orton1966
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 03:07 PM |
|
|
Why The New Range Rover Evoque Gets Up My Nose
Where do I start: Firstly it’s not just the Range Rover but the whole way the motor industry is trying to drive us! The New Evoque is just one of the
brashest examples of this to date.
What do I mean, Ok what does £40k-£50k buy us in the Evoque? Structurally and from a basic design standpoint a £20k+ car (Freelander), engine –
likewise. Yes it looks very nice and is nicely trimmed with good quality materials but I had a new import vehicle completely leather trimmed for only
about £2k a few years back! Yes it has some cleaver electronic suspension and transmission controls but firstly to get the most from these you need
the electromagnetic shock option £1500 (you notice all the press test vehicles have had this on) and anyway this cleaver electronic control stuff is
very cheap to manufacture as generally the control software is present in the base ecu and just uses things like the wheel speed-sensors (needed for
the antilock brakes anyway) to do its party tricks. At best they are marketing a £30k valued vehicle.
The fact that some of the additional asking price has found its way into the Becham’s already bulging back account as so called “design consultants”
is the icing on the cake! Generally these celebrity designers’ only involvement are is to add their “name”. I know this because a friend works for one
of the big sofa companies that regularly promotes a new “somebody” designer ranges. These people virtually never visit the company office, almost
never communicate in person and if design copy is sent to them for approval almost invariably send it back approved without request of changes or
indeed any comment. This example regards respected designers, the Beckam’s, the last time I checked were celebrities not automobile designers.
And it’s that word that sums it up “celebrity” the asking price, of the Evoque, is not about what your being asked to buy, even autocar accepts this,
and I quote “ it is not just the tangible but the intangible you’re paying for ”. It is the designer tag and the celebrity endorsement they want you
to dig-deeper for. Just like a celebrity being photographed wearing some designer jeans or carrying a designer handbag. No right minded person ever
believes those items are physically better products than equivalent non-designer items. No, but unfortunately marketing and the media feeds our
celebrity obsessed culture and convinces an army of want to be wags that somehow paying through the nose and having these “names” on their bags or
bums makes them a little bit special. Unfortunately or fortunately, it just screams chav to me!
It used to be that you paid more, to get more i.e. you looked at a Ford Sierra against a BMW 3 series and you knew the extra cost of the BMW gave
improvements in build quality, engineering, performance etc. tangible things! Even when Audi launched the TT, on the same platform as the golf, there
were some semi-tangible reasons to part with the extra cash and anyway the difference in price between similar spec’d golfs’ and TT’s wasn’t that
massive. To me, the evoque is telling prospective buyers its “brand” and celebrity endorsement are worth close to an extra £20k. Can anyone seriously
believe any Freelander based suv is worth £10k more than a Merc SLK or £5k more than a decent spec 5 series?
The car industry desperately wants us to see our cars as fashion accessories that we should then change as often as they can encourage us to in order
to keep “the look” Everything is geared to “turning” us over more often, the massive cost of replacement parts once out of warranty, even the
structuring of finance deals. A friend of mine who worked for a Ford main dealer came back from a sales conference with a new “tool”! Basically they
instructed him to go out in his lunches and put his business cards on the windscreen of a certain model, certain age of ford. They had statistically
worked out that this model was; most likely to be privately owned, most likely to have been brought on finance and this age was most likely to have
only a short amount of finance remaining. The message he was instructed to leave on his card was “I have a customer willing to pay top price for your
particular model & spec of car please give me a ring to see how much we are able to offer you!” or words to that effect. If the person called
(obviously they had no waiting customer) they used the patter of getting them “into” the new shape of that car for “no increase in their monthly
payments” Basically the message was- target people who are close to clearing their finance and get them “chuckied up” (trade turn for financed) before
they get used to not paying out each month.
The whole attitude of showrooms is changing. My wife was recently thinking of changing her car and she wanted to look at a mini (not the old type) she
arranged a test drive and I went with her to the showroom. Firstly the sales guy’s attitude was very arrogant, kind off, these sell themselves we
don’t need to try hard. Also he seemingly had no interest in the technical aspects of the cars “well these two versions are kind of the same but the
electronics have been tweaked to give this one a bit more power”. Also considering one of his pitches was, mini’s are specked fairly basic as
standard so you can individualise them (accessorise was the term I think he used) yourself but strangely he then proceeded to offer us only two levels
of accessory pack, the chav’ly named pepper and chilly spice packs I didn’t feel much individual treatment. Of course you could then choose to have
TLC (service pack) or clip on mirror covers or a roof décor. Basically the whole experience felt more like a cheap mobile phone store than spending
£20k+ on a new car.
Think I’m wrong, consider;
long service intervals – great for first owner, great for fleets, pretty pore for someone who buys a 100,000 mile car that’s only had 5 oil changes
in its life!
Scrapage scheme – Lets help the poor car industry, struggling because cash strapped Britain doesn’t want more finance around their collective necks.
Sold to the public as – “let’s get these old, dangerous, polluting cars off the road”. Really it took the best older small cars off the road, that
generally did very few miles (because they were often a household’s second car) and were well maintained and then persuaded these owners to chuckie
themselves up, because the best deals were always linked to a finance deal. Now those new owners are back in the preferred (by the industry) three to
four year cycle of ownership. Oh and incidentally the pollution involved in making a new car is much greater than that saved by taking an older one
prematurely off the road!
Anyone fancy a 10 year old high-mileage evoque- What do you think the main-dealer costs of all the electronics for suspension, transmission, steering
diff’s etc will be like if they go wrong? Basically, manufacturers are building cars that don’t have a financially viable life much beyond the
warranty period they give!
I’m no luddite, I love design and innovation but I just think as a society we’re being spun on our head. There was a time, a few years back when the
likes of Toyota, BMW and Honda seemed to compete on reliability, creating good products that did last, honourable design and innovation goals. Now it
seems to have slipped and the goal seems to be to make something that gets through the warranty period and who cares it fails after that it, and who
cares how much it cost to fix if it does! Yes I understand the pressures of business but fact remains that in the old world, creating a car that
failed after about 5-6 years and was then uneconomical to fix would have got you a bad reputation. Trouble is by spinning the market to believe that
you should be changing your car every 3 years and suddenly people start thinking 6 years, that’s an old car, of course you can expect problems and it
then doesn’t seem to dent there reputation.
Evoque....should have called it the E-Joke!
|
|
|
|
|
Ivan
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 03:17 PM |
|
|
Couldn't have said it better myself.
|
|
|
richardh
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 03:20 PM |
|
|
some interesting points there.
a bit rant-sounding though for my taste!
If you don't want one or a new car at all and to stick with an old model, no finance etc then that's fine by me.
I've come to much the same conclusion and bordering on my own attempt to be slightly eco friendly without the need to have rechargeables in my
car for every 30 miles of driving.
Why pick on the Evoc thingy though. The Main Rangey, the sports, bentleys, astons and every other manufacturer are the same, doing the same, etc
What gets me is despite a downturn and higher fuel costs, taxes, vat, electric, gas, etc - who can afford to buy these things new? and how are they
doing it?
Just doesn't make sense.
I know folk who have a high mortgage, little income and yet still have a range rooney, jag xkr and a 1 series - all 60 plates
Time for a change!
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 03:23 PM |
|
|
How big is your nose? 
|
|
|
Agriv8
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 03:26 PM |
|
|
we are turning into a form over function society is the Apple iphone better than its HTC rivals personally I dont think so but I await Flames. Its all
in the branding and Hype in my opinion
Cars used to rust away within 10 years but they dont anymore now with a new ( my R reg passat has 250k miles on and still on its original eXhaust )
and still going strong.
Regards
Agriv8
Taller than your average Guy !
Management is like a tree of monkeys. - Those at the top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. BUT Those at the bottom look up and see a
tree full of a*seholes .............
|
|
|
pekwah1
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 03:34 PM |
|
|
i would argue, who really cares what it is and how much it costs.
I agree that it's a monstrocity and there's no way you'd see me driving one however much it cost, but i guess the idiots who like it
and buy it will be happy with it. At the end of the day, it's only worth what people will pay, and if they pay for it, then that's their
perogitive.
|
|
|
orton1966
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 04:00 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agriv8
Cars used to rust away within 10 years but they dont anymore now with a new ( my R reg passat has 250k miles on and still on its original eXhaust )
and still going strong.
Regards
Agriv8
Exactly, they’ve overcome the rust demon and at first they were happy marketing on how much better their cars would last against their rivals.
Unfortunately it is now some of the parts prices or availability that are the new built in obsolescence.
Your passat is of that age, the age where companies, the good ones, built something right that would last and thought this was good for business!
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 04:04 PM |
|
|
Yep agree 100%
Most likely most of us on here have very high common sense / disposable income ratio and therefore won't be their target market.
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 04:21 PM |
|
|
I agree with your general sentiment, but I think it was a bit unfair to pick on the Evoque (except for the reference to the Beckhams... bleurgh!).
The Evoque is loosely based on the Freelander2 (a good car in itself), but is really only £5k more across the 'like-for-like'
pricing range. Most motoring-journos seem to feel that its build, styling, handling and technical advantages are worth the premium.
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
orton1966
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 05:53 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
I agree with your general sentiment, but I think it was a bit unfair to pick on the Evoque (except for the reference to the Beckhams... bleurgh!).
The Evoque is loosely based on the Freelander2 (a good car in itself), but is really only £5k more across the 'like-for-like'
pricing range. Most motoring-journos seem to feel that its build, styling, handling and technical advantages are worth the premium.
I’ll re check the prices but the evoque test cars (autocar etc) have been over £40k
A £35k-£40k Freelander would be a hell of a price for what that platform offers!
I picked on the Evoque because I see the Freelander as a mid £20k car and the Evoque as a company asking another £15k-£20k for it to have the
emperor’s new clothes
|
|
|
kevmcdo
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 05:58 PM |
|
|
To some degree I agree with where you are going with your point but the one thing that will tell for sure if the manufactures or the customer feed
back sessions are driving the market will be sales and on this one with the Range Rover as you used as an example will most likely really upset
you.
I visited my friend at the local Land Rover dealership in Edinburgh and he is walking about with a smile that you could not remove surgically due to
the pre orders he has taken for the you guessed it new Evoque.......
Like has already been said you like you buy if you don;t walk on by, there is contrary to popular believe and scaremongering still an awful lot of
money out there and people at that end of the scale are still spending it
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 06:07 PM |
|
|
Freelander GS = £25k Evoque Pure = £28k
Freelander XS = £28k Evoque Presrtige = £35
Freelander HSE = £33k Evoque Dynamix = £37
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
orton1966
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 06:28 PM |
|
|
I don’t doubt people will buy it, as they do designer jeans and hand-bags. I even believe it is a good motor and yes if I sold them I would be very
happy.
My point is that it is being sold on the wrong values and at too higher price. My guess and yes there will be exceptions are that your friend will
find that most buyers are either (relatively) young trendy males who will chucky themselves to the eyeballs to have the latest status car or
non-working ladies-who-lunch who’s hubbies will buy anything to keep them happy.
Anyway it is merely a symptom of the changing face of the motor industry and how it wants the market to move from seeing cars as a considered
long-term purchase to a more fad driven, fashion driven, shorter term consumer purchase
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 06:39 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by orton1966
Anyway it is merely a symptom of the changing face of the motor industry and how it wants the market to move from seeing cars as a considered
long-term purchase to a more fad driven, fashion driven, shorter term consumer purchase
I think the market had always been this way... they manufacturers have always wanted to shift as many cars as they can and have used fashion as a
marketing tool.
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
kevmcdo
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 06:45 PM |
|
|
Personally I think that they have hit it on the head with who their customer base is currently, you only have to have a look at their current range of
cars and who are driving them.
Range Rover sports are really on Discovery 3 in drag but they are selling bucket loads of them to the point that dare I say it they are looking
common.
The good thing about what they are doing with their range is that at least what ever is under the body can still cut it in the mud with the correct
rubber on which is something that the other manufacturers are still struggling with. More than anything forget the designer attachment from the
Beckams I think that Land Rover / Range Rover has a big enough cult following of its brand to help its sales.
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 06:53 PM |
|
|
It's Lotus I worry about... my favourite car brand by a country mile, but what the feck were they doing with all that 'Swizz Beats'
collaboration nonsense!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 07:44 PM |
|
|
Some on the forum will have rear I learned to drive on an Austin Champ so I am not anti-4x4 but I think the government should tax every
non-essential off the road I am really p*_+&4d off with the current bigger is better 4x4 than my neighbour sick culture,
As somebody remarked a while back we are being carted off to hell in in a HUMV. The whole suburban 4x4 culture is just stupid, the dammed things
aren't even any use in the snow twice last winter I had wait while new Range Rovers on totally unsuitable tyres driven by even more unsuitable
chav owners were unable to move in just a few inches of snow, in the end one got moving and the other I just drove around it with nothing more than
FWD and cheap budget tyres.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
kevmcdo
|
| posted on 7/9/11 at 08:11 PM |
|
|
Would a lotus seven rep come under the non-essential tax?
Sure plenty people get just as angry when they see sports cars or bikes going past them on the road??
|
|
|
morcus
|
| posted on 8/9/11 at 02:18 AM |
|
|
Car dealers have been like that for years with new cars. Go to any main dealer and start talking technical to anyone in a tie and your wasting your
time. I've been to dealers with my dad to be told the car we're looking for was never built (It was we'd just come from seeing two)
and didn't know which generation the astras were.
As some one else said though, the car isn't for you, it's for a huge number of people who are willing to buy it.
In a White Room, With Black Curtains, By the Station.
|
|
|
orton1966
|
| posted on 8/9/11 at 05:47 AM |
|
|
Try it, go in to a Mini Showroom, look around at the walls of clip on Mirror covers and roof panel graphics. Then talk to the guys about “spice packs”
and “tlc option” – Then tell me they havn’t made the experience more like a mobile phone shop.
As for Evoque, at least it’s still a Range Rover argumant, I stand to be corrected but aren’t they talking about (or possibly have already
done/announced) a front wheel drive only version – Range Rover?
As for the specifics of price, which I might have got a little wrong, firstly I bet you can get the Freelander discounted from it’s rrp but not the
evoque. So the true differential is greater than the rrp’s suggest. Also even the testers, like Autocar, accept the vehicle is good but question the
price tag for the physical elements of what you get!
|
|
|
Richard Quinn
|
| posted on 8/9/11 at 05:51 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kevmcdo
Range Rover sports are really on Discovery 3 in drag but they are selling bucket loads of them to the point that dare I say it they are looking
common.
Where our office is they are common but not as common as the Range Rover itself. There are even quite a few Overfinch, Kahn and Revere versions as
people try to differentiate themselves.
It's not the motor industry that's to blame in this lot, it's the new breed of British consumer.
This type of argument has been around for a while: Why buy a Passat when you could have an Octavia? Jags v. Mondeos etc
|
|
|
MK9R
|
| posted on 8/9/11 at 06:36 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by orton1966
[I’ll re check the prices but the evoque test cars (autocar etc) have been over £40k
A £35k-£40k Freelander would be a hell of a price for what that platform offers!
I picked on the Evoque because I see the Freelander as a mid £20k car and the Evoque as a company asking another £15k-£20k for it to have the
emperor’s new clothes
It is not a tarted up freelander, the upper body structure is completely new, it does not share a single BIW panel.
What you have to remember is the price is also based on how many they will sell in a production life cycle set against the investment costs for all
the tooling and manufacturing, you could have 2 fiesta sized cars, 1 with an estimated production cycle of 1 million and another with only 100,000,
then compare this to the investment cost of the line, including the running cost, and you will see the high production level car will be a lot
cheaper, even though they do not look any different.
Cheers Austen
RGB car number 9
www.austengreenway.co.uk
www.automatedtechnologygroup.co.uk
www.trackace.co.uk
|
|
|
MK9R
|
| posted on 8/9/11 at 06:44 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by orton1966
I stand to be corrected but aren’t they talking about (or possibly have already done/announced) a front wheel drive only version – Range Rover?
No they produce a fwd only freelander now, a lot of which is to do with emmisions for the company average, but also because 90% of freelanders never
leave the tarmac 
Cheers Austen
RGB car number 9
www.austengreenway.co.uk
www.automatedtechnologygroup.co.uk
www.trackace.co.uk
|
|
|
v8kid
|
| posted on 8/9/11 at 08:10 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alan B
Yep agree 100%
Most likely most of us on here have very high common sense / disposable income ratio and therefore won't be their target market.
 very, very good that ratio is worth remembering.
You'd be surprised how quickly the sales people at B&Q try and assist you after ignoring you for the past 15 minutes when you try and start a
chainsaw
|
|
|
v8kid
|
| posted on 8/9/11 at 08:18 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
Some on the forum will have rear I learned to drive on an Austin Champ so I am not anti-4x4 but I think the government should tax every
non-essential off the road I am really p*_+&4d off with the current bigger is better 4x4 than my neighbour sick culture,
As somebody remarked a while back we are being carted off to hell in in a HUMV. The whole suburban 4x4 culture is just stupid, the dammed things
aren't even any use in the snow twice last winter I had wait while new Range Rovers on totally unsuitable tyres driven by even more unsuitable
chav owners were unable to move in just a few inches of snow, in the end one got moving and the other I just drove around it with nothing more than
FWD and cheap budget tyres.
I used to agree with you but changed my mind when my kids bought a 4x4 and she lives in Edinburgh new town! Seems to tick all the boxes above for
being BS untill you find out they are architectural photographers and got stuck twice (alone) in remote estates to their alarm. So how do you decide
who is allowed to own or not?
Who decides? The same people who run traffic wardens?
Cheers!
You'd be surprised how quickly the sales people at B&Q try and assist you after ignoring you for the past 15 minutes when you try and start a
chainsaw
|
|
|
