct. And now with TATA Motors as the parent company (after previously dumping FORD), it should be a completely different face. LR has faced their generalized reputation of "unreliable" in their pre-2006/2007 models. As a personal owner of a 2007 RRS to 70k, I had not ONE failure during my ownership from 25k-70k miles. I had a glitch with my airbag sensor which I repaired myself, and it was a FORD relay. I went in ONCE for an air compressor. [$600 fix under warantee] (My obsession with access/offroad mode could have been a great catalyst to its failure.) It's a great surprise to hear that LR is making record sales and having an amazing past few months. The Evoque was sold out for 4-5 months+ wait around Thanksgiving! I see lots of potential for this company in the coming years. The Evoque is a complete stray from their regular brand lineup. With these new exotic designs for the Discovery etc., who knows what's in the works.

Originally Posted by sfax

Thanks for posting. It's good to see opinions of people who haven't gone for BMW and it's an interesting read but this statement doesn't make any sense at all to me

I quite like the look of the Evoque but it simply isn't comparable to the X3 because of its size as I understand it. X1 maybe. Maybe I need to get in one to check. I also don't like the back at all - it looks ridiculous frankly

Proper Range Rovers like the Vogue are awesome and if money was no object....

Not convinced on RRS or the Evoque personally

My statement reflected that I was going to give the X3 another shot after seeing this thread...I'm obsessed with the design of the Evoque. It's simply unparalleled to anything on the road right now. It's all a matter of personal preference

Enjoy your X3! I was hot on the 20D M Sport two years ago...the car never came to this day. If it was out back in 2010 I'd probably be an X3 owner right now. It's a bit ludicrous that they produce them here and SHIP them to Europe and don't let us purchase them. I'm a huge fan of BMW and it's my #1 brand which I vouch for day in / day out. In my personal opinion though, I just don't see how exterior/interior of the X3 is really THAT much better as others state. The "driving" experience of the vehicle is the only thing I see keeping it afloat. [ From an aggressive LR fan torn in between ]

[Nahoa]

Styling-wise for me I find LR and BMW hard to compare. Even without the new direction of the Evoque styling, the LR and BMW approaches to aesthetics seemed always to be aiming at different targets. In my view, both good, but heading in different enough directions that it's difficult to answer "which is better". Reliability is a whole different debate and for me it's hard to differentiate what is the legacy of an earned reputation and what is current reality. The drive, the BMW approach to driver focus, and some of the practical bits I think would keep me with the X3 if I were picking again today, but the pop of the Evoque appearance will continue to grab my attention.

Separate, but kind of related note -- finally spent a little time in a Q5. Not for me. Kept forcing myself to try to see what was good about it, but it just didn't work for me. I like the exterior okay, but the interior is so far off what I like I don't even care how it drives.

[Le Chef]

The Evoque is subjectively better looking than the X3 particularly when you see them next to each other. The X3 looks overweight and needs a nose job.

However the X3 drives better and with the 35 is significantly faster. The Evoque feels painfully slow and if you rev the engine you have the sound of a food processor filled with nails - not pretty.

The interior of the Evoque is much classier - a lot more leather where the BMW has plastic. the Evoque's plastic also appears to be better quality too. Space is a win for the X3 by quite some distance.

As to reliability who knows but on recent showing you would certainly not bet on the X3 winning a JD Power reliability award. If the Evoque proves to be reliable it will have a huge positive halo effect on the whole of the JLR model range.

[Filski]

I've tried to remain unbiased in my comments. I'd agree with all the above. As somebody who is looking at nothing more than the 20d there is no trade off in power, but there is in road behaviour.

One thing I do not like about the current x3 and the x1 for that matter is the 'hatch' or estate body form. Having looked at body shape across the market there is only a few styling cues that separate them. I think that is the success of the evoque - loathe or love it, it is different.

[LEDZEP]

Unless you're comparing a Honda to a Toyota, I don't put much value in CR reviews of vehicles. They are not looking at them for the elements that buyers are interested in. Nice to see your vehicle given a thumbs up, we all like that - but I don't think it means that much.

[MileHiGolfer]

Wow they even picked the 28i over the RRE?

The RRE does look pretty cool, but who in their right mind would pay that much money for such a slug? I understand having a model with a weenie engine for the people who just want the RR badge to poke around in, but why didn't they offer a model with some power to go along with the looks?

When shopping with my wife we thought the Q5 also looked nicer, but was nowhere even close to the X3 35i when it came to how they drive. (RRE wasn't out yet) The steering on the X3 was better, and the 35i engine is way better than anything else in the class. If they only had the 28i we might have ended up with the Audi. Too bad Audi doesn't offer their 3.0T in their Q5, then they would have a real competitor.

I applaud RR for pushing the design envelope, but next time give it some balls!

[JoeyO]

The Evoque has that "look at me" design, but I fail to see its functional advantage over other compact SUVs that are considerably cheaper. A base Q5 is $7k cheaper and is just as fast, has better gas mileage, and appears to have more rear storage room.

All show, no go?

[clivem2]

Originally Posted by JoeyO

The Evoque.......
......All show, no go?

I agree but would take it further. We can say there's personal preference about the styling of the Evoque but there's a certain something about style which classifies it as classy, safe or crass. It's not something that can be taught or written down as an equation (some elements can, eg golden ratio). The X3 has safe styling that won't offend or have people go wow. The Evoque is a mixture. The front is aggressive and the best angle. The side on the 3 door - the rear window looks tiny but maybe it's ok, on the 5 door it's wrong. The rear is a disaster, really messy and frankly very ugly.

We should applaud RR for trying to do something different but the styling exercise should not have made it into production.

You may say there are plenty of people buying them and that's true. They just don't have style and they won't look as smug as they do today when there's are lots around and everyone gets over their newness and sees the styling for what it is. The Evoque might as well have been styled by a footballer - lest we forget Victoria Beckham put her name to some to the interior design, ironically some of the best features.

So yes, all show and no go but the show part has very little style.

[OOOSQ]

Originally Posted by clivem2

I agree but would take it further. We can say there's personal preference about the styling of the Evoque but there's a certain something about style which classifies it as classy, safe or crass. It's not something that can be taught or written down as an equation (some elements can, eg golden ratio). The X3 has safe styling that won't offend or have people go wow. The Evoque is a mixture. The front is aggressive and the best angle. The side on the 3 door - the rear window looks tiny but maybe it's ok, on the 5 door it's wrong. The rear is a disaster, really messy and frankly very ugly.

We should applaud RR for trying to do something different but the styling exercise should not have made it into production.

You may say there are plenty of people buying them and that's true. They just don't have style and they won't look as smug as they do today when there's are lots around and everyone gets over their newness and sees the styling for what it is. The Evoque might as well have been styled by a footballer - lest we forget Vicotria Beckahm put her name to some to the interior design, ironically some of the best features.

So yes, all show and no go but the show part has very little style.

Totally agree with this. Good post.