Thread: Can someone explain the model designations?

Originally Posted by rammypluge

I still dont really grasp the modern model designations. For example, the Evoque is considered a 'Range Rover', a premium model, yet it is derived from a Honda CRV, which is a pretty crappy thing.

In contrast, the new Disco 5 is considered mid tier, yet uses the platform from a genuine fully fledged purpose built Range Rover.

I cant help wondering if a V6 Disco 5 is going to have better NVH, performance, etc, than an Evoque?

I havent driven either, so maybe the proof is in the pudding?

Don't know where you read or heard that an Evoque is derived from a Honda CR-V. I think the Evoque was actually an all-new unibody on which the Discovery Sport is now based.

In essence, Land Rover is splitting it's product portfolio into three streams (I used to work for them): the utilitarian (new Defender when it appears), the premium/practical (anything badged as Land Rover e.g. Discovery and Discovery Sport) and the luxury (anything badged Range Rover).

Originally Posted by rammypluge

For example, the Evoque is considered a 'Range Rover', a premium model, yet it is derived from a Honda CRV, which is a pretty crappy thing.

The Evoque - a Range Rover is just a marketing thing - just as the L320 RRS is just a marketing thing as it is really a D3 not a RR.

The Evoque has nothing to do with the Honda CRV - you are getting confused with the Freelander 1 which was designed in the mid 90s when Honda had the controlling interest in Landrover. The original CRV and the original FL1 were supposed to be the same car with different bodies and engines etc and underneath there is alot in common from the design perspective - however Honda sold their interest in LR to BMW before the FL1 development was finished and the FL1 and CRV went their own way. The earlier FL1s stayed with its planned engines under Honda - UK L series diesel and K series petrol but once BMW took over the BMW TD4 went into the car.

There are some similarities between the first CRV and the first FL1 but not a lot in it.

The FL2 is different again as is the Evoque, though the Evoque has some commonality with the FL2 underneath.

Garry

Okay. I thought the FL1 was derived from the CRV, and the Evoque was derived from the FL1.

Still, the evoque has a steel monocoque and coil springs, versus the D5 alloy monocoque and airbags.

Does the evoque really feel more posh than the D5?

Sorry - I for one am still missing your point. D5 and Evoque are different cars aimed at different market sectors and road conditions.

Well, my point is that i am trying to work out what LR are on about. If, for example, a mid tier D5 beats an upper tier Evoque in most areas with regards to the normal measures of things, then what are they on about?

Range Rover used to mean luxury and the King of off road. The Evoque is seemingly sporty, and clearly not off road oriented.

Perhaps the only significant basis for LR's designation is exterior style? No doubt the original Rangie was considered to have a very stylish exterior, and so too does the Evoque, and maybe the D5 doesnt quite have that X factor? If that is what LR are on about, its a pretty uncommon, and dare i say it, weird situation, to focus in on just one attribute, and have so much variation in the other attributes.

Brand name, price and the looks of the thing is all that concern the average new car buyer that Land Rover wants through the doors of their showrooms. What's under the skin is quite irrelevant. Eccentric would be owners who know about technical details are of no interest to them. "Range Rover" is a very valuable brand name all over the planet and Land Rover milk it to the max.

Funny how times change.

Originally Posted by rammypluge

Funny how times change.

Quite. The people who knew engineering from their service time in WW2 are long gone and have been replaced entirely by middle management and marketing gurus.