My Jeep Compass Forum banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
79 Posts
Discussion Starter #1


Jeep’s controversially styled Cherokee compact SUV has been reinvigorated for the upcoming model year. Toned-down styling, fresh features, and a new turbocharged engineare a few of its highlights.

Debuting at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, this new Cherokee’s front end is much more conventional looking. Gone are the narrow, alligator-like headlamps found on today’s version. Available bi-LED projector lights are encapsulated in larger housings that look similar to what’s found on other Jeeps. Additionally, the front fascia is new, as is the hood, which is made of lightweight aluminum.
Read more about the Refreshed 2019 Jeep Cherokee is No Longer Ugly and Gets New Turbo Engine at AutoGuide.com.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Curious is you had a 2.4L Tiger Shark powered 4WD Compass vs. Cherokee comparison, what advantages does Cherokee give you. I am choosing 2.4L to be as equal as we can get. Comparing 2nd genration Compass.

Is Cherokee stronger for offroad? Size wise to me they are close enough to be almost equal. I'm not trying to pick a winner but I want to understand difference better. Same 2.4L, same 9 speed auto, what else should I know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
I would love to have the 2.0 Turbo in my Compass Trailhawk. I drove a Cherokee while they were replacing the transmission in my Compass and I enjoyed the extra room and storage.
If I could do it, I would get the New Cherokee with the Turbo just for the extra room and towing capacity. Now if they were to offer a Compass Trailhawk with the 2.0 Turbo with the battery assist like on some of the new Ram and Jeep models, than you would have a fun little off roader IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
Agreeed on wanting more power. I am trying to understand though if you spec'd a Cherokee with the 2.4L what you would gain over Compass?
IMO roomier interior with more storage options. Higher towing capacity. Close to the same fuel mileage.
As for off-road the only advantage I can think off hand, is you would have increased tire size. I don't know if the Cherokee Trailhawk has any more ground clearance. Power wise comparing 2.4 to 2.4 unless they changed the gearing more on the Cherokee Trailhawk, I would think the Compass Trailhawk would have the advantage since it is lighter in weight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Curious is you had a 2.4L Tiger Shark powered 4WD Compass vs. Cherokee comparison, what advantages does Cherokee give you. I am choosing 2.4L to be as equal as we can get. Comparing 2nd genration Compass.

Is Cherokee stronger for offroad? Size wise to me they are close enough to be almost equal. I'm not trying to pick a winner but I want to understand difference better. Same 2.4L, same 9 speed auto, what else should I know?
I've got one of both. Both with the 2.4l and 9-spd.

The Cherokee is definitely larger. It doesn't look like it on the outside, but packing stuff in for long trips.... the Cherokee just fits more stuff.

The Cherokee is also heavier. But for me, that's probably not real fair statement. I have the Cherokee TH, but a Compass Limited. The TH has the skid plates, a lift, and bigger tires. So it really feels heavier and slower than the Compass with the 19" street tires.

The Cherokee TH is by FAR better offroad than the Compass TH. True low range and a rear locker make a huge difference.
A Cherokee with the AD1 4wd system versus the Compass with the AD1 4wd would probably be very similar though.

edit: here's a pic where you can see the general size differences
 

Attachments

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
535 Posts
I've got one of both. Both with the 2.4l and 9-spd.

The Cherokee is definitely larger. It doesn't look like it on the outside, but packing stuff in for long trips.... the Cherokee just fits more stuff.

The Cherokee is also heavier. But for me, that's probably not real fair statement. I have the Cherokee TH, but a Compass Limited. The TH has the skid plates, a lift, and bigger tires. So it really feels heavier and slower than the Compass with the 19" street tires.

The Cherokee TH is by FAR better offroad than the Compass TH. True low range and a rear locker make a huge difference.
A Cherokee with the AD1 4wd system versus the Compass with the AD1 4wd would probably be very similar though.

edit: here's a pic where you can see the general size differences
Question how is the road noise on the new compass vs the cherokee as well can you hear the engine noise as much, I still haven't had the chance to drive one of the new compass'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
213 Posts
The Cherokee has been in production since 2014 I believe. The facelift hopefully won't change things much, and assuming you avoid the new engine - most of the bugs will have been worked out by now. A reasonable choice for a reliable new vehicle, now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
I've got one of both. Both with the 2.4l and 9-spd.

The Cherokee is definitely larger. It doesn't look like it on the outside, but packing stuff in for long trips.... the Cherokee just fits more stuff.

The Cherokee is also heavier. But for me, that's probably not real fair statement. I have the Cherokee TH, but a Compass Limited. The TH has the skid plates, a lift, and bigger tires. So it really feels heavier and slower than the Compass with the 19" street tires.

The Cherokee TH is by FAR better offroad than the Compass TH. True low range and a rear locker make a huge difference.
A Cherokee with the AD1 4wd system versus the Compass with the AD1 4wd would probably be very similar though.

edit: here's a pic where you can see the general size differences
Thank you for sharing your experience with these vehicles. smile:
If I could do it, I would trade my compass TH in for the 2019 Cherokee TH with the turbo. But we are going to replace our Wrangler JKU with the new JL Rubicon 4 door in the near future so I will be driving the Compass TH for a while yet.
:jeep:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Question how is the road noise on the new compass vs the cherokee as well can you hear the engine noise as much, I still haven't had the chance to drive one of the new compass'
Tough to compare Tyler.
Even at stock the Cherokee TH had firestone ATs and the Compass has ContiProcontact's. No comparison at all on the road noise from the tires.

I think the cabins themselves are similar though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
WisHawk said:
I would get the New Cherokee with the Turbo just for the extra room and towing capacity.
I doubt the 2.0 Turbo will be rated to tow more than the 2.4 NA. There is not going to be enough low-end torque for it to be a good towing buggy, the extra power that comes with turbocharging comes in too late in the RPM band typically and you need low-end grunt for starting heavy trailers, and there is typically little or no boost pressure at highway cruising RPMs so you won't have enough oompf there either. You can't cross the country at 4500 RPM the whole way and expect it to last so... I predict the towing capacity of the turbo will be no more than 2000 pounds or less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
This is what was posted on one of the Auto show pages I was reading.
The 2.0 makes 270 horsepower at 5,200 rpm and 295 pound-feet of torque at only 3,000 rpm. That torque number actually beats the output of the 3.6-liter V-6 by 35 pound-feet! Better still, the 2.0 makes its power lower in the rev range, likely making it a better choice for serious off-roading. Horsepower-wise, the 2.0 only gives up 15 ponies to the V-6.It makes more power than the standard 4-cylinder, and more torque lower in the rev range than the optional V6.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Well, maybe it could be a hauler. Its a lot to squeeze out of a 2 liter, still seems like reliability would be suspect for say, pulling a larger pop-up camper around the mountains. Will be interesting to see what the official tow rating comes out as, but they are so conservative with those numbers it will only mean so much. For a short trip I wouldn't hesitate to pull something heavy with the 2.0, just unsure about 3000-mile treks at max GCVW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
still seems like reliability would be suspect for say
Your statement is correct there. We are talking FCA products. Just got the wife to agree to wait a few months on the new Wrangler JL Rubicon she wants.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
535 Posts
I can't believe everyone's resistance to the new turbo engine. 1 less hp and 56ft/lbs more torque than the V6. If the engine wasn't reliable do you think FCA would release it. I haven't heard any horror stories about the 1.4T that has been around for years now. That's ok though none of you need to buy the new engine. There is nothing wrong with the 3.2L as I have 2 cherokees both with that engine but more low end torque would be very welcome and make the cherokee alot faster, yes it doesn't need to be fast but after driving a compass and patriot for 8 years the extra power was very welcome
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
213 Posts
Well, maybe it could be a hauler. Its a lot to squeeze out of a 2 liter, still seems like reliability would be suspect for say, pulling a larger pop-up camper around the mountains. Will be interesting to see what the official tow rating comes out as, but they are so conservative with those numbers it will only mean so much. For a short trip I wouldn't hesitate to pull something heavy with the 2.0, just unsure about 3000-mile treks at max GCVW
Technology has progressed a lot, and 'turbo' never necessarily meant you couldn't tow - heavy trucks are typically turbos. Not likely that the engine would simply fail under heavy towing, more likely the control logic would cut back boost to protect the engine, based on inputs such as exhaust temperature. So if pulling max load up a grade in summer weather you might find you lose power.
The real reason not to buy the turbo is that it is FCA. If you are intending to purchase and keep the vehicle past the warranty you would be risking very costly repairs. Let other people be the unwitting test subjects for the first few years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
zoner99 said:
heavy trucks are typically turbos
A lot of them are but a turbo on a big V8 or V10 is not the same deal as a turbo 2 liter, those trucks have mountains of torque long before boost comes on and would function just fine without any boost at all. 4 bangers do not have the grunt and its a catch-22 when you don't make power till higher RPMs and you can't make higher RPM's until you get moving, unless you slip the torque-converter or clutch a lot for a long time which equals heat and wear.

Most turbo vehicles do not make any boost cruising on the highway, you are rolling along entirely on the amount of air the atmosphere is pushing through and making minimal power while using minimal fuel. Boost comes into play pretty much only during acceleration and the rest of the time there is no boost and you are making MUCH much less torque and power. For a light load this is ideal but it may take a lot more continuous power to keep a heavy trailer at speed, especially if it is catching the wind. For an undersized motor this could mean you have to stay in a higher rev range to maintain continuous boost and if you are crossing the whole country end to end, this is not ideal. The turbo is meant to be more or less idle while cruising, if you keep it working for thousands of miles on end, its not going to last. And if some kind of mitigation control comes in from the ECU as you mentioned, cutting boost to preserve the longevity of the components, then you will not have the power you need to move a heavy trailer up a 7% grade for 25 miles.

Like I said, a short tow would probably be fine but any kind of road trip would probably be pretty hard on it. I want to be able to pull my 1700# show car to various meets from state to state, I don't think a 2.0 4 cylinder would be up to the task turbo or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
213 Posts
A lot of them are but a turbo on a big V8 or V10 is not the same deal as a turbo 2 liter, those trucks have mountains of torque long before boost comes on and would function just fine without any boost at all.
I think there are some ideas behind your comments that don't make sense to me. Size or layout of the engine don't change the effect of turbocharging. And they wouldn't work 'just fine' without the boost - no one spends money on additional equipment unless there is a good justification for it.

4 bangers do not have the grunt and its a catch-22 when you don't make power till higher RPMs and you can't make higher RPM's until you get moving, unless you slip the torque-converter or clutch a lot for a long time which equals heat and wear.
Again, I disagree with the basic principle you seem to be relying on. There is nothing about a '4 banger' design itself that implies lack of torque. Google Detroit Diesel Series 50, for one.

Most turbo vehicles do not make any boost cruising on the highway, you are rolling along entirely on the amount of air the atmosphere is pushing through and making minimal power while using minimal fuel.
I believe that is true if you are thinking of a 1980's era gasoline turbo engine. Drive a FCA 1.4T engine today and you'll hear the turbo spool up as soon as you touch the gas. I had one as a rental and it appeared it was always on some amount of boost except for idling.

The turbo is meant to be more or less idle while cruising, if you keep it working for thousands of miles on end, its not going to last.
It's a question of design and technology. If it is designed for continuous operation then there is no reason why it can't operate continuously. Certainly the technology exists. Whether FCA can design and build it successfully is another story. But generally speaking their engines are good, it's everything else on the vehicle that fails - hasn't really changed in decades in that respect.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top