After reading the various articles on the Compass (a vehicle that is lighter than its sibling the Patriot), each one seems to point out the lack of pep. Even on of our own posters mentions this in his review of his own Compass.

That doesn't bode well for the Patriot. If the vehicle doesn't have the power to perform on the road....how is it going to perform off-road? And in truth, who cares how it performs of road, if you feel under-powered on road?

Read this, you'll see my point:

http://minitruckinweb.com/features/0607mt_2007_jeep_compass/

That's one of the biggest complains about the Hummer H3... though capible off-road, it is believed to be way under powered on the road. Most of the fourm posts concerning the engine are by people looking for ways to give it a boost.

I hope that's not the case for the Patriot. I may be mistaken but I thought I read somewhere about Mopar already having a kit for adding a little boost?!?!?

I just looked it up and (much to my surprise) the H3 has only a 5 cylinder engine in it. I have a 93 ZJ with a 5.2L V8 in it and I think that the engine suits my Jeep very well -- it doesn't feel over-powered (althought is there really such a thing?), and is definitely not underpowered. I haven't driven a V6 Grand Cherokee, but I would assume it feels a bit underpowered on the road.

The H3 is a bit bigger than my 93 ZJ, so I could only imagine that it'd be sluggish on the road. Although people probably say the same thing about the Wrangler.

I will have to wait and personally test drive it before passing my final opinion. Here's what one review of the Compass said about it's performance:

...By the time we arrived at the shore that beckoned Lewis and Clark, the Compass convoy had already driven nearly 100 miles from Portland, through the green roller coaster of State Highway 6, up a gravel logging road and into the clouds that drape the fir-covered Cascades, up, down and across several towering dunes at Sandlake Recreation Center and, oh, yes, in Portland's rather intense rush-hour traffic.

After all that, I can say that Jeep's new entry-level vehicle performs well beyond its price range, even in a mountain range... source (http://www.huntingtonnews.net/columns/060616-shns-autos.html)

I wondedr how close the Patriot's performance will be.

I think the power will be OK....I have an Outlander with 160HP, AWD, auto and is very close to the same weight as the Patriot. It's my road machine and has plenty of power for safe highway use. It will pull to 90+ mph entering the Interstate ramps which is good enough and will do more than 100 which is where I bail. I suspect the Outlander and the Patriot will be very similar in handling too. Both are Lancer platforms and I can sure tell it. The Outlander goes straight as an arrow and hunkers down in the twisties. I think the Patriot will be even better with the updated Lancer platform. The 170HP with AWD and the 5 speed should be a really nice driver. Good MPG too. I think the Patriot will be a winner for Jeep. The Compass may be a question. It doesn't look Jeep and has some awkward visual elements. Notably the chipmunk cheeks. That did not have to be. Too bad. I suspect the Patriot will be the survivor in the long run. Any thoughts?

We have a 03 JGC with 4.0. Actually, for our driving style, which I would say is average, the 4.0 is just fine for most driving situations. Once in a while, while going uphill, it will downshift, but it is not annoying.

Maybe if one lives in a hilly enviornment, they may want to opt for a V8, but we live in NW Indiana, where the fields are large and flat with the corn growing big and tall:-)))

Yeah it really helps. I grew up in the Pittsburgh area, which is right in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains. The roads are very windy and hilly (actually the roads that aren't stricken with potholes are a helluva lot of fun to drive).

I just moved to Buffalo and the roads are a lot flatter there (at least north of the city), so there probably isn't a huge need for the V8.

Out of curiosity, what sort of gas mileage do you get with the V6 GC? I usually get 17/20 on my V8.

I live out near Hwy 6, and know the logging roads they drove down in the article. Here is a shot typical to the Oregon coastal mountian range that Hwy 6 cuts around through...

http://www.oregonhiking.com/photos/img115x.jpg

After reading the various articles on the Compass (a vehicle that is lighter than its sibling the Patriot), each one seems to point out the lack of pep...

Have you read this review?

...It is powered by a remarkable inline-4-cylinder engine, whose strong band of power seems to last forever, giving the impression of a far larger engine.

The Compass comes as either a front-wheel- or all-wheel-drive vehicle, and with either a five-speed manual or an as-tested continuously variable transmission. The CVT, on roads and in the dunes, was a wonder. With its virtually limitless ``gears" handled by contracting and expanding pulleys, there was never a sense of upshift or downshift on highways, twisting Oregon back roads, or even over beach and dunes... source (http://www.boston.com/cars/car_reviews/articles/2006/07/02/jeeps_new_direction/)

My wife's right "lead" foot gets about 20 mpg on the V6. However, we are trying to track down some engine problem that causes it to "spit and sputter". The problem is it only does it intermittently and only lasts a very short time. By the time it is taken in for service, there are no computer codes to help the techs find the problem.

Recently, on my XJ, with 225,000, I clocked in at 24.2 mpg, with the 4.0.

Have you read this review?

source (http://www.boston.com/cars/car_reviews/articles/2006/07/02/jeeps_new_direction/)

I hadn't seen that one....it is hard to tell what people are judging the speed against. Do we know what the 0-60 time is yet?

Along with proving the Compass' off-road capabilities, the off-roading also highlighted the powertrain's most prominent fault: There's simply not enough power — and the CVT contributed to the Jeep's feeling pokey. Rowing the gears ourselves with the five-speed manual transmission helped, but you should still expect 0-60-mph times in the 10-11-second range.


Guess that answers things.....and to me, that is a bit slow. Here is the link....this review seems pretty neutral.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=115901

However, as I've stated before, we can fix that with a little modification. And as Jeep responded to my inquiry, the CVT2 can withstand engine modification, its only a matter of how quickly Mopar puts something out. Though I must admit, I didn't realize Mopar made things to increase engine output....oh well, I'm a newbee I guess. Here's to a Patriot that tops out around 185-190 HP and the same torque.....

Oh well... you can't please everybody. It is after all, a 2.4-Liter engine.

If you want a Jeep with more horsepower, stay away from the either of the Jeep Calibers and get a Jeep that gets under 20MPG instead. Unless you have an Entrance Ramp of Death on your daily commute, you shouldn't be too concerned with the 0-60 time.

That approximate time of 10-11 seconds for 0-60 wouldn't surprise me, however. The Compass concept vehicle had an estimated 0-60 time of 9 seconds with a 3.7-Liter engine (see link below):

http://www.daimlerchrysler.com/dccom/0-5-470118-1-486476-1-0-0-0-0-0-36-479389-0-0-0-0-0-0-0.html

People were crucifying Jeep for poor gas mileage; now they are crucifying Jeep for vehicles with decent gas mileage, but less power. Duh.

Guys and gals of the jury: Note . . . this vehicle is NOT a Wrangler, Cherokee, JGC, or Commander. While I really like the Patriot and think it is a heck of a step up for Jeep, remember what it is--a CAR based SUV. It was designed this way for a purpose--better gas mileage, with decent off road capabilities. It is not an off-road warrior. Buy the JGC SRT 8 or wait and see if the Compass comes out in the SRT 4 platform if you want more power.

There are plenty of 4 banger Wranglers on the road, which do adequate off road. I forgot where I read it, but DCX was considering reintroducing a 4 banger in the 2007 two-door Wrangler, which was originally dropped from the line.

Why doesn't Jeep use an engine like the Impala's? A V8 with the ability to run like a V4. I'd heard a couple years back that Chrysler was working on this, but haven't heard anything since.

I'm not sure how seemless the transition is for the firing the extra 4 cylinders when needed, and I could see this being an issue off-road. So why not have this "automatic" ability for everyday road use, and have a "V8 lock" mode where it operates all 8 cylinders when needed. It's just another switch to add to the dash.

Couple that with electronic locking diffs so you don't need to drop a bunch of money for aftermarket lockers and you got an off-road monster with decent fuel economy on road.

The very fact that you can think up alternatives for more power and better gas mileage that Jeep has not implemented is the answer to HoosierMud's post. That is why people keep complaining about car companies.

Come on guys, its not like they don't start developing new models 3 - 4 years in advance. They have plenty of time to work every detail out...to do market research, to do testing, to project where the weaknesses will be.

From what I've read, the Patriot will be a huge hit....it really nailed a niche....however, it could have been the perfect car if they used something like that 4cyl - 8cyl combination.

Gas can go up to $5 bucks a gallon, but as long as there are other cars out there that will out perform yours, or make it seem hard to "get up and go" with traffic, people will lean toward the stronger engines that will do 0 - 60 in 8 - 9 seconds. Don't tell me Jeep couldn't have made an engine that produced 15 more horses and 15 more torque and still had better fuel economy than your average small SUV.

I'd be willing to bet that someone out there will complain that the new Jeeps don't corner like the less off-road capible competition cars with thier low center of gravity and minimal ground clearance.

I think that the new diesels will really be great. I like the Patriot and don't expect it to be everything to everyone. It is what it is in it's market class.

The SRT models will be fast off the line but I never expect them to out perform the competition off-road... that's no longer their main design intent.

All in all: the Patriot's capibility off-road, it's high MPGs, and low entry price is a winning package in my book.

DCX has the MDS capability--they use it in the 5.7 HEMI. Somehow, though, I don't see a HEMI in a production version Patriot any time soon:-)

There are a lot of SUVs that will outperform my XJ on road, which are sitting alongside the road for sale. The reason: since I didn't see this number before the gas prices hit the roof, I would guess that the price would be the number reason they are being put up for sale.

I remember well the gas shortages of the early to mid 70's. People then, as they are doing now, started buying smaller, more fuel effiencent cars--at the expense of performance.

Remember, this engine is not only going to be used in the USA, but over in Europe, as well--where gas is even more expensive than here. It more cost effective for Jeep to use the same engine in all its car-based SUVs.

Remember, this engine is not only going to be used in the USA, but over in Europe, as well--where gas is even more expensive than here. It more cost effective for Jeep to use the same engine in all its car-based SUVs.

I think that is the ultimate reason as to why the Patriot has this engine. I think logically, Jeep would have opted for an engine with more torque and even hp than the softer sibling the Compass was given. However, financially speaking, its easier for them to produce 2 vehicles in the same plant with the same engine than two vehicles with separate engines.

Further, who would honestly opt for the Liberty if the Patriot had 15 more HP and 20 more torque? The models would have canabalized each other.

Oh well.

If Honda can get 200 horse and great mileage out of a 2.0 liter engine DCX should be able to get it out of a 2.4. This vehicle will be underpowered which is why I will not buy one. Maybe in 08 if the power improves but more likely it will be the new Honda CR-V for me.

Underpowered is a relative term. For someone like you, who obviously likes Hondas, it is underpowered. For someone like me, who drives nearly 100 miles a day to and from work, it sounds attractive in this day of high gas prices.

My XJ is rated at 190 HP--the Patriot at 172. I'm more concerned with the durability of a new engine than I am with giving up a few Horses. Besides, I'll keep my XJ for the weekend thrills.

BTW, if I read it right last night, it said the 4 banger Wranger has 165 lb/ft of torque, which is the same as the Patriot. Someone correct me if I am wrong on that statement.

"Underpowered" is something we really need to get beyond. I suspect in ten years the 170HP of the Patriot may be viewed as awesome. Just wait until the 600cc critters invade..Then maybe we can talk underpowerd! Take a look at the rest of the world and prepare. The jobs outsourcing created overseas provided the money to buy cars which all need gas. Like it or not we will share that resource. Tell me about power when the per gallon price rests around $4.75-$5.00. At that point underpowered won't even matter. Just to have something that will get you there and not destroy your finances will be a blessing. Enjoy vehicles like the Patriot while you can because 25-30MPG will not cut it in the future.

Well if your both right about future engines being that detuned of power and 170 HP will be fondly remembered then the long term future of Jeep will be in question. All Jeeps have historically had poor to average gas milage.

I like my XJ way too much to sell it due to high gas prices. What I have had to do to keep it within my budget is ADJUST MY DRIVING STYLE. I think more "true" SUV owners are going to have to adjust their driving style. If they don't, they are going to have to face selling a vehicle they really enjoy.

"Fair weather" SUV owners--well, we really don't need them on the road anyway. They are the ones who didn't learn how to drive on ice and snow in the first place. Plus, they are some of the first to put their SUV up for sale when times get tough.

Patriot/Compass are steps in the right direction for the Jeep Brand. As someone mentioned, they are NOT replacing any vehicle; they are extending the brand.

If Honda can get 200 horse and great mileage out of a 2.0 liter engine DCX should be able to get it out of a 2.4. This vehicle will be underpowered which is why I will not buy one. Maybe in 08 if the power improves but more likely it will be the new Honda CR-V for me.

True, but there is much much much more to an engine than hp/liter. I won't criticize the Honda engine, as my old man has that one in his RSX, and its a lot of fun.

However, the limitations are also large, and ultimately why 200hp is not in the Patriot (it isn't that DCX couldn't do it, its that they chose not to).

1) Torque. The high hp/liter Honda cars are generally made for their sportiest models where high revs are tolerated and part of a "sporting" experience (S2000, RSX-S, Civic Si). That 2.0L 200hp engine you reference makes 200 hp at 7400 RPM and 142 lb-ft of torque at 6000 rpm. By comparison the Patriot makes 174hp at 6000rpm and 165 lb-ft at 4400 rpm. For the type of vehicle the Patriot is, you're not gonna be rippin around a race course at peak rpm. Low end grunt around town is more important, even if it costs you peak HP. That is why Honda chooses a 2.4L I4 for the Accord and CR-V. For cars like that, lower peak HP and more everyday torque is more important to that type of buyer.

2) Cost. The high running Honda engines have fancy materials and tighter specs that allow for those high revs. All cost money. The RSX-S is essentially a cheap compact dressed up and with the nice motor. Last I checked they stickered for about $23,500. That's a good chunk of change for a compact hatchback and you have to bet a good bit of that is because the engine costs more to produce. Patriot is designed to base at a much lower price. Can't have an expensive engine if you want to hit that number. Same with the 2.4L 200hp I4 in the Acura TSX. Same displacement as the DCX motor, 25 more ponies. But in a car that bases at 28K.

Bottom line, hp/liter isn't what it is all about. The 2.4L in the Patriot is at the top of its class, even when compared to Honda's "everyday" I4 engines (also of 2.4L) that are found in the Accord and CR-V. Specs and fuel economy are very similar.

Every review I have read on the Dodge Caliber says they generally like the vehicle but it's under powered. No thanks, there are far too many other choices.

I was at the dealership yesterday and they had their first Compass on the lot. I talked to a salesman about it and he said that it's very strange because of the CVT but it has a lot of pep. I was surprised to hear that so I told him that everything I had heard was that it was underpowered. He told me it just seems like it because you never hear a shift, but it zips around pretty quickly.

A few months ago I test drove a Dodge Caliber 2.0 with a CVT. It was not underpowered for that class of car and easily shot up to 85mph on the interstate. The CVT, however, winds the engine up and keeps it running high. I don't like the CVT and would not buy one. Then again I don't like automatics either. A CVT sounds and feels like an old automatic that is slipping.

That a 2.0 Caliber carrying 5 people could get up and go is a strong indication the Patriot 2.4 should handle what it is designed for: Towing under 2000 lbs and light off roading.

I have not driven a 2.4L Caliber and they apparently were having trouble making enough of them or DC was trying to build the Compass & Caliber 2.4s in a batch.

I was at the dealership yesterday and they had their first Compass on the lot. I talked to a salesman about it and he said that it's very strange because of the CVT but it has a lot of pep. I was surprised to hear that so I told him that everything I had heard was that it was underpowered. He told me it just seems like it because you never hear a shift, but it zips around pretty quickly.

Sounds right, Ive driven quite a few PMs and MKs and they feel underpowered at first. You nail it at a light and start thinking why is this thing so slow, then you look in your mirror and see traffic way behind you and when you check the speedo you see that your allready speeding. The CVT just takes a little getting used to, you could floor it from a start and the engine will sit at 6,000 RPM while you accellerate, it wont change RPM at all until you lift your foot. The engine is also very quiet and very smooth, which also cuts down on any sensation of accelleration. They both handle well and have decent rides and so far we have not had any come into the shop for any kind of repair. Nothing but PDIs so far.

underpowered is a matter of opinion,
no matter how its configured 173 hp is still 173 hp,
if your comparing it to a 6 cyl or 8 cyl, might seem under powered,
but in the 4 cyl range 173hp is great,
not many 4 cyl make 173hp,
if its not enough for you, than a 4 cyl SUV is not for you, no matter what make or model,

i agree with that. my wife's liberty has the 3.7L V6 engine, while my JGC has the 4.0L V6 engine, and when i drive the liberty and then drive the JGC, the JGC feels like it has no power compared to the liberty. so, if you are comparing b/w engine sizes, makes, and/or models then there will be obvious differences.

i agree with that. my wife's liberty has the 3.7L V6 engine, while my JGC has the 4.0L V6 engine, and when i drive the liberty and then drive the JGC, the JGC feels like it has no power compared to the liberty. so, if you are comparing b/w engine sizes, makes, and/or models then there will be obvious differences.

Did you do a special engine swap to get a 4.0L V6 in a Grand Cherokee? :confused:

sorry, i meant an I6. it's a 2004 special edition.