Compare Range Rover Evoque Coupe vs Range Rover Velar L560 facelift vs Volvo XC90 II facelift
Variants
Si4 240PS AWD 6AT
Si4 240PS AWD 9AT
Si4 285PS AWD 9AT
TD4 150PS
TD4 150PS AWD
TD4 150PS AWD AT
TD4 180PS AWD
TD4 180PS AWD AT
eD4
SD4 190PS AWD
SD4 190PS 4WD 6AT
SD4 190PS AWD 9AT
TD4 150PS AWD AT
TD4 150PS AWD
D200
P250
P400e
D300
P340
P400
B5 235
B5 235 6-7 Seat
B5 250
B5 250 7 Seat
B6
B6 6-7 Seat
Recharge T8
T5
T5 7 Seat
T6
T6 6-7 Seat
T8 4 Seat
T8 6-7 Seat
Capacity
Passengers
5
5
Payload
723 kg / 1594 lbs
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Ventilated discs, 325 mm
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
Double-wishbone
Double-wishbone
Suspension | Rear
Multi-link
Multi-link
Transverse stabilizer, Leaf spring
Tire Size
235/55 R19, 275/45 R20, 275/35 R22
Turning Circle
11.3 m / 37.1 ft
Water Fording
530 mm / 20.9 in
450 mm / 17.7 in
Construction
Battery | Capacity
17.1 kWh (gross)
Battery | Type
Lithium-ion
Body Style
3-door Crossover
Dimensions
Ground Clearance
215 mm / 8.5 in
223 mm / 8.8 in
Size | Height
1678 mm / 66.1 in
1776 mm / 69.9 in
Size | Length
4797 mm / 188.9 in
4953 mm / 195.0 in
Size | Width
2147 mm / 84.5 in (mirror unfolded) | 2041 mm / 80.4 in (mirror folded)
Track Width | Front
1625.0 mm / 64.0 in
1640.0 mm / 64.6 in
Track Width | Rear
1629.0 mm / 64.1 in
1657.0 mm / 65.2 in
Weight
2227.0 kg / 4909.7 lbs
Wheel Size
17 in, 18 in
Wheelbase
2660 mm / 104.7 in
2874 mm / 113.1 in
2984 mm / 117.5 in
Performance
Braking | 100 km/h - 0
36.0 m / 118.1 ft
Coefficient Of Drag
0.33
Electric Range
53.0 km / 32.9 mi
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (longitudinal), All-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), All-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 6d
Engine | Bore
83.0 mm / 3.3 in
82.0 mm / 3.2 in
Engine | Displacement
2.0 L / 120.2 cu-in / 1969.0 cc
Engine | Stroke
92.3 mm / 3.6 in
93.2 mm / 3.7 in
Transmission | Gears
8-speed
8-speed
Transmission | Type
Automatic
Automatic Geartronic
Production
Availability
2020
Reviews
Neofiliac score
8%
67%
67%
Pros
- So ugly that many thought it had character
- Some interesting engine options
- More reliable than the bigger RRs
- Low fuel consumption
- Good towing capacity
- Great comfort
- Some offroad capabilities
- Good towing capacity
Cons
- Very tight inside
- Low cargo capacity
- Bad drivetrain
- MacPherson struts in the front
- Bad ZF 9HP transmission
- Pretends to be "SUV"
- Crossover nonsense
- Only available with small engines
- Reliability concerns
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.