Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has released the first official images of the 2017 Jeep Compass, the solitary model replacing both the original Compass and its slab-sided Patriot compatriot.
Say goodbye to the flag-waving Patriot name, as this is a world model, and global Jeep customers are more familiar with the Compass name. Fittingly, the small SUV’s coming out party was held at its Goiana, Brazil assembly plant.
Riding atop a stretched version of the Fiat Small-Wide platform found in the smaller Renegade, the Compass replaces two endlessly derided vehicles that sold amazingly well, especially over the last two years.
Buyers flocked to the low price and visual Jeepiness of those models, and FCA wants global customers to continue that trend with the twins’ solitary replacement. Production has already begun in Brazil, but American buyers will source their models from Mexico.
Images aside, Jeep remains tight-lipped about what powertrains we can expect in North America. Those details will have to wait until the model’s domestic debut at the Los Angeles Auto Show in November. Jeep did say that the Compass offers “17 fuel-efficient powertrain options for consumers in more than 100 countries around the world,” so start guessing.
The automaker’s stalwart 2.4-liter four-cylinder matched with a nine-speed automatic seems the most obvious choice for a North American volume model, but there are other four-cylinders that Jeep could toss into the mix. That includes the turbocharged 2.0-liter “Hurricane” four bound for the 2018 Wrangler.
The company claims the Compass offers “best-in-class 4×4 off-road capability,” so it’s safe to say you’ll see a few “Trail Rated” badges when the model hits dealer lots in the first quarter of 2017.
[Images: Fiat Chrysler Automobiles]
So this fits in between the Renegade and the Cherokee? How close dimensionally is it expected to be when compared to the Cherokee? I guess CUVs/SUVs will now be sold in incremental half-size iterations of one another.
Good riddance to the Patriot name. What a stupid name for a vehicle – one reason I would buy a Compass over one simply because of the name.
Too bad, for I really liked the slab style, like the old Cherokee.
It’s kind of the ultimate irony that there’s still a slab sided, solid front/rear axle equipped 4wd SUV called “Patriot,” and it’s made by the Russians!
http://starmoz.com/images/uaz-patriot-14.jpg
Manual only, Body on frame, true part time transfer case with low range, fantastically roomy, available with a pair of (somewhat gutless) 4 cylinder engines, gas and turbo diesel.
Cost starts at about 700k rubles, or a bit over $10k USD with the current exchange rate.
Here in the US, suburban moms will have to soldier on with their “SUV” named for an obese native American.
Yes, lets put the name ‘Patriot” in the recycle bin along with Liberty/ Commander/ Nitro (LOL) and permanently shred with AVG.
I think this looks good. Much better than the cartoonish Renegade (can’t believe how many of those I see). And the size could be just right. Although three small SUVs with overlapping prices does seem a bit much, especially when the Renegade’s price can creep way into the 30s.
Cartoonish sells, at least when the Jeep name is slapped on the front.
And I suspect less than 5% of the buyers could tell you it was built in Italy or Brasil.
I like the way this looks. Although we are beginning to split hairs with Renegade, Compass, and Cherokee – how much interior volume difference is there in actuality?
If the new Compass is cheaper than the Renegade it is going to spank the Renegade in sales from here to Italy and back.
No more cheap for you, there is a whole new(er) platform to pay off. You will overpay for the same thing three or four times over, and you will like it.
Honestly I think they either need to lower the renegades price or price this lower. They are losing a lot of sales that the compatriot had with out that.
They are splitting hairs, but then Toyota sells 1) RAV4, 2) Highlander, 3) 4Runner 4) Sequoia – that’s not counting Land Cruiser and Lexus models. If anything they could stand adding a mini-CUV like HR-V or Crosstrek. FCA are far from having too many CUVs.
Toyota does have a subcompact SUV planned, the C-HR I think. But keep in mind Jeep (not FCA, just JEEP), with the Renegade, Compass, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, Wagoneer, and Wrangler, will have a range of 6 SUVs. 7 if the Grand Wagoneer ends up distinct, and 8 if you count the Wrangler Unlimited as a seperate model (justifiable, it’s a whole size class bigger than the vanilla Wrangler). And then you’ve got the Dodge Journey and Fiat 500x on top of those. ;)
Granted it’s hard to say they’re overdooing Jeep when Jeep seems to have a license to print money, as compared to the other nameplates. But I do wonder if that many might start cannibalizing sales from each other rather than the competition.
When the Patriot/Compass came out, I was really surprised at how ugly the Compass was. I had a friend buy one with an automatic in black, and while I silently gagged, he liked it. Never figured it would make the cut and the Patriot wouldn’t. It’s all in the name. Looks great though.
Put me in the “it looks good” camp. It’s not something I would ever buy but it is a major step-up compared to the aged Patriot and Compass.
Meh, looks like every other CUV to me. Not bad, but nothing special. I’ll kind of miss Patriots huge greenhouse, the last of a dying breed.
What about the Forester?
Looks better than the Renegade, but I bet it’s heavier. Question is, is it as heavy as the rather porky Cherokee? If it is, it may be worthy of consideration, since I don’t particularly like the Renegade design.
It’s pretty eye opening to see how heavy modern Jeep crossovers are.
Renegade Trailhawk: 3600lb
Cherokee Trailhawk: 4000lb (not sure if v6 or 4cyl)
For comparison, a early 2000s Grand Cherokee Laredo 4wd with two solid axles and significantly more interior volume weighs 3800lb
An old XJ Cherokee with 4wd and a cast iron 4.0L six weighs 3200ish lb
My ’96 4Runner with likewise a cast iron block V6, a frame, solid rear axle and a boatload more utility weighs 3750lb
The now-discontinued Patriot weighed a somewhat reasonable 3100-3300lb (also a tad porky for what it is IMO)
I was actually considering moving up to the Cherokee, thinking it was time to upsize from the compact hatch/subcompact SUV class. Then I saw how heavy it was. Even the non-Trailhawk is nearly 4000 lbs with AWD.
Interesting stats. “Lightweighting” is relatively expensive to do when substituting materials for cast iron and mild steel. (Although the old 3200 lb Cherokee certainly is a pretty robust platform, there are zillions of them soldiering on into their 3rd decade here in rust / pothole country.)
Not sure why the Renegade would be so much heavier. Lots of airbags and copper wire and computers I guess.
Honestly everything is pretty porky in its own way. My 2010 Highlander V6 4wd had a listed curb weight of 4200 lbs which was the lightest of a 3 row CUV comparison that C&D did.
How many times to I have to tell you that solid axles are actually lighter than equivalent multilink suspension? It was clearly demonstrated with the new Mustang, as well as when Liberty replaced Cherokee a while back. Current Wrangler is lighter than Highlander or Pilot by hundreds of pounds.
The Highlander and Pilot are longer, wider, and have nearly 50% more interior volume than an Unlimited Wrangler. They are literally a whole size up. They should be heavier.
According to cars.com, the Highlander and Unlimited Wrangler are within 100lbs of one another. The compact CUV class is more in line with the Wrangler as far as interior space and they are typically 3600-4000 lbs versus the Wranglers 4300-4400.
http://www.cars.com/go/compare/trimCompare.jsp?acodes=USC60TOS142C0,USC60JES162B0,USC60TOS112B0
Sorry, we didn’t quite hear you. Speak from the diaphragm next time.
Very well, but how do you reconcile my 4Runner example? I have an entire boxed steel frame that needs to be accounted for weight wise, and it at least has IFS. I think the newer cars must have much sturdier underlying structures in interest of safety and rigidity (NVH and handling).
A true apples to apples would be very interesting. I think that aside from the weight of the control arms and CV axles, we have to remember that the IFS vehicle will (most likely) have said control arms bolted to some sort of subframe. Perhaps the most equal comparison I can think of would be to take an Explorer SportTrac with a leaf sprung solid rear axle and weigh that detached from the vehicle, and do the same with a BOF 3rd gen Explorer with IFS.
The rumor on Allpar is that the next gen Cherokee will be longer to give some more space in the models. Also seems they may be moving the cherokee up the pricing ladder a little to leave room for this.
FWIW, Wikipedia says the KL Cherokee is a midsize, but I’m not so sure. It’s a hair smaller in both OAL and WB than the vehicle I consider to be the first (and smallest!) midsize CUV: the 2001 Highlander.
I see nothing wrong with the Cherokee becoming truly midsized (as in, 110″-ish WB), based on what 95% of its buyers are using it for.
Cherokee definitely needs to do something to improve interior capacity, the cargo space in particular seriously lags its main compact CUV competitors. Actually Honda’s HRV gives the KL Cherokee a run for its money in both seats up and seats down cargo room.
I wonder if they’re just in a hurry to retire the CUSW platform? With the Dart and the 200 gone and all. It was a little bit of a hack job when you get down to it.
Looks pretty good. I think I’m lovin’ it! Can’t wait to see it in person and check out the price, equipment and stats. Seems like if there is one brand that is on a roll, it is Jeep!
Making the new Compass look like a downsized Grand Cherokee is a clever ploy, what with the outré styling of the Renegade and Cherokee.
Essentially, when shopping for a Jeep, you can get a zany Renegade or Cherokee, a more conservative looking Compass or Grand Cherokee, or a ‘really’ old-school Wrangler.
Jeep’s low quality and reliability would keep me away, but for someone that just has to have one for the lifestyle statement, FCA certainly seems to have all the bases covered.
I like the looks, but I liked the current Compass, too.
But if it comes with “the automaker’s stalwart 2.4-liter four-cylinder matched with a nine-speed automatic”, I will *never* consider one.
BRRRRRTTT *endless vibration shudders*
And that’s whole stopped at a light.
This is a very handsome crossover. Sure there is overlap with the Renegade and Cherokee, but the people are demanding MOAR crossovers.
As an aside, the Patriot and Compass combined were putting down some serious volume. FCA should continue selling the Patriot to fleets similarly to how the Dodge Grand Caravan is still being sold to fleets. FCA could be walking away from a lot of volume.
“FCA should continue selling the Patriot to fleets”
Hell nah they shouldn’t. I don’t want to ever be ‘upgraded’ to a Patriot again by my rental company.
Slittier and slittier windows?
Go die in a hole, Jeeparoni.
Agree it’s better looking than the Cherokee, Renegade, and Compatriot, however that bar is not set very high. Let’s see, 4-cyl transverse engine, no manual and no low-range. Pass. I want this styling, a 3.2L longitudinal Pentastar, low range, and a manual. It’ll never happen though ’cause this thing will probably sell very well if they keep the price reasonable. The recipe for sales success is decent styling and an affordable price. Guess the number of buyers that actually care about capability are not significant.