[The Brutailer]

Umm, contrary to popular equipment, I’m digging this car.

It’s
+ A turbo petrol
+ Not linear (torque steer!!)

I like my cars to be temperamental and this fits the bill. This is basically the next level of Abarth Punto. Perfecto.

[nik_kapur]

We recently got the Compass AT and i have to say its very ordinary below 1500-1800 RPM. Its only once you have hit the higher revs does the car really begin to gallop. I find the initial turbo lag and the painfully slow gearbox to be a real problem. At start, if you push on the pedal, it moves forward and then whines as if its in neutral and the up shift is slow. I drive a Corolla CVT and i find that thoroughly enjoyable and linear as compared to this gearbox.

Having said that, the car looks like a million bucks, the interior plastics and quality are very very good, the feel good factor it offers is a real positive.

[sandeepmohan]

Very informative review, especially the technical bits around the engine and gearbox.

The BMW VANOS isn't what I'd call ultra reliable. If it shows signs of failing (excess noise), it is time you think of selling the car. For what seems to be an even more complex system, the MultiAir has been reliable. No questions about Honda's iVtec.

It is pretty evident that the foundation block of this engine is the age old 1.4 Fire series from Fiat. The MultiAir version is heavily reworked internally, slapped with an ultra modern intake and fuel injection system, an intercooler and turbocharger. However; there is no taking away some aspects and that is the dull bottom end response which applies even to the NA 1.4l. Yes; you should ideally get past this with a turbo but that ain't the case. The T Jet suffers from annoying lag too.

Originally Posted by blackwasp

There is a hint of cabin shake on startup - accentuated by the fact that one doesn't expect this from a petrol engine. The engine is audible inside the cabin, but it's not loud at idle

Strange. No shake or noise from the older generation of this engine and on a much cheaper car.

Originally Posted by blackwasp

It wouldn't even allow me a downshift from 4th gear at 3,800 rpm into 3rd.

To me this sounds like some protective measure to not kill the gearbox. Thats within the zone where the engine is pushing peak torque so maybe it is a case of saving the shift mechanism, bearings, etc. Hard to say unless the designers themselves spoke about why they keep such limitations.

On one side you have the brilliant dsg which in my books trumps even the ZF's on BMW's. The trade off being the gearbox might fall apart at any time. Then you have Ford and "Other" systems that are also dual clutch but are no match to the dsg when it comes to speed. Reliabilty is also suspect.

Originally Posted by nik_kapur

I drive a Corolla CVT and i find that thoroughly enjoyable and linear as compared to this gearbox.

The quality of the drive is further assisted by the excellent 1.8l engine. The Toyota 1.8l is a solid NA engine with brilliant bottom end even by todays standards. Probably the reason why they continue to use this engine in pretty much every corner of the world. No tiny turbo petrol can match the bottom end of this engine.

FCA really need to offer this brilliant petrol in manual top trim. I bet that will shave off almost 2 lacs straight. This AT is almost 24-25 lac car. I would start to veer towards an Octavia Tsi.

[RaghuVis]

Originally Posted by nik_kapur

We recently got the Compass AT and i have to say its very ordinary below 1500-1800 RPM. Its only once you have hit the higher revs does the car really begin to gallop. I find the initial turbo lag and the painfully slow gearbox to be a real problem. At start, if you push on the pedal, it moves forward and then whines as if its in neutral and the up shift is slow. I drive a Corolla CVT and i find that thoroughly enjoyable and linear as compared to this gearbox.

Congratulations on the car . You are one of the first few in our forum to get the AT. eagerly waiting for your ownership report. It will surely help others in making an informed decision.

Originally Posted by nik_kapur

Having said that, the car looks like a million bucks, the interior plastics and quality are very very good, the feel good factor it offers is a real positive.

For a car that is close to 2 million on road, that is quite less!
On a serious note, the car looks smashing no two ways about it.

[civic-sense]

The dilemma persists. My next car would definitely be the compass. No Creta or Tuscon for me.

I don't like the smell of burnt diesel. But then I don't want another 'underpowered' car like my current Ecosport AT.

Too many negatives for the Compass AT to overlook.

[abs182]

4 to 5 months ago when I was deciding on the Creta AT petrol the Jeep Petrol AT was another wildcard option. But instinct told me to go with the tried and tested Creta with more back bench space as the car was going to be largely chauffeur driven. I'm glad i didn't wait for the Jeep AT petrol! The lack of back space and a underwhelming engine would have not served my purpose at all.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by civic-sense

But then I don't want another 'underpowered' car like my current Ecosport AT.

The Compass Petrol AT isn't underpowered at all! In fact, it's a fast SUV. What takes away from the driving experience is the lag & dimwitted gearbox.

[Waspune]

Great review there . I really loved the section where you explained about the multi air technology.
I am not an AT fan and even if I drive an AT someday, it would be a DSG for sure. Have heard that ZF is equally impressive though I don't have any experience. The kind of power and torque the 1.4 makes, its just brilliant. For eg: The Jetta 1.4 tsi made 120 bhp and 200 NM while the Octavia 1.4 tsi makes 148 bhp and equals the multiair in torque.

After driving the 1.3 MJD for the past 2.5 years I am not averse to lag, in fact I love the silence before the storm kind of feeling which the 1.4 multi air should provide, given the specs, at least in manual guise

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

It’s
+ A turbo petrol
+ Not linear (torque steer!!)

With a good manual gearbox (as per reviews of the diesel), the base Sport variant which gets most of the safety features sound like the best bet - if Compass petrol is of interest to you in terms of performance.

[Dr.Naren]

Has anybody got delivery of base petrol manual? There are no TD vehicles and I am not sure if it's in production yet.

[Pam81]

Originally Posted by sandeepmohan

The BMW VANOS isn't what I'd call ultra reliable. If it shows signs of failing (excess noise), it is time you think of selling the car. For what seems to be an even more complex system, the MultiAir has been reliable.

I beg to differ here, this is very misleading. BMW VANOS & Valvetronic is in production since early 2000s and applied across all BMW gasoline engines. Even the latest B38, 1.2L engine applied with Valvetronic which is in MINI and also PSA applied the same in Prince 1.6L in Europe. MultiAir is applied only in expensive FIAT cars. No other customer got them so far in production. Reliability in just few cars Vs whole family of Gasoline engines in BMW is not a fair comparison! Perhaps, this may be one off case with your experience but definitely Valvetronic & MultiAir are world apart!

Originally Posted by blackwasp

If you suddenly kickdown the accelerator in traffic, there are times when there is no response for 1-1.5 and at times 2 seconds, after which the turbo spools, the gearbox shifts down and you get a sudden surge of power with accompanying torque steer. This can take getting used to, especially when closing traffic gaps or during quick overtakes. The lack of a torque converter on the gearbox only adds to the delay;

This is the piece I was personally interested to know from the review here. Based on the industry study & literature, 0.5 second interruption between gear shifts in AT is acceptable and mostly not perceptible by many drivers. For a dual clutch AT, where the fundamental design objective is to have the shift quicker due to independent clutches for each bank of gears, does not seem to be right to take 1 ~ 2 seconds. And so, on the contrary, one could doubt the engine's MultiAir system, which essentially hinders the aspiration of the engine. The technology, undoubtedly great! However, it needs to be tuned for faster response. There're so many hidden stuff going on in the background when you floor the pedal or let go smoother.

Here's what happens in little bit of technical details: Host of sensor inputs checked at the ECU and it selects the right combination of valve lift / timing to satisfy the need of the Torque Demand (Pedal input is converted into Torque Demand). And as it was explained in this review, there are many systems need to act fast: The cam input is being taken but converted into hydraulic stiffness and again the amount of oil determines the valve lift / timing and coupled with the solenoid actuation. Most of the solenoid valves operate around 40 ~ 50 millisecs (0.04 second). However, the time takes to either pressurize or relieve the pressure from the chambers before transferring motion to the valve is not as fast as solenoid. Even it is 0.2 ~ 0.3 seconds, it is adding to 0.5 seconds gear shift interrupt and in total comes to 0.8 sec. Add all variations in real world scenario, you might be perceiving the response delay of 1.0 sec or more particularly when you are accelerating. Usually, for these kind of technologies, accumulation of ECU signals, responses and final actuation is not perceptible in steady state driving. However, when you really need the engine to respond fast, the LOGIC plays major role in switching from one mode to the other. Probably comparable to "Gear Hunting" in AutoShift of Maruti Celerio.

Even then, this technology applied only to FCA so far but successful in gasoline dominated markets such as USA. It is my belief based on experiences that the software & host of other conditions might not have tuned for India as it calls for greater investment, long cycle development, calibration & implementation and not to mention the sad state of India specific product engineering at FCA which is non-exist!

Originally Posted by blackwasp

Although I must add, the 1.4L MultiAir is 'boomier' than you would expect in a Rs. 25 lakh car. The engine note is alright, yet certainly not what us enthusiasts would call a 'sweet enjoyable sound'.

Overall, we'll say that the Petrol engine does the job, but it doesn't impress like the 2.0L diesel did. The Compass diesel has a jewel of an engine; it makes more power as well as torque. We look forward to the upcoming Diesel AT variant. Even the Petrol AT's gearbox is strictly average. On paper, 7 gears & dual-clutch tech puts it on par with VW's DSG, although in the real world, it can't match the speed & intelligence of the DSG. There's no comparison.

Again, I really doubt if the dual clutch AT is the only culprit here. From a comparison standard, VW DSG is mated to Engine that does not have a sophisticated system to alter the breathing of the engine other than throttle control for a gasoline car.

Thanks to reviewers in detailing out the experience & observations. It was well written and greatly comprehended!!

[sandeepmohan]

Originally Posted by Pam81

I beg to differ here, this is very misleading.

I do not recall writing that every VANOS system, on every BMW falls apart. If you are going to buy an old BMW that does use VANOS, it is very important to check it is functioning well. I do not have the ability to judge a failing vanos nor does a regular mechanic. Only mechanics who are familiar with vanos can identify a fault or signs of excess noise. To you and me, the engine would sound just fine. The earlier generation vanos systems are known to fail. It is one of those things you'd check as part of a PDI. Failures have been reported even on a BMW Z4 that uses the 3l straight six. The same engine is used on other BMW's too.

MultiAir was applied to a Fiat Punto almost a decade ago on the very same engine block that the Jeep Compass uses today. This is not considered a expensive car.

I am not sure what you mean by customer.

[Pam81]

Originally Posted by sandeepmohan

I do not recall writing that every VANOS system, on every BMW falls apart. If you are going to buy an old BMW that does use VANOS, it is very important to check it is functioning well.

Thanks for clarifying. VANOS & MultiAir are different from a functional perspective. MultiAir & BMW Valvetronic are apple to apple. MultiAir also has a functionality for phasing (timing change) but in a very constrained manner. It can't match VANOS, moreover, MultiAir is only for Intake and not for exhaust where as VANOS is for both Intake & Exhaust.

Originally Posted by sandeepmohan

I do not have the ability to judge a failing vanos nor does a regular mechanic. Only mechanics who are familiar with vanos can identify a fault or signs of excess noise. To you and me, the engine would sound just fine. The earlier generation vanos systems are known to fail. It is one of those things you'd check as part of a PDI. Failures have been reported even on a BMW Z4 that uses the 3l straight six. The same engine is used on other BMW's too.

Not all of us are competent to do so and I did not meant to be that way.

Originally Posted by sandeepmohan

MultiAir was applied to a Fiat Punto almost a decade ago on the very same engine block that the Jeep Compass uses today. This is not considered a expensive car. I am not sure what you mean by customer.

Right, but the same Punto would cost you ~20% more if it's offered in India. MultiAir is from INA Schaeffler, who is Tier-1 supplier, I meant here OE customers such as FIAT, NISSAN, BMW etc.... So far, it is strictly with FIAT and not in every FIAT car!

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by Pam81

MultiAir is from INA Schaeffler, who is Tier-1 supplier, I meant here OE customers such as FIAT, NISSAN, BMW etc.... So far, it is strictly with FIAT and not in every FIAT car!

Small correction there. Multiair was developed by FIAT Powertrains Technologies who later licensed the technology to Schaeffler.

[heydj]

I am surprised to see not having paddle shifters as a negative. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't paddle shifters same as having manual mode, all thats different is the location and convenience.

Moreover some vehicles have paddle shifters and some manual mode E.g. Vento TDI vs City CVT in terms of implementation of manual mode.

I am further surprised to read Jeep DCT not in same league as VW DSG. Could it be due to mating of gear to engine performance.