Topic: Test Drive: 2010 Jeep Compass 4x4 North Edition

[Autos_Editor]

Based on the Dodge Caliber, this entry-level Jeep hatchback is roomy, comfortable and practical, and is available with AWD for extra winter traction, but it's not particularly exciting to drive and the interior could use some upgrading, says Greg Wilson.

Read More...

[saint_satan]

This is one weird looking car.  What's worse, Chryco's decision to go with a cvt rather than a standard 4 speed auto tranny doomed this vehicle and it's more handsome sibling, the Patriot.  Most Jeepers could overlook the utilitarian interior (common in many vehicles these days) if it had a bit of pep and was fun to drive.  This is neither.  It also lacks the Freedom Drive II option offered on the Patriot for better off road performance.  Finally, it has a 51l gas tank so you can stop at gas stations every 4.5 hours.  Ditch the Compass, put a small six in the Patriot with a 4 or 5 speed auto, a slightly bigger gas tank and watch sales improve dramatically.


It's amazing that people who design and market cars could get it so wrong - they must not look at their competition...

[Winterpeg]

This is one weird looking car.  What's worse, Chryco's decision to go with a cvt rather than a standard 4 speed auto tranny doomed this vehicle and it's more handsome sidling, the Patriot.  Most Jeepers could overlook the utilitarian interior (common in many vehicles these days) if it had a bit of pep and was fun to drive.  This is neither.  It also lacks the Freedom Drive II option offered on the Patriot for better off road performance.  Finally, it has a 51l gas tank so you can stop at gas stations every 4.5 hours.  Ditch the Compass, put a small six in the Patriot with a 4 or 5 speed auto, a slightly bigger gas tank and watch sales improve dramatically.


It's amazing that people who design and market cars could get it so wrong - they must not look at their competition...

You are truely a worthy saint.....well stated.   

[D70]

Having just completed a 2000 km journey to Bella Coola from Burnaby in my 20 yr old Miata I would think that this wagon would have done the trip and enabled me to venture off on some of the gravel roads with a little more comfort. Seems like good value.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/d70w7/4865542061/

[mrthompson]

This is one weird looking car.  What's worse, Chryco's decision to go with a cvt rather than a standard 4 speed auto tranny doomed this vehicle and it's more handsome sidling, the Patriot.  Most Jeepers could overlook the utilitarian interior (common in many vehicles these days) if it had a bit of pep and was fun to drive.  This is neither.  It also lacks the Freedom Drive II option offered on the Patriot for better off road performance.  Finally, it has a 51l gas tank so you can stop at gas stations every 4.5 hours.  Ditch the Compass, put a small six in the Patriot with a 4 or 5 speed auto, a slightly bigger gas tank and watch sales improve dramatically.


It's amazing that people who design and market cars could get it so wrong - they must not look at their competition...

Agreed.

[overtakeyouintheleftlane]

saint_satan - I agree with all of the above.

I also wonder though why would you buy a Jeep if it's not a "real Jeep"? I never saw the point of SUV's or CUV's when the closest thing they ever get to off-road is the grass in the mall parking lot or the gravel in somebody's driveway. Maybe they have an "active lifestyle", whatever that means.

[SJP]

This vehicle doesn't even need to exist, it's just a patriot with the corners melted. The money saved on tooling could have gone to decent interior material.

[Sival]

I'm maybe the only one, but I prefer the Compass' looks to the Patriot's. To be fair, I like it probably for the same reason that others hate it, because it's a more modern take on the classic Jeep look. For some, it means "HERESY!", for me, it's merely a long overdue refresh of the look. The Patriot for me looks like just a smaller scale version of the big Jeeps, but it just doesn't work at that size.

[Tyler]

We quite like our Compass.  We picked ours up in black and it looks som much better than some of the wild colours out there...bright blue anyone?  So far, we've put over 182,000 km on it without so much as a hiccup.

[saint_satan]

I own a "real Jeep".  I have nothing against Jeep making crossovers with moderate capabililites.  I looked hard at the Patriot as a replacement for my Cherokee - I like the styling - much more so than the Compass.  I read it had decent reliablity and was "the spiritual successor" to the Cherokee so I took a gander at both.  I don't understand how 13 years after the first Cherokee, Chryco could replace it with a pair of SUVs that:

- Weigh the same and have almost the same dimensions as the Cherokee but have all kinds of blind spots the Cherokee doesn't have.

- Reduce towing capacity by 60%

- reduce 0-60 times by 2+ seconds

- Swap out a 4.0l I6 engine with a 2.4 I4 , turn an SUV into a CUV and only improve fuel economy by 10% on the highway (Freedom Drive II Patriot)

- Reduce the overall range by 100+km with a Honda Civic sized gas tank.


It's like Chryco got 80% of the way and just gave up.

If the Patriot had a normal auto tranny, a small six and a 60l gas tank, I’d already own one.  Why don't the Jeep designers don’t get this?  Surely they looked at the Escape, RAV4, CR-V when judging their market.

When Chrysler went bankrupt, I heard rumours that Ford and Nissan had interest in the Jeep division - I got excited.  I hope that the Fiat merger works but combining a floundering Chrysler with one of Europe’s worst companies makes a Jeep fan very nervous.

[mrthompson]

Gonna get a Liberty?  X-Terra.....do it.

[chrischasescars]

I read it had decent reliablity and was "the spiritual successor" to the Cherokee so I took a gander at both.  I don't understand how 13 years after the first Cherokee, Chryco could replace it with (the Compass and Patriot).

I dunno that the Compass and Patriot are successors to the Cherokee at all, spiritual or otherwise. That's what the Liberty is supposed to be. To my mind, the Compass and Patriot might be comparable price-wise to the Cherokee (when you factor in today's dollar vs. 10-15 years ago etc. etc., and the Liberty more expensive, but its abilities are similar to the Cherokee's.

[saint_satan]

The "spiritual successor" was Daimlers marketing platform.

The Liberty is clearly more in line with the Cherokee, although the current version is 1,200 lbs. heavier, lower, slower and far less nimble.

[Sival]

I own a "real Jeep".  I have nothing against Jeep making crossovers with moderate capabililites.  I looked hard at the Patriot as a replacement for my Cherokee - I like the styling - much more so than the Compass.  I read it had decent reliablity and was "the spiritual successor" to the Cherokee so I took a gander at both.  I don't understand how 13 years after the first Cherokee, Chryco could replace it with a pair of SUVs that:

- Weigh the same and have almost the same dimensions as the Cherokee but have all kinds of blind spots the Cherokee doesn't have.

- Reduce towing capacity by 60%

- reduce 0-60 times by 2+ seconds

- Swap out a 4.0l I6 engine with a 2.4 I4 , turn an SUV into a CUV and only improve fuel economy by 10% on the highway (Freedom Drive II Patriot)

- Reduce the overall range by 100+km with a Honda Civic sized gas tank.


It's like Chryco got 80% of the way and just gave up.

If the Patriot had a normal auto tranny, a small six and a 60l gas tank, I’d already own one.  Why don't the Jeep designers don’t get this?  Surely they looked at the Escape, RAV4, CR-V when judging their market.

When Chrysler went bankrupt, I heard rumours that Ford and Nissan had interest in the Jeep division - I got excited.  I hope that the Fiat merger works but combining a floundering Chrysler with one of Europe’s worst companies makes a Jeep fan very nervous.

Actually, the Patriot Freedom Drive II is fully 15-20% more efficient on the highway than the old automatic V6 Cherokee 4WD, and even more fuel efficient in city driving. Overall it's 30% more efficient than the Cherokee. The issue with visibility is one of safety, metal is more resistant than glass, so that's my modern cars have much more blind spots than old cars that had smaller pillars and  bigger windows.

However, you forget that the first Cherokee had been available with a 121 to 130 hp 4-cylinder 2.5L engine. If you look at that version of the Cherokee instead of the V6 version, than the claim that the Patriot is a spiritual successor makes more sense: it is more fuel-efficient, safer, probably quicker, with more features for less money (when inflation is accounted for), of similar size and of similar practicality (towing capacity of 2000 lbs versus 1000 for the old 2.5L). It's outclassed in many things by the V6 version, but that's why the Liberty exists.

[saint_satan]

I know someone with a 2007 FDII Patriot.  He says he's burning over 9l/100km in "real world" highway driving - I do a consistent 10.8L/100km with a 4.0L I6 engine.  In town, the numbers are probably better.

When comparing the Cherokee to the Patriot (a bit unfair, really), I think about what the Cherokee was in it's heyday of the early 90's with the 4.0 I6.  It was nimble, fast ( 0- 60 in a little over 8.0 seconds was good - even sports car like in it's time) and was equally at home at the mall and the cottage/farm/mud and had cutting edge styling at the time - all told almost 3 million were sold.  Compass/Patriot miss most of these marks.  A small V6 or 4 speed auto would have fixed the performance issue - I guess they have a few hundred thousand CVTs they have to get rid of first.

Still, with all of that, my biggest complaint seems rather benign.  A 50l gas tank with an absolute maximum range of 450 km (all highway) just doesn't cut it for my driving routine that can see me 100+km between gas stations from time to time.  I've never had to plan my fuel stops that carefully before...

[sacrat]

This is one weird looking car.  What's worse, Chryco's decision to go with a cvt rather than a standard 4 speed auto tranny doomed this vehicle and it's more handsome sibling, the Patriot.  Most Jeepers could overlook the utilitarian interior (common in many vehicles these days) if it had a bit of pep and was fun to drive.  This is neither.  It also lacks the Freedom Drive II option offered on the Patriot for better off road performance.  Finally, it has a 51l gas tank so you can stop at gas stations every 4.5 hours.  Ditch the Compass, put a small six in the Patriot with a 4 or 5 speed auto, a slightly bigger gas tank and watch sales improve dramatically.


It's amazing that people who design and market cars could get it so wrong - they must not look at their competition...

Are you sure about poor sales ?! I see a zillion of these and Patriots on the road. Of course true Jeepers won't buy it, but they are not the target. For the price they are actually a decent bargain.I agree about the gas tank, but I'm not sure if there's room back there to go larger

[Sival]

I know someone with a 2007 FDII Patriot.  He says he's burning over 9l/100km in "real world" highway driving - I do a consistent 10.8L/100km with a 4.0L I6 engine.  In town, the numbers are probably better.

When comparing the Cherokee to the Patriot (a bit unfair, really), I think about what the Cherokee was in it's heyday of the early 90's with the 4.0 I6.  It was nimble, fast ( 0- 60 in a little over 8.0 seconds was good - even sports car like in it's time) and was equally at home at the mall and the cottage/farm/mud and had cutting edge styling at the time - all told almost 3 million were sold.  Compass/Patriot miss most of these marks.  A small V6 or 4 speed auto would have fixed the performance issue - I guess they have a few hundred thousand CVTs they have to get rid of first.

Still, with all of that, my biggest complaint seems rather benign.  A 50l gas tank with an absolute maximum range of 450 km (all highway) just doesn't cut it for my driving routine that can see me 100+km between gas stations from time to time.  I've never had to plan my fuel stops that carefully before...

9,0l/100 Km is either 16 or 20% better than 10,8 l/100 Km depending on how you calculate it, not 10%. So you actually confirm the ratings with your anecdotal evidence.

A 4-speed automatic would be worse than the CVT in terms of performance, even if Chrysler's programming of it is really not good. As to performance, it's sure that an automatic 4 cylinder in a small SUV is not speedster. Someone who wants more performance can opt for a manual Patriot, only with FDI though, that will be just as fast as the former V6 auto Cherokee.

Finally, people wanting the spiritual successor of the V6 equipped Cherokee have the Liberty which is quite directly its successor and replacement. It's just as small, just as nimble and just as good off-road. The Patriot/Compass is more the successor of the cheaper trims of the Cherokee.

[aknutson]

Why anyone would choose this over the Patriot leaves me baffled. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but as a fan of the old Cherokee, that little Patriot hits a soft spot...even though it will never replace that Cherokee.

[sacrat]

Someone who wants more performance can opt for a manual Patriot, only with FDI though, that will be just as fast as the former V6 auto Cherokee.

Finally, people wanting the spiritual successor of the V6 equipped Cherokee have the Liberty which is quite directly its successor and replacement. It's just as small, just as nimble and just as good off-road. The Patriot/Compass is more the successor of the cheaper trims of the Cherokee.

Unless things have changed, you can match AWD with a manual in the Patriot. Only Freedom 2 the trail rated package requires the CVT. When I looked at 09s, I was considering a AWD manual North Edition. Unlike many companies CVTs (Nissan) better mileage was also available with the manual.This was a bonus in purchase price and ecking out a few more kms from the small tank. I actually had a deposit down on one before I decided better deals were to be had at Hyundai. Incidently my Sonata has a 67 litre tank which was a great selling point    

[saint_satan]

Sival:

Lot's of good 4 cylinder SUVs with decent performance - see Rav4 and Cr-V.  I hear the  4 cyl. Escape isn't that bad…

Just to clarify:

 "Greater than 9.0l/100km" = 9.5l/km not 9.0l/100km (confirmed) = 13%

The last "V6" Cherokee was made in 1986 (GM 2.8l V6)

The 4.0l I6 will smoke any 5 speed 2.4l.  I haven't tried it - but I'd be willing    based on the following:

The numbers for the 2001 Cherokee 4.0l I6 are 193hp with 243ft lbs of torque. The 2.4 I4 Partiot are 172 hp with 165 ft lbs. of torque.  Curb weight is almost identical.  Do the math.

It's silly to compare an SUV built in 2010 with earlier versions of a vehicle that hasn't been made in 10 models years.  But I will concede this -  the performance of a brand new Patriot would match a base model Cherokee built 26 years ago.

The Liberty - I like the first generation. 

Nible? - yes ! most incredible turning radius of any SUV I've driven. 

Stylish? - yes - 1st generation = cutting edge

Quick?  Not really - smaller engine + 1,000 lbs curb weight slows things down compared to Cherokee.

As good off road?   Nope - not even close - BUT good enough.

Better on the highway?  Absolutely!

Second generation Liberty - Chryco laid a huge egg... Sales numbers will bear this out…

Simple common sense changes could have made the Patriot a first class small SUV BUT Cerbrus was busy gutting the company and ignored one of the few Chrycos that had curb appeal.  Lot’s of Patriots on the road – sure.  10 x more Escapes for the same money.

And only 1/10 Patriots are “trail rated”.  50l fuel tank = inexcusable…

I’m officially a Jeep geek and I’m now going to buy a Honda before it gets worse…

P.S. The Compass sucks...