Model Year | 2013 | 2016 | |
Model | Land Rover Range Rover Evoque | Jeep Wrangler | |
Engine | turbocharged 2.0L I4 DOHC-4v 240 hp@5500 251 lb-ft@1750 |
3.6L V6 DOHC-4v 285 hp@6400 260 lb-ft@4800 |
|
Transmission | 6-speed shiftable automatic | 5-speed shiftable automatic | |
Drivetrain | AWD | 4WD, part-time w/low range | |
Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 104.8 in | 116.0 in | -11.2 in |
Length | 171.5 in | 184.4 in | -12.9 in |
Width | 77.4 in | 73.9 in | 3.5 in |
Height | 64.4 in | 72.3 in | -7.9 in |
Curb Weight | 3680 lb. | 4100 lb. | -420 lb. |
Fuel Capacity | 18.5 gal. | 21.6 gal. | -3.1 gal. |
Headroom, Row 1 | 40.3 in | 41.3 in | -1 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 56.6 in | 55.8 in | 0.8 in |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 0.0 in | 55.6 in | -55.6 in |
Legroom, Row 1 | 43.1 in | 41.0 in | 2.1 in |
Headroom, Row 2 | 39.7 in | 40.3 in | -0.6 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 55.4 in | 56.8 in | -1.4 in |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 0.0 in | 56.7 in | -56.7 in |
Legroom, Row 2 | 35.7 in | 37.2 in | -1.5 in |
Total Legroom | 78.8 in (over 2 rows) | 78.2 in (over 2 rows) | 0.6 in |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 20.3 ft3 | 31.5 ft3 | -11.2 ft3 |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 51.0 ft3 | 70.6 ft3 | -19.6 ft3 |
2013 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
When I first drove an Evoque, I found its front seats cushier and more comfortable than those in the X1. But that was for a short test drive. With more seat time later, the seat felt overly firm beneath my bum and the left seat cushion bolster pressed uncomfortably into my thigh. We're all shaped differently, and we sit differently as well, so your impressions may vary. As with any car, try to get as much seat time as you can before buying--few things are harder than seat comfort to evaluate during a test drive. see full Land Rover Range Rover Evoque review |
2013 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2012 | 4dr SUV turbocharged 240hp 2.0L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
Astonishingly, the rear seats in this small SUV seat two six footers (and another, smaller middle passenger) very comfortably. see full Land Rover Range Rover Evoque review |
2016 Jeep Wrangler Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
Two adults can squeeze into the back of the regular Wrangler, but Jeep clearly didn't intend the two-door for people who'll often be using the rear seat. The door openings are small and the front seats don't return to their former position after being tipped forward to let people in. The Wrangler Unlimited has a much wider three-person rear seat served by its own doors. But even in the Unlimited rear knee room isn't abundant and the rear seat cushion is somewhat under-sized. Some owners of the two-door Wrangler remove the rear seat (unlike in the Unlimited, this doesn't require tools) to open up a larger cargo area with a flat floor. There's not a lot of cargo space behind the second row in the two-door. The great majority of the Unlimited's 20-inch wheelbase extension goes into the space behind the second row, nearly tripling cargo volume there from 17 to 46 cubic feet. It's the one to get if you want to be able to carry three or more people and their gear. see full Jeep Wrangler review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Jeep Wrangler.