Skoda Karoq 2017 vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 249 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 365 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 7.5 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Karoq engine produces 99 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, whereas torque is 115 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. Due to the lower power, Skoda Karoq reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 7.9 | |
|
The Skoda Karoq is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Skoda Karoq consumes 2.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, which means that by driving the Skoda Karoq over 15,000 km in a year you can save 360 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| Skoda Karoq gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Skoda Superb, Skoda Scala, Audi A1, Audi Q3 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Land Rover Defender, Land Rover Range Rover Sport | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Karoq might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Skoda Karoq 2017 1.5 engine: The engine is praised for being both flexible and torquey, delivering impressive performance for its horsepower rating. It is also remarkably fuel-efficient. However, the engine is very demanding when it comes ... More about Skoda Karoq 2017 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.65 m | |
| Skoda Karoq is 1 cm longer than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Karoq is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 521 litres | 591 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1630 litres | no data | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Skoda Karoq has 70 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. This could mean that the Skoda Karoq uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Karoq is 0.7 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, which means Skoda Karoq can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`929 | 2`430 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque scores higher in safety tests. The Land Rover Range Rover Evoque scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 18 600 | 31 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Karoq has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
| |