4X2 2.4L w/ CVT = 23/28 so 21/27 is a significant drop going to the 6 speed. I would say the 4WD will take more of a hit than 1 MPG.

 

Actually that 23/28 number is the 4x2 2.4 L with the five speed manual.

The current CVT trans is 21/27, which according to Chrysler is the same number (estimated) as the 2014 with the six speed.

To clarify, I'm wondering if the six speed 4x4 with the 2.4 L is going to be the same as the CVT 4x4's numbers (21/26). My guess is it will be close, either the same or 1 mpg less (like 20/25).

 

On the new 2014 Patriot page on Jeep.com, you can scroll down and click the 2.4 L engine option it will display the estimated 4x2 mpg numbers of the 2.4 with the new six-speed (which is estimated at 21/27)

I'm wondering if any of you have heard the numbers for the 4x4 version. If I had to guess I'd think that if it wasn't the same as previous years it'd be 1 mpg less.

Your guess is probably right. IMHO I don't think its hard to beat Chrysler's mpg estimates. I'm driving a 4x2 with the CVT. It has rarely dipped below 27 in any kind of driving. Worst I ever got was 26.5 with the boat on the roof (see avatar) and a pretty full load inside; mostly state highways at 40-55mph. I usually run 27-28 in mixed driving / 31 hwy.

If Chrysler is consistent, I think their projected numbers are attainable with 4x4 and a 6-speed auto. I imagine all those speeds are to improve fuel economy, so the numbers should be at least a little better than present.

 

I imagine all those speeds are to improve fuel economy, so the numbers should be at least a little better than present.

In theory, the CVT has infinitely more speeds than a standard 6 speed. One would think if fuel economy was a major factor it would be easier to attain better with a properly programmed CVT than a standard gearbox.

 

I had a 92 Dodge Caravan with the infamous 604 4 speed electronic transmission. What a piece of junk; after the first total rebuild we got rid of it before the tranny crashed again. We needed a minivan with 2 kids and 2 big dogs so we got a 97 Caravan with the old reliable 3 speed mechanical not electronic auto tranny. That combination was much more reliable and we got 27 mpg on the highway instead of 24 mpg with the other. I hope the new 6 speed auto tranny is way better than our experience with that electronic one we had in the Caravan. Did I mention that I am happy with the 5 speed MT in our Patriot.

 

My 07 2.4L CVT model said 24/27 on the window sticker, and after 5.5 years of ownership it is averaging around 25 mpg overall.

 

Am I the only one who caught that the 2014 FDII Patriot will still have the CVT? The 6 speed auto is only going in FWD and FDI Patriots.

 

The CVT has been ok, one advantage is now hard downshifts going up hill on snow and ice, which can make your tires break loose.

The FDII is lower geared, so less MPG, and I think would benefit from an overdrive on the highway, but not sure a 6 speed auto would offer any advantage.

Of course I have the lifetime warranty, so feel better about the CVT, without the warranty I'm not sure.

 

The new transmission is built by Hyundai right? If so, their transmissions are pretty well built. Most of my family owns hyundais and they are pretty impressive vehicles.. I plan on trying the new Patriot when it comes out.

 

The new transmission is built by Hyundai right? If so, their transmissions are pretty well built.

Yep the same transmission is used in Hyundai vehicles. I believe it's made by some Australian company, but designed in part by Hyundai.

Sure would be nice if we had a member that owns a Hyundai who could provide some insight......


WAIT A MINUTE!! someone go grab croat out of the Political forum and tell him his expertise are needed over here.

 

the laws of mechanics mean that a CVT with a theoretical infinite number of gear ratios within the designed range of the transmission always exceed the efficiency of a traditional planar gear transmission (of any # of speeds even if that # was theoretically infinity). the reason why that is, is b/c as you add more gears to make it more efficient (striving for more gear ratios) you are actually adding more weight and also adding more instances of momentum reduction with each gear shift.

if the 6-speed auto transmission really is more efficient than the CVT, it means that the CVT must have had some significant deficiency that prevented it from reaching its full potential - either inadequate programming or perhaps an inefficient designs of the V-blocks. who knows.


the argument of CVT vs Planar Gear regarding serviceability is a moot point when most dealers don't even rebuilt planar gear transmissions anyways. they are refurbished by a certified manufacturer (per the vehicle manufacturer's certification program) and shipped to the dealer. once a planar gear transmission starts "going" as they say, it's already too late and the damage is done. all the fluid changes in the world won't stop the vicious cycle unless you open up the beast and replace the worn out components, clogged internal filters, etc. so there isn't much you can do with an auto trans anyways without opening it up, however they will still operate until the bitter end. you can get away with a slipping planar transmission for up to 20,000 miles if you drive mostly highway and you change your transmission fluid every 5,000 miles. not so with the CVT. when it fails it's usually instantly a dud

 

I rented an Avenger with the 2.4 and 6-speed automatic. It ran fine, plenty of pep (for a four) and got 30 mpg. It had more power than the Patriot I rented, which had the same engine and CVT- it got 22.5 mpg. But the Compass I rented with the same engine and CVT got 30 mpg and seemed to have more power ??? I plan to buy a Compass when they put the 6-speed in it. I have no idea why it out-performed the Patriot.

 

Probably because the Compass is more rounded and the Patriot has the aerodynamics of a brick!

 

I should say the mpg on the 200 was very good -- well into the 30s and frankly better than I expected. (2 fill-ups over 400 miles) I'm figuring an 75/25 split highway/city.

 

The video of the 5 speed...sounds like something very bad happened during the up shift from 2-3. The driver was absolutely hammering it.

 

You're right. Someone should tell him there's a red-line on the tach for a reason. Strange he only gets into 3rd gear. Wonder what happened after that? Those noises don't sound good.

 

You are right about the aerodynamics of the Pat. My mileage drops once I get past 65 MPH due to the wind resistance from that flat front end. Holding it at 2000 rpm on the expressway which is about 65, I can get 27 MPG. Around town I get 24 MPG in the summer and 22 MPH in the winter I think due the winter blend gas. I'm not complaining, it's been a great car.