|
|
VS |
|
Welcome to the Mazda CX-5 Vs the Range Rover Evoque comparison for 2017. It’s been many years since we reviewed and compared the Range Rover Evoque to any car or SUV so we decide to compare the lasted smallish but arguably medium sized SUVs to see how the Evoque has aged over the years. First of all the actual name of the SUV is the Land Rover Ranger Rover Evoque which is probably the longest model name of any car we know. You see Land Rover is the manufacturer’s name and Ranger Rover is the ‘Luxury’ version of the brand. The first comparison for the Evoque is against the Mazda CX-5 and due to the huge price difference only the top range CX-5 will be used as the reference for the comparison.
Mazda CX-5 Vs the Range Rover Evoque exterior design comparison: The Range Rover Evoque biggest change for 2017 is the availability of a Convertible version and it looks a little awkward, like a high rise bath tub. The regular Evoque still looks good although it has only dated a little due to the squared off lines but thanks to being different to all the exisiting smallish SUVs it does stand out. It’s large wheel and small body was great when released but not so much on 2017. Aside from the awkward Evoque convertible version the 4 door version looks like an after thought as the Evoque was designed as a 3 door version last made in 2015. We think that Ranger Rover marketing must be stupid to think a convertible will sell as well as a the 3 door version. The 3 door Evoque has a classic style but not the common variety 5 door version we can only buy now. The CX-5 on the other hand uses the latest styling theme from Mazda and while conservative it have enough ‘elements’ to not age for the expected 5 year model cycle it is unlikely to be a classic design which the Evoque has a better chance at in another 10 years or so. The CX-5 looks worth the asking price but the Evoque doesn’t.
Mazda CX-5 Vs Range Rover Evoque interior comparison: The Evoque when first released had an interior was a stand out in terms of quality although there were shortfalls that shouldn’t have been there for the price. Not much has changed over the 7 years and while it still looks and feels very good it is not that great a difference to the CX-5. Furthermore the Evoque requires any buyer to use the options list to improve the interior ambience and the cost is high for options that should be standard in 2017 and for the asking price regardless of model. Does the Evoque look and feel luxurious? No not in standard trim and certainly not the entry level model.
Mazda CX-5 Vs Range Rover Evoque engine and technology: The engine choices in the Evoque are very good and it starts of with a diesel engine and goes to a powerful turbo petrol shared with the Ford Focus RS. However the Evoque is a heavy SUV for its size being 200Kg more than the CX-5 which means the Evoque is not a modern design. The heavy weight also means that it needs a more powerful engine to keep performance competitive. The standard safety features for the entry level Evoque which is still in a higher price bracket is lacking auto brakes, blind sport etc that come standard with CX-5 but they can be optioned on the Evoque. For example a $6000 safety pack brings it almost on par with the CX-5. The infotainment has been updated and sounds very average as standard but only when optioned with the $3000 extra yet mostly unknown ‘Meridian’ branded system and only then does mount any quality comparison with the standard BOSE in the top range CX-5. There are plenty of optional equipment for the Evoke like electric seats for $2500 which should be standard and Digital radio (DAB+) for around $750 which should also be standard but plenty more that go beyond the availability in the current CX-5.
Mazda CX-5 Vs Range Rover Evoque on road: Simply put the Evoque drives nicely, a little noisy due to expectation and not particularly fast and handles no better than a Corolla we also own. We are yet to drive the new CX-5.
The winner of the Mazda CX-5 Vs Ranger Rover Evoque a draw! It is because it ultimately depend on how much money you want to spend and which badge you prefer as it is no longer about quality or design. As is the top range $50000 Mazda CX-5 exterior and especially interior quality has improved compared to the last model is more than equal to the Evoque that costs $17,000 more. We also think the Evoque is a complete price rip off for $1500-280o for your choice of metallic paint and the Evoque also has the rip off turbo tweak feature so you get the same engine but some models get the better tuned version with more power. In this price range it is simply truly a complete rip off. As a result you see lots of Evoque’s that are white because owners can’t actually afford them in any other colour in the first place. So if you can only afford to buy a white Evoque you really need to forget it as everyone will know you’re just a try hard.
| Mazda CX-5 |
Ranger Rover Evoque |
 |
 |
| Engines | |
| IL 4 Cylinder Petrol DOHC EFI VVT 2.0 Litre (1996cc) Claimed 114Kw @ 6000RPM Claimed 200Nm @ 4000RPM |
IL4 Cylinder (204DTD) DOHC EFI DI Turbo Desel 2.0 Litre (1999cc) Claimed 110Kw @ 4000RPM Claimed 380Nm @ 1750RPM or Claimed 110Kw @ 4000RPM Claimed 380Nm @ 1750RPM |
| IL4 Cylinder Petrol 2.5 Litre (2488cc) DOHC Engine EFI Claimed 138Kw @ 5700RPM Claimed 250Nm @ 4000RPM |
IL4 Cylinder (224DT) DOHC EFI DI CR Turbo Desel 2.2 Litre (2179cc) Claimed 140Kw @ 3500RPM Claimed 420Nm @ 1750RPM |
| IL 4 Cylinder Twin Turbo Diesel DI CR EFI 2.2 Litre (2191cc) Claimed 129Kw @ 4500RPM Claimed 420Nm @ 2000RPM |
IL4 Petrol DOHC VVT EFI Intercooled Turbo 2.0 Litre (1999cc) Claimed 177Kw @ 3500RPM Claimed 340Nm @ 1750RPM |
| Weight | |
| FROM 1511 Kg Towing capacity up to 1800kg |
From 1746Kg Towing capacity up to 1800kg |
| Fuel capacity & consumption | |
| Up to 58 litres IL4 2.0 Petrol 6.9 Lts per 100km AVG IL4 2.5 Petrol 7.5 Lts per 100km AVG IL4 2.2 Diesel 6 Lts per 100km AVG |
Up to 70 litres IL4 Diesel 2.0 4.8 Lts per 100km AVG IL4 Diesel 2.2 6.5Lts per 100km AVG IL4 Petrol 8.7Lts per 100km AVG |
| Other specifications | |
| 6 speed manual or 6 speeds Overall height/width 1675/1840 Overall length/wheelbase 4550/2700 4WD system: FWD or On demand AWD ANCAP Safety: 5/5 |
9 speed Auto or 5 speed Manual Overall height/width 1635/1985 Overall length/Wheelbase 4370/2660 4WD system: AWD ANCAP Safety: 5/5 Tyre size: Verious |
| Capability | |
| Angle of: (degrees) Approach xx Departure xx Breakover xx Ground clearance (unloaded) xxxmm Water Fording depth xxmm Max |
Angle of: (degrees) Approach xx Departure xx Breakover xx Min ground clearance xxx mm Water Fording depth xxx mm |
| Performance | |
| Pricing | |
| 2017 $28,690 – $49,990 AUD *Always check with the dealer for up to date pricing and specials accessories etc… |
2017 FROM $56,050 – 93,450 AUD + any additional equipment packages |