It seems like most people think the Commander a better vehicle performance and off-road-wise. But if you look at lbs/horsepower, the Patriot wins out against the Commander 3.7L with 210hp or 4.7L with 235 hp. This is primarily due to the Patriots' lower curb weight. Patriot is 3516 lbs curb vs. Commander's 5169. This is for 4wd versions of course. So Patriots lbs/hp is 3516/172 = 20.44. Commander 3.7L is 5169/210 = 24.61 or 4.7L is 5169/235 = 22.00. Generally speaking wouldn't Patriot be the better performing vehicle because it is lugging around fewer pounds for each unit of horsepower. I may be wrong but thought this might spur some discussion. I think the Commander's 0-60 is 8.0 but I don't know the Patriots. I think I read around 10 or 11 sec somewhere? Anyway I am juggling both as purchases at the moment.

i think the biggest question is price
its hard to compare when they are at different ends of the price scale
i am really looking forward to the patriots arrival
i have been looking for somthing to replace my cherokee and this looks like the perfect option

well ... given that calibers pretty much go without any discount off sticker (at least they did for a long while), and compasses haven't done too bad (i would expect the patriot to do far better), if you're looking at a well-equipped patriot, you could be paying more than for a commander ... the patriot sport e can cost $23,000 (according to preliminary build&price) with FDII and just the stuff that you get standard on the commander (Auto, AC, cloth, 17"s, cruise, etc). Our local dealer with "hassle-free" prices was only asking $23 for 4x4 base commanders this year (their first year, & not just during employee pricing). so if they don't discount the patriot, you could be looking at about the same price for similarly equipped vehicles.

It seems like most people think the Commander a better vehicle performance and off-road-wise. But if you look at lbs/horsepower, the Patriot wins out against the Commander 3.7L with 210hp or 4.7L with 235 hp. This is primarily due to the Patriots' lower curb weight. Patriot is 3516 lbs curb vs. Commander's 5169. This is for 4wd versions of course. So Patriots lbs/hp is 3516/172 = 20.44. Commander 3.7L is 5169/210 = 24.61 or 4.7L is 5169/235 = 22.00. Generally speaking wouldn't Patriot be the better performing vehicle because it is lugging around fewer pounds for each unit of horsepower. I may be wrong but thought this might spur some discussion. I think the Commander's 0-60 is 8.0 but I don't know the Patriots. I think I read around 10 or 11 sec somewhere? Anyway I am juggling both as purchases at the moment.

There is a lot more to offroading than horsepower. Just in the realm of engine output alone, you really need to consider the produced torque. Horsepower is meaningless offroad if it's at a higher RPM. That's why the straight six was such a wonderful engine. But powerplants aside, you need to consider things like ground clearance, approach/departure angles, wheelbase, breakover angle, suspension, axles, gearing, and transfer cases before you can really rate a vehicle's offroad prowess... and even then every vehicle will perform differently during different types of offroad situations. Horsepower is just one small, small part of the equation so you can't at all judge what would be "better" by that alone.

These vehicles are so different, it's difficult to compare them in any meaningful way. I doubt many people are shopping a Patriot vs. a Commander. You're comparing a compact SUV with only one engine option to a 'large midsize' SUV with three engine options. Pricewise, they're barely within shouting distance, unless you're comparing a loaded Patriot to a barebones Commander (each about $25,000).

If a low pounds-per-horsepower number is what's important, Jeeps are probably not the way to go (except the Grand Cherokee SRT-8).

These vehicles are so different, it's difficult to compare them in any meaningful way. I doubt many people are shopping a Patriot vs. a Commander. You're comparing a compact SUV with only one engine option to a 'large midsize' SUV with three engine options. Pricewise, they're barely within shouting distance, unless you're comparing a loaded Patriot to a barebones Commander (each about $25,000).

If a low pounds-per-horsepower number is what's important, Jeeps are probably not the way to go (except the Grand Cherokee SRT-8).

I think you guys are correct. Basically, foolish on my part to compare Patriot and Commander. After further consideration I don't really need the size of the Commander. The Patriot should do fine. If it only had the same power as the Commander and the mileage of a Patriot then I wouldn't have to think twice about it. But the laws of physics aren't about to change so I'll just have to dream about the "Patriomander"

But the laws of physics aren't about to change so I'll just have to dream about the "Patriomander"

Screw the 3.7 or 4.7L and find a 5.7L HEMI, then overhaul the Patriot so you can make room to jam the 5.7L HEMI in there. That, my friend, is your Patriomander. I'm sure we'd all love to see that -- I know I would :D

Screw the 3.7 or 4.7L and find a 5.7L HEMI, then overhaul the Patriot so you can make room to jam the 5.7L HEMI in there. That, my friend, is your Patriomander. I'm sure we'd all love to see that -- I know I would :D
A hemi in a Patriot would be a sit-n-spin, twice the motor in half the weight ,I would love to see the rooster tail of mud that could sling , I would have to buy new tires at every oil change . I can honestly say I would buy one . " if it aint dirty its not fun ". Sparrow