Rolls-Royce Cullinan vs Range Rover Evoque

What's the difference?

The truly great thing about great wealth - I mean like, drop $1 million on a new Rolls-Royce with a casual yawn and a mouse click wealth - would be how great it is not having to do anything for yourself.

Personally, I would hire a chef, so I’d never have to cook again, and a pilot to fly my private jet, so I’d never have to catch pneumonia while flying 34 hours to Ibiza with strangers to do my weird job (oh, and if I was rich I wouldn’t have to work anyway), and in theory I might even hire a chauffeur for those odd times when I didn’t want to drive myself in one of my fleet of beautiful cars. 

All right, so I can’t even imagine that last one, but the most interesting fact I gleaned while in Spain, tirelessly testing the new Rolls-Royce Cullinan Series II, is that even the ridiculously rich are falling out of love with not driving these days.

Perhaps, being tech-savvy types, they can see the end of driving and the rise of autonomy coming and they want to make the most of it while they still can. But according to Rolls, the percentage of its buyers who sit in the back rather than in the driver’s seat has flipped entirely over the past 15 years.

Back in the day, 80 per cent of Rolls owners were back-seat passengers, blowing cigar smoke at the back of a chauffeur’s head, while 20 per cent actually drove their expensive motors.

Today, the number who drive themselves has soared to 80 per cent, and apparently that’s not just because it would feel weird being chauffeured around in what is now the most popular Rolls-Royce by far - the Cullinan SUV.

The other big change, apparently, is that the average age of a Rolls-Royce buyer has also dropped, from 56 to the low 40s. And that means more buyers with kids, and gold-plated prams and other associated dross, which means they need bigger Rolls-Royces, family-sized SUV ones, which again helps to explain why the Cullinan now makes up as much as half of all the brand’s sales in some markets.

And why the arrival of this, the facelifted, tweaked and twirled Series II version of a car that was greeted cynically by many in the media when it arrived (“one group was not sceptical, and that was our clients,” as a Rolls spokeswoman delightedly pointed out) is such a big deal.

Range Rover has developed a bit of an image problem in the last few years.

To many the brand is still the face of a quintessentially British aspirational luxurious off-roader. But to a growing group, it has become synonymous with the concept of an environmentally reckless fuel-guzzling SUV.

They’re big, heavy, and still feature V8 engines, but Range Rover knows all too well the writing is on the wall for its increasingly infamous range of combustion vehicles.

The trouble is, customers love them, and while the I-Pace from sister brand Jaguar is a big leap into the future, there needs to be a happy medium for easing some of its existing customers away from combustion, while still offering the kinds of excess and aspirational performance the Range Rover brand is associated with.

Enter this car, the Evoque HSE P300e. It’s a plug-in hybrid, notably only available in the top trim level, with top-shelf performance, too.

Is it the right car to represent Range Rover’s entry-level model at a critical time of technological transformation? Let’s take a look.