Anyone Own a 2011 Jeep Compass?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: wsar10
you guys that are bashing jeeps...are driving or looking at sissy jeeps. Jeep is no more after 2004...

I disagree.

I see the current Jeep Wrangler Rubicon as a very capable off-roader. GenII Dana 44 axles, electronic lockers, electronic sway bar disconnect....

The main problem with the 3.8 V6 was that it was perceived as a "minivan" engine. Makes more horsepower, makes more torque...that's usually a benefit. I guess the 3.6 is also a "minivan motor"....nevermind that it makes so much more power than the 4.0 that it lops 3 seconds off the 0-60 time.
Ever get beaten by 3-seconds? That's a big gap.

And I've driven a YJ with a 2.5. The major difference between a Suzuki Samurai and a YJ with a AMC 150 off-road is that the Samurai comes back with less dings on the rocker panels. Neither one of them will get anywhere on or off-road in a hurry.
 
i've had the 4.0 in many of the jeeps i've owned, i consider it the best engine ever made! that being said i now have an 07 4 door wrangler with the 3.8, it is a very capable engine the difference between the two power wise is the 4.0 has great low end low rpm torque, in my cherokee in 4 hi i could dump the clutch on pavement in 3rd gear at idle and not kill the engine, the 3.8 you need to rev to get torque. the 4.0 is the ultimate rock crawler engine, the 4.0 acts more like a diesel then a gas engine.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: wsar10
you guys that are bashing jeeps...are driving or looking at sissy jeeps. Jeep is no more after 2004...

I disagree.

I see the current Jeep Wrangler Rubicon as a very capable off-roader. GenII Dana 44 axles, electronic lockers, electronic sway bar disconnect....


Me too. I'm not sure what is different about a 2004 Wrangler vs. a 2006 Wrangler. If you're going to include TJs, at least include all TJs (though 2006). Wsar10 is evidently not familiar with how well the JKs 'wheel, though.

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
The main problem with the 3.8 V6 was that it was perceived as a "minivan" engine. Makes more horsepower, makes more torque...that's usually a benefit. I guess the 3.6 is also a "minivan motor"....


Well, to be fair, the 3.8L V-6 was used exclusively in the minivan at the time they started putting it in the Wrangler. So it really WAS a "minivan engine" at the time. Nothing wrong with that, or the engine either. I owned two examples of that engine (both in minivans) and they're excellent little OHV V-6s. They're right smooth and quiet...I'd take one over a 4.0L any day myself. My neighbor has an '07 JK, obviously with the 3.8L, and it's got plenty of grunt to get the job done. Even on 33s.
 
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: wsar10
you guys that are bashing jeeps...are driving or looking at sissy jeeps. Jeep is no more after 2004...

I disagree.

I see the current Jeep Wrangler Rubicon as a very capable off-roader. GenII Dana 44 axles, electronic lockers, electronic sway bar disconnect....

The main problem with the 3.8 V6 was that it was perceived as a "minivan" engine. Makes more horsepower, makes more torque...that's usually a benefit. I guess the 3.6 is also a "minivan motor"....nevermind that it makes so much more power than the 4.0 that it lops 3 seconds off the 0-60 time.
Ever get beaten by 3-seconds? That's a big gap.

And I've driven a YJ with a 2.5. The major difference between a Suzuki Samurai and a YJ with a AMC 150 off-road is that the Samurai comes back with less dings on the rocker panels. Neither one of them will get anywhere on or off-road in a hurry.


and again your buying a jeep for speed and thats not a jeep.
we will see if these min-van motors go to 300k,
 
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: wsar10
you guys that are bashing jeeps...are driving or looking at sissy jeeps. Jeep is no more after 2004...

I disagree.

I see the current Jeep Wrangler Rubicon as a very capable off-roader. GenII Dana 44 axles, electronic lockers, electronic sway bar disconnect....


Me too. I'm not sure what is different about a 2004 Wrangler vs. a 2006 Wrangler. If you're going to include TJs, at least include all TJs (though 2006). Wsar10 is evidently not familiar with how well the JKs 'wheel, though.

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
The main problem with the 3.8 V6 was that it was perceived as a "minivan" engine. Makes more horsepower, makes more torque...that's usually a benefit. I guess the 3.6 is also a "minivan motor"....


Well, to be fair, the 3.8L V-6 was used exclusively in the minivan at the time they started putting it in the Wrangler. So it really WAS a "minivan engine" at the time. Nothing wrong with that, or the engine either. I owned two examples of that engine (both in minivans) and they're excellent little OHV V-6s. They're right smooth and quiet...I'd take one over a 4.0L any day myself. My neighbor has an '07 JK, obviously with the 3.8L, and it's got plenty of grunt to get the job done. Even on 33s.


I'm very familiar with how the JK's wheel and you have a point they do very well offroad, quite a few of my buddies have new wranglers............they are still not as rugged as prior wranglers.
but still the jeep experience includes the 4.0 not a v6 motor.
 
Originally Posted By: wsar10
they are still not as rugged as prior wranglers.
but still the jeep experience includes the 4.0 not a v6 motor.


How are they not as rugged as the TJ and older? For what it's worth, every JK I've been in has felt more substantial than my folks' TJ.

The minivan engines will have no problems going to 300k miles. They're extremely durable engines, and there are a number of 3rd generation ChryCo vans with well over 300k miles to substantiate that. I used to moderate a ChryCo minivan forum; I'm pretty familiar with these engines. They're good.
 
I own a 2008 Jeep Compass and am very happy with it. Gas mileage is OK -- I get 24/26 (city/highway) with the FD1 4WD and CVT. It's pushing about 100,000 miles and so far, outside of taking a rock through the AC condenser, has only needed preventive maintenance.

It's a very utilitarian vehicle that fills a niche need, where it isn't really a SUV and not a station wagon either. It does a good job in many things but isn't particularly amazing at any one thing. It is what it is. When I bought it, there wasn't anything on the market at anywhere near the same price.

If you want it for off-road, get another vehicle, or you wont be happy with it and may wind up rebuilding your front end.

The CVT has really grown on me and the only down side is the cost of the fluid (around $18/quart). It definitely does take awhile to get used to. It does well in the snow, has a great deal of usable space inside, the fabric is easy to clean, and the el-cheapo hard plastic interior can be wiped clean and seems relatively impervious to scratching. I live in the mountains and the 2.4L is good enough for getting around.

To summarize... If it were totaled, I'd replace it with another one. It was our first "modern" Chrysler product after coming from a Toyota Matrix.
 
I drive a 2011 Jeep Patriot 4x4 with the 5-speed manual transmission and trailer tow package (good for 2,000 lbs.) Fuel economy on the highway is between 28 and 30 mpg and never less than 26 combined city/highway. Handling is excellent, the car is quiet and has lots of room. Not a single issue in the 8 months and 10,000 miles I have had it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom