Hi,just joined the forum, and looking for any input on the subject of used models. I am looking at 2 Certified Pre-Owned Compass models. Both are 2016, one is a Sport 4x4 with 49,000 miles. 2.4L engine and 6 speed transmission. The other is a Latitude FWD, 25,000 miles and has a 2.0L with CVT. Not familiar with either engine/trains combination. Looking for pros and cons of these 2 vehicles to help me decide. Will be driven by my daughter, a new driver. No off road driving, Michigan winters would be the most it would see. Not so much concerned with 4wd vs. FWD, more so the engine and trans. Both are priced approximately the same amount. Any input on this would be greatly appreciated.
I always say to people to drive a CVT before buying a CVT as they are something that some people really donít get on with. This is in general and not just a Jeep thing.
They work well enough and are simple (and therefore normally reliable). But, they can drone and revs can can up and down when you donít expect. This is normal for many CVT boxes and they drive simply and smoothly enough for the most part but some people just donít get on with the characteristics.
If you drive one and it feels to you like itís a normal auto then you have nothing to worry about.
The 2.0 and 2.4 are essentially the same engine, but the CVT is very different than the 6 speed auto. In used car pricing, generally, the 6 speed adds to the value of the vehicle while the CVT detracts from it. That said, most people can't tell the difference any how.
4wd is a huge advantage anywhere that receives snow. For example if you are pulling on to a busy street from a driveway, say, a 2wd vehicle may spin its tires on snow or ice and you may find yourself only halfway on to the road when oncoming traffic arrives. A 4wd just goes. However the priority should be a good set of winter tires first, 4wd second, if you have to choose.
My '08 has the 2.4L with a CVT, and overall we've been pleased with it. It currently has 162k miles on it, and engine-wise has been totally reliable the 10 years we've owned it.
Our only complaints about the engine is that the gas mileage is kind of "meh" - about 22-23 around town, and it developed the well-known "mild engine shake" at stops while in gear at around 100k. This may be due to worn engine mounts, which I plan on having checked out.
Thankfully, as original owners, we have the Lifetime Powertrain Warranty, and at 75k miles a new CVT had to be installed - at no cost. The replacement tranny will soon be 90k and is holding up fine. I plan on having the CVT fluid changed at around 95-100k miles (on that trans).
The two biggest weak spots overall in the 1st Gen Compass that I can see were crappy lower front control arms where the bushings wear out prematurely AND the dreaded sub-frame rust-out in the Northern states that use salt. Ours experienced both, and thankfully FCA paid for the entire subframe repair.
What would you say is "horrendous" about the 2.4L? I'm not trying to be defensive or combative - I'm just curious to know the specifics so I can compare them to my own experience(s)- as WELL as to be "on guard" for something I haven't experienced yet. Mine's the old-school 2008 DaimlerChrysler model of the World Motor. The Tigershark has a complex all-FCA upper end on the motor - which I'm wondering is some of your problem(s)?
Last edited by CompassSportMan; 07-24-2018 at 11:05 PM.
Btw Mike - I just read your "Book of Job"-like experience with your 2nd Gen Compass. HOLY COW! My 24 year-old daughter was looking at the Compass after leasing 2 Jeep Patriots the last 4 years. I *think* I will be counseling her to broaden her selection list to include a few more models/brands! Bummer for you, regarding that cluster-bleep experience!
2.0L it just a better engine overall. 2.4L is absolutely horrendous IMO. Doesn't matter the GEN.
The 2.0 is a 2.4 with cylinder sleeves inserted. Otherwise the same motor. I've had both.
My 2008 2.4 went to 300,000 with no problems. Got about 29mpg overall. CVT has a life expectancy of about 150,000 miles.
Wife's 2.0 does about 10% better on fuel economy, but with the 5-spd there's a lot of downshifting on hills.
Thanks DixieWheeler for sharing that dazzling info. I've always felt that mumbo jumbo is key to understanding partially fractionalized moritfals, myself. But that's only my opinion. Others may have better insight.
Only a suggestion, but you might want to keep your hamster off your keyboard.