DCX has stated that the Patriot and Compass are to attract NEW, younger buyers to the Jeep brand. Also, they are for improving sales in the international market.

However, does anyone think they underestimated the mostly positive response of CURRENT Jeep owners to the Patriot--especially us, with aging XJs in our driveways? I'm definately not in the target demos that have been published, either age-wise or income wise (older and poorer:-0)

While I have no illusions that it will be able to replace the off-road prowlness of my XJ, the trail rated version just might be a replacement as a daily driver with some mild to moderate off-roading intertwined.

I think the Patriot may take on a life similar to that of the Scion xB. It was positioned to get the first time buyers and the tuners. Now I see about 1/2 of them being driven by some empty-nesters. Nothing wrong with it... I think that it's an untapped market (with this stize/class/style) vehicle.

Hard to market to this group without scaring off the kiddo's looking for thier first car.

I watched a Commander advertisement (during a snowboarding event on TV a few months ago) that showed a bunch of young adults (probably in their early twenties) with their snowboarding gear on riding in a Commander. But selling a Commander to someone in their early twenties seemed to me to be a bit of a stretch due to the Commander's high cost of entry.

The Caliber-based Jeeps (the Patriot and the Compass) are the perfect ones to sell to the younger generation (anyone from 18 to 35), IMHO. I won't be in that age group for very much longer. I am replacing a Subaru Forester (L trim), which only has a cassete player, so the Patriot would be a step up. My wife and I are DINK's.

The Patriot is almost the exact same height as the Forester (about 66"). Some of the other "mini-SUV's" out there are really not so mini. The Ford Escape and Jeep Liberty are both 70-72", and they are both rollover-prone IMHO.

The 4-door Jeep Cherokee (1997-2001) was all of 64" tall overall. I feel the Patriot will be just slightly larger than those Cherokees in general.

It won't be as "roll-over" prone since it will have a wider stance. Most roll-overs, in general, from all types of non-car vehicles are because the driver tried to manuver them as though they were a car, IMHO. It is even much easier to roll a class-C motorhome onto its side than any SUV - especailly if you try to manuver them like a car.

I totally agree. I learned to drive on a 92 Cherokee. I currently drive a 93 Grand Cherokee. My parents also had an 89 Bronco II, which I had to drive every so often. So I have always driven an SUV. I drove my father's Accord a few times, and it was amazing to me how well that thing corners. I could easily take some turns 15-20 mph faster than I would ever think of doing in an SUV. My ex-gf had a civic and it was the same thing -- I was braking for corners that the car easily could have taken without braking.

Hahaha...unfortunately some people don't understand the laws of logic...let alone physics. Oh well. A 64" SUV will corner much more efficiently than a taller vehicle...the Patriot shouldn't pose a big problem here.