By on July 17, 2017

2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk - Image: © Timothy Cain

2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk

2.4-liter inline-four, SOHC (180 horsepower @ 6,400 rpm; 175 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm)

Nine-speed automatic, all-wheel drive

22 city / 30 highway / 25 combined (EPA Rating, MPG)

10.8 city / 7.8 highway / 9.5 combined (NRCan Rating, L/100km)

21.8 mpg [10.8 L/100 km] (Observed)

Base Price: $22,090 (U.S) / $26,795 (Canada)

As Tested: $35,200 (U.S.) / $41,500 (Canada)

Prices include $1,095 destination charge in the United States and $1,895 for freight, PDI, and A/C tax in Canada and, because of cross-border equipment differences, can’t be directly compared.

This is the new, second-generation 2017 Jeep Compass, tested here in $35,200 Trailhawk guise, including $5,510 in options.

It’s two inches shorter than the old Compass but two inches wider. The new Compass offers 20-percent more cargo capacity than the old Compass and, according to the specs, marginally less space for passengers. The Trailhawk’s 8.5-inches of ground clearance is up by four-tenths of an inch.

Forget the specs, though. And for a moment, forget the price. This new Jeep Compass is better than the old Jeep Compass.

It would be difficult not to be.

But comparisons with the an old Jeep Compass that went on sale in 2006, while making for easy reading and easy writing, won’t take us very far. Rather, our goal is to determine whether the new 2017 Jeep Compass is a worthy compact utility vehicle today.

Because improving upon a vehicle that, in 2006, TTAC called “ an ugly, gangly, underpowered, mud-aversive half-breed,” a vehicle that “stomps all over Jeep’s reputation as America’s purveyor of authentic off-road vehicles,” wouldn’t be surprising, sufficient, or significant.

2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk - Image: © Timothy CainForgetting the old Compass and its departing Patriot sibling, the 2017 Jeep Compass squeezes into a narrow niche in Jeep’s lineup between the smaller Renegade and larger Cherokee. The result is the right-sized member of the trio. Though larger, the Cherokee doesn’t feel roomier inside than the new Compass. Meanwhile, the Compass’s half-foot of extra length compared with the Renegade pays major dividends inside. Adults can sit happily in back, and there are 27 cubic feet of cargo capacity behind the rear seats, 47 percent more than the Renegade offers.

Yet while the Cherokee offers a 3.2-liter V6 that imbues the larger of Jeep’s three small crossovers with moderate quickness, the 2017 Compass does no better than the Renegade’s 180-horsepower 2.4-liter four-cylinder. Underwhelming in the Renegade, the 2.4-liter — hooked up to a painfully eco-minded nine-speed automatic that hates downshifting more than I hate downpours — is downright anemic in the Compass, particularly in our Trailhawk tester with the added weight of all-wheel drive bits and optional extras.2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk - Image: © Timothy CainIt’s not just the lackluster takeoff from rest. Apply heavy throttle at 60 miles per hour and you still won’t encounter much in the way of additional forward progress. In 2017, 180 horsepower and a 3,633-pound curb weight don’t mix. Mind you, a basic front-wheel-drive Compass tips the scales with roughly 450 fewer pounds, enough to hasten the Jeep’s hurry.

Yet if a lack of accelerative ability is the Jeep’s foremost fault, it’s one of only a few major gripes. First, despite many past positive interactions with Uconnect, the week spent with the 2017 Compass Trailhawk was full of freezes during which even audio couldn’t be turned off. Then the Trailhawk’s somewhat rugged Falken Wildpeak tires interrupted some of the Compass’s impressive air of maturity by wandering about at highway speeds, far removed from the straight-line stability of virtually every direct competitor. This does no favors to the Compass’s already hyperactive lane departure warning system that simply must be turned off because of its sensitivity. Moreover, given how much of a downward glance is required to adjust the low-mounted climate controls, another meaningful objection, more straight-line stability is sorely needed.2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk rear - Image: © Timothy CainFortunately the new Jeep Compass is a delight in many other areas. Free from any sporting pretense, the Compass Trailhawk instead emphasizes supply ride quality, absorbing the worst pavement with ease and in silence.

Even with a comfort-oriented approach, the 2017 Compass is nevertheless small enough to be nimble; sorted well enough to be relatively agile. Sure, the steering is predictably lifeless, the brakes announce more stopping power by way of a firm pedal than they actually possess, and the transmission (while never flubbing shifts as it has in past applications) is an unwilling partner. But it’s easy to see how the Compass chassis is capable of handling more power and more sporting bias without ruining the refined nature of its on-road experience.

Quiet and smooth operation is particularly notable in the new Compass in large part because the model isn’t as confined to pavement as many compact crossovers, at least not in this Trailhawk format.2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk - Image: © Timothy CainThe Trailhawk’s Active Drive Low 4×4 all-wheel-drive system makes use of a Selec-Terrain selector with a Rock mode, one you’re unlikely to ever require. There are also minor styling alterations that provide the Trailhawk with improved 30.3/24.4/33.6-degree approach, breakover, and departure angles. Then there’s a low-range-aping crawl ratio of 20:1, skid plates, and a ride height increase of nearly an inch. We spent much of our time with the Compass off pavement, and while we didn’t ford 19 inches of water (Jeep says the Compass Trailhawk can) there’s an obvious sense of competence once you’ve strayed from the beaten path that you never perceive in a Honda CR-V, Hyundai Tucson, or virtually any direct Compass alternative.

Do you buy a 2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk because you’re an avid off-roader? It would probably be a mistake to do so. But if you find yourself in a rural setting and want to grab some photos from the top of usually inaccessible hill, the second-gen Compass performs tricks other small crossovers can’t.

2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk interior - Image: © Timothy CainBuilding the Compass that does all of this quite obviously costs a pretty penny. Compass pricing starts at $22,090. All-wheel-drive Compass pricing requires another $1,500. But the Trailhawk starts at $29,690. Throw in luxury features via the $895 Advanced Safety & Lighting Group and the $745 Cold Weather Package, plus $895 navigation, a $495 power tailgate, and a $1,295 panoramic roof, and the Compass is competing in a price category where its basic interior materials and weak 2.4-liter engine simply don’t belong.

Given the savings over a comparable Jeep Cherokee, however, the 2017 Compass Trailhawk begins to stand out from the pack of seven-slat grille crossovers thanks to its impressive ride quality and quiet cabin and nimble chassis.

Forget the old Compass. The more costly Cherokee is the Jeep with which the new Jeep Compass must be compared.

[Images: © Timothy Cain/The Truth About Cars]

Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Autofocus.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

83 Comments on “2017 Jeep Compass Trailhawk Review – In a World Gone Mad for Crossover Cars, a Crossover That Wants to Be an SUV...”


  • avatar
    thelaine

    Return of the AMC Eagle.

  • avatar
    caltemus

    So jeep lately is the most off road capable vehicle in it’s class’ in every class it competes in? I suppose that’s one way to get sales while only moderately diluting the brand, which is probably one of FCA’s most valuable assets right now.

  • avatar
    Hoon Goon

    So much offroading prowess with the red tow hooks and all. Sweet unibody bro.

  • avatar
    Flipper35

    Get rid of the power liftgate and you save some weight up high.

  • avatar
    sirwired

    It’s hilarious how many Jeep reviews come down to: “Well, by a large margin, the Jeep is about the most mediocre choice for 90+% of the people that might buy one, but out of all the competitors, it’s certainly the Jeep-iest!”

    Aggressively carving out a niche is not necessarily the worst choice in such a competitive segment, where generic all-around excellence takes effort, ability, money, and reputation, none of which FCA has a surplus of. Selling a such a distinctive car tends to keep cross-shopping to a minimum, which is more than, say, Hyundai or GM can say.

    • 0 avatar
      turbosasquatch

      I agree. Jeep is trying to market the “butch” crossover. It’s hard to argue against the usefulness of the crossover but they have the reputation as mom-mobiles. Jeep is waving its arms wildly screaming “our crossovers are manly!” and it works.

      I just don’t understand why other car companies aren’t doing anything similar.

  • avatar
    JimZ

    it’s worth noting that the Compass was re-styled and got a marginally better interior in 2010. the original which launched in ’07 was horrendous.

  • avatar
    stingray65

    Jeep is not well served by the Fiat parts-bin engines. Not particularly powerful, economical, reliable, responsive, or smooth. Put a new turbo-4 from Honda or even Ford in this and you would have a world-beater.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    Impressive approach and departure angles, and despite the stubbiness it wears the Grand Cherokee styling well. 30mpg highway and some real ability to get down a dirt track, not bad at all. I could see myself wanting one if I didn’t need to carry four people and gear–this could be do well at running the family up a local trail for the day, but not as a camping rig.

    Shame then about the powertrain and MSRP. The latter is negotiable, but you’re stuck with 20 lbs/hp and that 9-speed no matter how well you haggle.

    To commit the notorious faux pas around here, I’d personally look hard at a 1-2yo Grand Cherokee for ~$31K just to get the better powertrain.

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      “Shame then about the powertrain and MSRP. The latter is negotiable, but you’re stuck with 20 lbs/hp and that 9-speed no matter how well you haggle.”

      There are 6 speed auto and manual transmissions available on lesser models than the TH. A 6MT 4×4 model would be my preference.

  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    Patriot continuing for a year or two more as one or two trim levels with no options would have been good for FCA. Fleet sales and entry level coverage. People that actually own the Patriot are pretty darn happy.
    Without Dart what entry level vehicle does Chrysler-Ram-Dodge-Jeep have on the market?
    Compass is competitive which is great. It’s also expensive compared to the actual selling price of the vehicle it replaced.

    • 0 avatar
      quaquaqua

      “People that actually own the Patriot” are stupid. Anyone who actually knows something about cars would never buy one, so basically you’re saying stupid people are happy with their stupid choice. That is true of every single car on the road, no matter how frumpy or crappy or maddening to live with they are. Doesn’t change the fact that no new FCA product since the current Grand Cherokee bowed years ago has been even remotely competitive.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        quaquaqua is the perfect example of someone who thinks he’s an expert because he can parrot what he reads in Jalopnik comment threads.

        here’s a hint: repeating the whinings of a bunch of kids who can’t afford to buy any new car (even with their parents co-signing) doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about. These things sell pretty well because the mass market doesn’t care what a small handful of blog commenters think is a better use of money.

        • 0 avatar
          gtemnykh

          I was going to say, within the niche of bottom-feeder (read:$17k new on the dealer lot or whatever low monthly payment subprime loan) AWD CUVs among which I’d include the Patriot and old Compass, old bodystyle Rogue “select” and Mitsubishi Outlander Sport, the Patriot is definitely a solid pick. Regular 6spd auto aside from the few FreedomDrive II optioned vehicles, cool trucky looks, good clearance. You can even find a manual+4wd variant. Not the most reliable or best built, but not horrible by the end of the run.

      • 0 avatar
        Oberkanone

        Point A to point b transportation at an affordable cost. Patriot met the expectations and needs of many buyers. Inexpensive is seldom the gold standard. With the exception of Patriot/Compass with the CVT it’s a decent vehicle at the prices it sold for.

        While a Patriot is not my choice of vehicle, if Patriot is right for you it does not make you stupid. Telling people they are stupid says more about you than it does about the person you are insulting.

        • 0 avatar
          syncro87

          Weren’t the vast majority of Patriot/Compass sold over the years equipped with the CVT? The traditional automatic came along pretty late in the run if I recall, and the percentage of the pair with the manual is likely in the single digits.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            The 6spd auto was around since ’11 or so, so half the run more or less. The CVT is not quite as horrible as people like to make it out to be, neither in reliability nor in what the layman thought of their performance/NVH. Having said that I’d make sure to hunt down a stick shift one if I were to ever to consider the purchase of one of these.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            I have a neighbor that uses a Patriot as a work vehicle (company fleet) and he’s said, “The thing’s a tank!” He’s been very surprised at how durable it has been for him over the time he’s had it, especially since he travels a lot and often on soft roads.

    • 0 avatar
      seanx37

      Does FCA need an entry level product? With the absurdly low lease deals, their entry level product is the 300. Can be found well under $200 a month in my area. Rams for $199 a month. The loss of the cheap old Patriot/Compass is a real loss. Those went out the door for well under $200 a month. Those were what dealers lived off of.

  • avatar
    volvo

    Let’s just say you won’t be going to Baja with that ground clearance. OK for moderately potholed dirt roads or some of the reasonable streets in Detroit

  • avatar
    RS

    You can get 4×4 with the 6 speed auto in some trim levels. I just priced a build on Jeep.com and came up with a Latitude with 4×4, 6sp auto, tow package, cold weather package for $26,525.

    Tow capacity is 2000 lbs with the package. It looks like it’s only an option on 4×4’s and Latitude trim or higher. It’s an interesting option on a small SUV.

  • avatar
    BunkerMan

    NB Plates. 506 represent! (Did I do that right?)

  • avatar
    derekson

    Off topic but since this is the only active FCA thread: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-17/new-u-s-subprime-boom-same-old-sins-auto-defaults-are-soaring

    Looks like we figured out the secret to why Jeep and RAM really took off even disproportionate to the SUV and truck market, partnering with Santander to give out fraudulent loans.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      Good thing I don’t buy or lease through shady, unknown, financiers. But I highly doubt Jeep/FCA is the only brand seeing defaults. This ridiculous idea of stretching car payments out to 8 years is ludicrous! I’m betting a lot more of those $50K-$60K pickup trucks are defaulting than are Jeeps.

  • avatar
    gtemnykh

    $35k MSRP for this thing, I’d make a bee-line straight to a 4Runner SR5 if I wanted off-road capability/durability (and massively better resale to boot) or else a Grand Cherokee Laredo if I wanted a much nicer Jeep, or a Subaru Crosstrek if I wanted a very underpowered crossover with a modicum off dirt road ability (and massively better resale).

    • 0 avatar
      syncro87

      Yeah, at $35k (real world transaction prices may be considerably lower), I don’t see any value here. A lot of far better choices at that price point.

      At $20-25k, Compass makes a lot more sense to me.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    “Yet while the Cherokee offers a 3.2-liter V6 that imbues the larger of Jeep’s three small crossovers with moderate quickness, the 2017 Compass does no better than the Renegade’s 180-horsepower 2.4-liter four-cylinder. Underwhelming in the Renegade, the 2.4-liter — hooked up to a painfully eco-minded nine-speed automatic that hates downshifting more than I hate downpours — is downright anemic in the Compass, particularly in our Trailhawk tester with the added weight of all-wheel drive bits and optional extras.”

    My bet is that the Compass you drove had less than 2,000 miles on it OR has been in the hands of so many different drivers that it hasn’t had a chance to learn any one driver’s habits. I’ve been driving the Renegade now for 9 months and over 6000 miles and the Renegade HAS learned how to down-shift and is much more responsive to me as a result. Yes, I had a similar complaint in the first few hundred miles because on a slight grade it wouldn’t downshift until the engine dropped below 1500 rpm… and then it would have to jump two gears to get the torque it needed to get back up to speed. Now if the revs drop even 200 from cruise, it downshifts and gets back up without me needing to goose it. Admittedly, it doesn’t want to downshift sharply in city traffic, but on the highway it is responsive as all get-out to a passing maneuver.

    Again, the transmission just needs to be trained.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      Overall, I don’t believe the Compass is anywhere near as bad as you want to believe. For being only marginally lighter with the same engine/transaxle combo, the Renegade practically leaps out of the gate. Acceleration is remarkably smooth and as long as you’re not racing along at 80mph the economy should be reasonable; even with the Renegade’s blunt nose, I’ve exceeded 32mpg on the freeway by just keeping it at or slightly below the posted speed limits. (63 mph seems to be its sweet spot.) So I can’t imagine the Compass being any worse–once it has learned its driver.

      • 0 avatar
        brandloyalty

        Vulpine: “32 mpg highway”. Is that US or Imperial gallons?

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          US. I am an American. I just happen to drive more sensibly than most. EPA estimates assumes people drive above the speed limit because the average American drives above the speed limit.

      • 0 avatar

        My ’15 Renegade with the 1.4 turbo and 6MT will break 36 mpg at a steady 70 mph on a flat road. Overall average for the 2 years I’ve owned it is in the neighborhood of 31 mpg.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          That’s the advantage of the smaller engine, though I have to ask what its acceleration is like.

          I live in the coastal plain area of the Atlantic seaboard but my travel consistently takes me over the hilly country of the foothills and into the Appalachian mountain range where the average speed limit is 70mph. My 9-speed version with the bigger engine handles these hills very handily, but they do pull on the fuel economy over the length of the journey. Over the years, the only vehicle I’ve owned that has exceeded my Renegade’s economy was a ’96 Camaro with the 3.8 V6 under the hood. Its advantage was aerodynamics as it had minimal frontal area by comparison and a much more streamlined shape. That’s why I’m thinking the Compass would have the advantage over the Renegade despite being marginally longer and heavier. But… The Compass is now very generic looking in the Jeep fleet as the Cherokee and Grand Cherokee are reasonably similar (especially the GC.)

          Now, please note that I’ve managed 25mph average mileage with a Wrangler on the east-bound leg of the trip I just described. That done by holding it down to 60mph except when passing slower cars. That’s 25mpg average over 650 miles and passing through the D.C. area at 2am on the beltway. (I do have photo proof of it reaching that economy on the freeway, albeit blurry due to the relatively rough ride on concrete.) So I’m not surprised the Renegade could do as you say on flat highway with that small engine. I was tempted myself, but my wife prefers automatics and some ‘get out of its own way’ power, so we chose a 75th Anniversary edition.

    • 0 avatar
      syncro87

      This post makes me chuckle. Apologies if I roll my eyes a little here.

      This whole “the transmission just needs time to learn your driving style” line was a brilliant cop out used often by the service writers at the VW/Audi dealership where I used to work, when confronted with an upset customer. It was the easiest way to brush them off, minimize their issue, or to make them feel like the problem was them, not the car. The general tactic was to convey to the customer that their new vehicle was so incredibly advanced that they (customer) were rubes to even question the transmission’s performance. Have you been living under a rock, Mr. Client? Transmissions these days LEARN. LEARN, I say. This transmission monitors your driving style thirteen thousand times per second. With patience, you may, someday, if you’re lucky, be able to appreciate it.

      There is, of course, some truth to the adaptive “learning” thing, but not to -nearly- the extent the service advisors wanted the clients to believe. It isn’t like the car defaults to some 100% crap mode, then magically learns the driver’s preference and transforms into something totally different. There will be some small adjustments, but it isn’t a sow’s ear to silk purse kind of thing.

      The service (and sales) guys basically laid it out to the customer that the transmission was so special and intelligent that it was like a fragile flower that needed to be nurtured, gently spoon fed input and information, until the vaunted adaptation epiphany would one day take place. All would, at that point, be well.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        Well, you may disbelieve it all you like; I did. But we chose the Renegade as the wife’s car for work but I’m the primary driver for any two-person rides (her choice) and I’ve seen what a few months of getting used to the driver can do with these Jeep/Fiat automatics. I’m really hoping for a Jeep or Ram mid-sized truck using the same drivetrain.

        All it takes is a little time.

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        “With patience, you may, someday, if you’re lucky, be able to appreciate it”

        LOL. I remember the VW sales guy giving me that line when I mentioned the recalcitrant downshift behavior of a 2012 DSG GTI. HATED that transmission on the test drive. The 2015 Mk7 was much better when I tried it. On that test drive, 3 years later, I was given the brilliant pupil transmission line once again.

      • 0 avatar
        joeaverage

        I’m wondering if aging transmission fluid makes a difference to how an automatic transmission shifts.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      “the transmission just needs to be trained.”

      Maybe they need to be sent to obedience school?

      Shift means SHIFT, no treat for you!

  • avatar
    tallguy130

    Reminds me of something my father said right before he sold his old jeep Cherokee . “It’s a terrible vehicle but an excellent Jeep”. I drove it a few times most in normal conditions on the freeway and once in a really bad snow storm.

    That statement was the most honest review of a car ever…

  • avatar
    dmoan

    I would stay away from any new FCA products considering their track record with reliability.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      “I would stay away from any new FCA products considering their track record with reliability.”

      … which isn’t nearly as bad as you think it is.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        I’m sure it is not, its probably worse.

        • 0 avatar
          dmoan

          Worse may be understatement I would say, I have 2016 Jeep Cherokee and it’s got ton of issues. Only consolidation is I got ton of upfront money for trade in, took like 7k off MSRP and small lease payments.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            … and I’ve got a 2016 Renegade with no issues. I’m finding it quite the ideal runabout for everyday driving.

            Your experience may not be the same as mine but my experience with two different Fiat-built products suggests that the problems may not be with Fiat but rather with the American plant where your Cherokee was built.

      • 0 avatar
        joeaverage

        I agree. Have several FCA vehicles in the coworker fleet. They are aging as well as anything else.

        One is a Patroit approaching 70K miles. Not a single problem since new.

        Another is an aging Chrysler minivan. ~250K miles and lots of neglect. Still rolling along albeit with suspension noises.

        And so on…

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      What track record with reliability? You mean those things Consumer Reports says? JD Power? Practically worthless. Things that are said on these very boards by the staff writers? Even worse. I went into my first Fiat ownership believing the same things you do–and the Fiat proved me wrong. It was more reliable by far than what I expected and had performance that made the TTAC review look sick. The thing, for having the base 1.6, was lively as heck and outran many bigger cars 0-60. Trucks too.

      My Renegade has carried that on; the 9-speed is a quick transmission because it puts a lower starting gear out there for the 2.5L and the beastie likes to MOVE! Maybe it’s not as fast overall as a V6 model, but it’s still quick for its size and engine.

  • avatar
    syncro87

    How about a review of the Sport trim with 4×4 and manual transmission? You can find reviews of boring stuff like automatic Trailhawks everywhere, but rarely if ever the unicorn variant.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      The Unicorn variant doesn’t have the same engine; it’s got a smaller, turbocharged engine that offers a bit more torque but is down about 30 horses. You also can’t get it with the Trailhawk low range (Rock) setting on the AWD.

      • 0 avatar
        gtemnykh

        For what it’s worth that “low range” is absolutely a marketing gimmick, there is no difference in gear ratios vs the lesser trims, that “20:1 crawl ratio” they extoll is literally the same ratio as it is in every other Renegade/Compass with the 9spd. The more you know. The rock setting’s more aggressive use of the brake-based traction control is legit however.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          Marketing genius it may be, but the 6-speed doesn’t offer that low range and I was specifically talking about the 1.6T with 6-speed when I mentioned that.

          • 0 avatar
            iNeon

            Vulpine– just a minor nit. The base engine you keep referencing (as a 1.6) is a 1.4.

            Carry on.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            I’ll take your word for it. Even so, that little turbo is lively enough but simply doesn’t have the same kind of horses as the 2.5 MultiAir and is ONLY available with the stick, just as the stick is ONLY available with that smaller engine.

          • 0 avatar
            iNeon

            There is no 2.5l MultiAir engine– it is a 2.4l, and on Compass the 2.4l does come with the 6-speed.

            I do not intend to follow you around (no matter that it seems so!) and correct you, but– one does need to know these things if they’re going to argue.

            The Compass has my current FCA car money. Just the 2.4/manual in a wagon makes it the best they offer for me. The 1.4 is fun– had one a couple years now in the Dart– but you can keep it.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            “There is no 2.5l MultiAir engine– it is a 2.4l, and on Compass the 2.4l does come with the 6-speed.”

            —- Ok. On the Renegade it doesn’t… yet.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Well phew I’m glad the not-an-SUV wishes it was an SUV, and it can actually drive through well cleared trail without getting stuck or breaking for 35K [!] USD.

    Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.

  • avatar
    shane_the_ee

    $35k for a Compass!?! Has the world gone mad? The Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon is only $2k more, and $1k MORE than a 4Runner SR5.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      “$35k for a Compass!?! Has the world gone mad? The Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon is only $2k more,…”

      The Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon also doesn’t have the comfort or most of the options that the Trailhawk as tested has, either. There is a trade-off. You want real off-road cred or do you want a soft-roader you can be fairly sure won’t get stuck? If you don’t need the mountain-crawler, purpose-built, go anywhere, do anything capability of the Rubicon, then the Compass might be the better choice.

  • avatar
    legacygt

    Got driven around in one of these on the Jeep course at the NY Auto Show. No doubt impressive what Jeep can do with cars like these. It doesn’t tackle the course like a Wrangler but all the electronic wizardry gets this thing through with too much fuss.

    I like the car but it shouldn’t exist. Nothing wrong with it but it just doesn’t make sense. There’s little white space between the Renegade and Cherokee. This barely squeezes in. The only real explanation I can think of is that FCA is not confident that the styling of the Renegade and/or Cherokee will hold up over time. The styling of the more conservatively styled Compass may hold up better. But the terrible thing about the Compass has nothing to do with the Compass at all. It has to do with FCA finding the resources to develop and market this largely redundant vehicle while Jeep still doesn’t have a three row vehicle.

    The review is correct that the competition is the Cherokee. Maybe also the Forester, which I bet can follow the Compass pretty much anywhere.

    • 0 avatar
      legacygt

      Just to follow up on my point about cramming another car into the existing lineup. I just checked Jeeps web site where you can compare vehicles. They currently list 7 Jeeps available for sale. The cheapest base MSRP is $18K. The most expensive base MSRP is $30K. I am aware that packages and options can increase these significantly. But my point is that they have a very complete lineup between the Renegade and Grand Cherokee. They should be looking to extend the lineup, not cram move vehicles into existing spaces. A three-row Jeep could start at $40K and make its way up from there. It could be hugely popular. And they could have developed it cheaply with the Grand Cherokee/Durango platform. Instead they toy with the idea of a $150K Jeep or a Ram-based option. Fine. Maybe those ideas are worth pursuing. But right now (and for the past several years) would-be Jeep customers who need a third row have been shopping at other brands. Pretty much every competitor has something to offer these customers. Jeep has simply ignored this space.

  • avatar
    Kato

    $40K CDN? Bwahaha! It’s at least better looking than the hideous Cherokee. I can get a nice used GC or Wrangler for a lot less, both of which would be superior in multiple ways.

  • avatar
    Kato

    TTAC:

    “In 2017, 180 horsepower and a 3,633-pound curb weight don’t mix.”

    I read this and thought, that’s not so bad, this thing is surprisingly light.

    Jeep.ca:

    “GVWR: 2131 KG (4700 LB)”

    OK, now I get why you think it’s sluggish. A little more proof-reading please..

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Curb weight and Gross Vehicle Weight Rating are not the same.

      Curb weight = empty vehicle, parked by the ‘curb’.
      GVWR = Curb weight + rated load capacity (people and their stuff).

      So in this case, the Compass apparently has a load capacity of about 1067 lbs.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • slavuta: Rusty Protege buys a lot of good stuff, if you know what I mean
  • krhodes1: Two adults and two kids in a Fiesta? Why not (at least space wise)? I wouldn’t want to put up with...
  • Guitar man: The Riley 1.5 is just a Morris Major with twin SUs instead of one. The Wolsley mini had a much more...
  • Guitar man: Probably a Minor 1000, since it has a single piece windscreen (earlier had a split windscreen). The...
  • krhodes1: I bought a ’13 Abarth new for the same reason over the FiST. It was just so much more fun, and I...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States