Deutschland
France
Nederland
Great Britain
Sverige
Danmark
Suomi
Italia
Polska
EspañaVS
Ford Mustang Convertible vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque - Differences and prices compared
Compare performance (446 HP vs 269 HP), boot space and price (56900 £ vs 43300 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Ford Mustang Convertible or Land Rover Range Rover Evoque?
Mustang Convertible
Costs and Efficiency:
Looking at overall running costs, both models reveal some interesting differences in everyday economy.
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has a clearly perceptible advantage in terms of price – it starts at 43300 £ , while the Ford Mustang Convertible costs 56900 £ . That’s a price difference of around 13629 £.
Fuel consumption also shows a difference: Land Rover Range Rover Evoque manages with 3.70 L and is therefore significantly more efficient than the Ford Mustang Convertible with 12.30 L. The difference is about 8.60 L per 100 km.
Range Rover Evoque
Engine and Performance:
Under the bonnet, it becomes clear which model is tuned for sportiness and which one takes the lead when you hit the accelerator.
When it comes to engine power, the Ford Mustang Convertible has a evident edge – offering 446 HP compared to 269 HP. That’s roughly 177 HP more horsepower.
In acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h, the Ford Mustang Convertible is decisively quicker – completing the sprint in 5 s, while the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque takes 7.20 s. That’s about 2.20 s faster.
In terms of top speed, the Ford Mustang Convertible performs a bit better – reaching 250 km/h, while the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque tops out at 213 km/h. The difference is around 37 km/h.
Both models offer the same torque – 540 Nm.
Mustang Convertible
Space and Everyday Use:
Cabin size, boot volume and payload all play a role in everyday practicality. Here, comfort and flexibility make the difference.
Seats: Land Rover Range Rover Evoque offers to a small extent more seating capacity – 5 vs 4.
In curb weight, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is barely noticeable lighter – 1792 kg compared to 1876 kg. The difference is around 84 kg.
In terms of boot space, the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque offers evident more room – 472 L compared to 310 L. That’s a difference of about 162 L.
When it comes to payload, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque decisively takes the win – 600 kg compared to 324 kg. That’s a difference of about 276 kg.
Who wins the race in the data check?
The Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is far ahead overall in the objective data comparison.
This result only shows which model scores more points on paper – not which of the two cars feels right for you.
Ford Mustang Convertible
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
Costs and Consumption
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
Engine and Performance
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
Dimensions and Body
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
from about £43,300
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
Ford Mustang Convertible
The Ford Mustang Convertible makes every drive feel like a small celebration, its exhaust note and open-air drama turning mundane routes into showstoppers. It’s a car that doubles as a weekend mood lifter and a credible everyday companion, blending swagger with surprising practicality.
details
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
1 (1 Reviews)
The Range Rover Evoque turns heads with a compact, sculpted silhouette and an interior that feels more boutique hotel than utility vehicle. It delivers composed, playful handling around town while keeping enough ruggedness for weekend escapes — perfect for buyers who want luxury without the ostentation.
details
Ford Mustang Convertible
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
56900 - 59900 £
|
Price
43300 - 64800 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
12.3 - 12.4 L
|
Consumption L/100km
3.7 - 7.8 L
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
|
Electric Range
-
|
Electric Range
60 km
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
11.50 kWh
|
|
co2
280 - 282 g/km
|
co2
85 - 177 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
61 L
|
Fuel tank capacity
57 - 67 L
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
Convertible
|
Body Type
SUV
|
|
Seats
4
|
Seats
5
|
|
Doors
2
|
Doors
5
|
|
Curb weight
1876 kg
|
Curb weight
1792 - 2157 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
310 L
|
Trunk capacity
472 L
|
|
Length
4810 mm
|
Length
4371 mm
|
|
Width
1916 mm
|
Width
1900 mm
|
|
Height
1403 mm
|
Height
1649 mm
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
1156 L
|
|
Payload
319 - 324 kg
|
Payload
503 - 600 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Petrol
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV, Diesel MHEV, Plugin Hybrid
|
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Automatic Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Automatic Gearbox
|
|
Drive Type
Rear-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
446 HP
|
Power HP
160 - 269 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
5 - 5.4 s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
7.2 - 10.3 s
|
|
Max Speed
250 km/h
|
Max Speed
190 - 213 km/h
|
|
Torque
540 Nm
|
Torque
260 - 540 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
8
|
Number of Cylinders
3 - 4
|
|
Power kW
328 kW
|
Power kW
118 - 198 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
5038 cm3
|
Engine capacity
1498 - 1998 cm3
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2024
|
Model Year
2025
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
G
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
G, F, B
|
|
Brand
Ford
|
Brand
Land Rover
|
Is the Ford Mustang Convertible offered with different drivetrains?
Available configurations include Rear-Wheel Drive.
The prices shown are estimates based on German list prices, adjusted for local VAT. Local registration taxes (e.g. NoVA, BPM or CO2 malus) are not included. This information is not legally binding.