2023 Jeep Compass First Drive Review: New Cabin, New Engine, Still Just Shy of Greatness

Adventurer55 said:

Have they improved in a customers order? Amazon certainly knows that, but we are hearing folks having orders for months. Apparently not.

Click to expand...

Adventurer55 said:

Unless the have no clue, they know what's ahead. Belvedere was the first casualty, there will be more ahead. That's the only way they know, or have been taught. Unfortunately, you can't cost cut your way out when your products are ancient history. I've said it before and say it again, look at Chrysler Australia, they were much smaller, but they had very similar problems. Old products and zero desire to "properly invest", in new products. Down the tube they went. Mitsubishi couldn't right the ship either and by 2007 they were gone. The same thing will happen here without real leaders that know the NA business here. Amazon execs, isn't what they need, IMHO.

Click to expand...

hmk123 said:

The tunnel vision in these discussions still surprises me. To quote from the PBS documentary "Triumph of the Nerds" about the PC revolution: "A nerd is someone who uses the telephone to talk about the telephone".

Just a few observations. While FCA has had and continues to have its share of quality issues I personally would not use Ford as an example of quality. First of all we know how poorly they handled their issue with the DCT, second the cracked block issue on some EcoBoost engines and then lately Ford's own CEO admitting that they still have a way to go. Improving Ford's quality remains job #1.

I just watched a report about Toyota engineers taking a Model Y apart and admitting they are quite a bit behind in their engineering efforts when it comes to building EVs. And this is coming from the largest automaker in the world.

I am neither for or against EVs but did notice that my local dealerships (within 40 miles) have 118 Ariyas, 81 Mach-Es, 220 ID.4s, 147 MB EQSs and 89 Mirais in stock. Maybe inventory is so high because they are so popular. But my guess is that it is because the adoption rate is still low.

Right now FCA is one of the most profitable automakers. So they did something right. And of course, Jeep's success invites competition. Not only with the Bronco but next with the Scout. When Stellantis will have to give up some of its gravy train it better finds something new.

At least with the Charger EV concept they are trying to think outside the box. But no doubt, the future looks very challenging.

I just find it "comical" that a lot of people think they know/knew how to do it better. When the 200 came out and the market was starting to shift lets think about what it would have taken to not only beat the Camry but even the Fusion. The ZF 9 speed would have had to be a hit right from the start like the 8 speed. But it wasn't. Even if it had had more rear leg room the next issue in my opinion would have been that they did not have a very competitive 4 cylinder. That is where Fiat was supposed to come in. But a 200 needs a different engine than a Fiat 500. Ce la vie. IMHO they tried with what they had. Let's not forget, most thought FCA would be gone by now and here we are with record profits. To get to 2030 you first have to make it to 2023.

And as we all learned the world can change in a day...

Click to expand...

hmk123 said:

The tunnel vision in these discussions still surprises me. To quote from the PBS documentary "Triumph of the Nerds" about the PC revolution: "A nerd is someone who uses the telephone to talk about the telephone".

Just a few observations. While FCA has had and continues to have its share of quality issues I personally would not use Ford as an example of quality. First of all we know how poorly they handled their issue with the DCT, second the cracked block issue on some EcoBoost engines and then lately Ford's own CEO admitting that they still have a way to go. Improving Ford's quality remains job #1.

I just watched a report about Toyota engineers taking a Model Y apart and admitting they are quite a bit behind in their engineering efforts when it comes to building EVs. And this is coming from the largest automaker in the world.

I am neither for or against EVs but did notice that my local dealerships (within 40 miles) have 118 Ariyas, 81 Mach-Es, 220 ID.4s, 147 MB EQSs and 89 Mirais in stock. Maybe inventory is so high because they are so popular. But my guess is that it is because the adoption rate is still low.

Right now FCA is one of the most profitable automakers. So they did something right. And of course, Jeep's success invites competition. Not only with the Bronco but next with the Scout. When Stellantis will have to give up some of its gravy train it better finds something new.

At least with the Charger EV concept they are trying to think outside the box. But no doubt, the future looks very challenging.

I just find it "comical" that a lot of people think they know/knew how to do it better. When the 200 came out and the market was starting to shift lets think about what it would have taken to not only beat the Camry but even the Fusion. The ZF 9 speed would have had to be a hit right from the start like the 8 speed. But it wasn't. Even if it had had more rear leg room the next issue in my opinion would have been that they did not have a very competitive 4 cylinder. That is where Fiat was supposed to come in. But a 200 needs a different engine than a Fiat 500. Ce la vie. IMHO they tried with what they had. Let's not forget, most thought FCA would be gone by now and here we are with record profits. Doesn't that mean shifting to RAM and Jeep was the right thing to do? To get to 2030 you first have to make it to 2023.

And as we all learned the world can change in a day...

Click to expand...

hmk123 said:

In previous posts I remember you saying they were on the right track under Cerberus. Granted, our 2009 Journey is our most used vehicle with now 150k miles on it. But in its first 100k miles I had to replace the TCM, ECM (under emission warranty), crank & CAM shaft positioning sensor, Throttle Body, Radiator, Alternator, A/C compressor and evaporator. The turn signal stalk became flaky twice. Oil Pan and Timing Case Sealant were covered under Lifetime power train warranty. And I have serviced (fluid changes and maintenance) the vehicle to a fault. Anyway, just like other owner stories these are anecdotal and don't necessarily mean anything. Cars are very complex machines and unfortunately some of us will be unlucky. I am not saying improving their quality reputation would not have helped them. Just saying I hear "horror" stories about BMW, Hyundai, Ford, etc. as well.

We are all creatures of habits and also perception. In my opinion to get people out of Camrys and similar cars would have taken an amazing product. For a while Chrysler had impressive hits due to clever designs. But we all saw that even with a sales wonder like the 300C it only lasts so long. Sure, of course, trying to get on-top and stay on top through quality like Toyota did is probably the right approach. But how many have tried?

Hyundai/Kia have obviously had a decent success story in the U.S. Did FCA have the means to beat them on all fronts? And again, when it comes to profitability didn't they choose the most obvious path for them? I think Sergio saw how much money he had to put on the hood of cars like the 200, saw how dealer space is limited and for better or worse put his bet on higher margin vehicles like Jeep and RAM.

What I do find sad is that in the long life of the HEMI they have not addressed weak points like the exhaust manifold bolts. If Sergio cheapened out on things like that then shame on him. But there were others before him and there have been others since then and I don't think I have seen much change there.

Click to expand...

hmk123 said:

I just find it "comical" that a lot of people think they know/knew how to do it better. When the 200 came out and the market was starting to shift lets think about what it would have taken to not only beat the Camry but even the Fusion. The ZF 9 speed would have had to be a hit right from the start like the 8 speed. But it wasn't. Even if it had had more rear leg room the next issue in my opinion would have been that they did not have a very competitive 4 cylinder. That is where Fiat was supposed to come in. But a 200 needs a different engine than a Fiat 500. Ce la vie. IMHO they tried with what they had. Let's not forget, most thought FCA would be gone by now and here we are with record profits. Doesn't that mean shifting to RAM and Jeep was the right thing to do? To get to 2030 you first have to make it to 2023.

Click to expand...

valiant67 said:

Sadly there is a terrible amount of irony in this paragraph.
The 200/Camry comparison now is the Jeep small CUV/RAV4 comparison. And again, Toyota prevails while FCA stumbles with lackluster offerings. Switching to small Jeeps instead of Dart and 200 didn’t prepare them any better to compete with Toyota.
Stellantis seems to maybe be trying to redeem Compass. We will see. Cherokee is done with no replacement, it simply wasn’t competitive.

Click to expand...

gforce2002 said:

I can't necessarily speak to other people's experience with their vehicles, but the 2018 Compass I had for 3.25 years was a crappy vehicle from day one. Plagued with incessant quality and reliability issues, I would say it's easily the most deficient and compromised vehicle of any of the original FCA models. Oil burning, rough shifting, suspension failing, software functions that never worked right, not to mention poorly fitting body panels and trim. As its final issue, the GPS unit failed in the entertainment unit. Thankfully, it was leased and I was able to just hand back the keys. I could never in good conscience have sold it to someone else.

Click to expand...

hmk123 said:

When the 200 came out and the market was starting to shift lets think about what it would have taken to not only beat the Camry but even the Fusion. The ZF 9 speed would have had to be a hit right from the start like the 8 speed. But it wasn't. Even if it had had more rear leg room the next issue in my opinion would have been that they did not have a very competitive 4 cylinder. That is where Fiat was supposed to come in. But a 200 needs a different engine than a Fiat 500.

Click to expand...