The average age of cars on US roads just keeps getting older. There are a couple reasons for this: old cars tend to last longer than they once did, and new cars just keep going up in price. I favor older cars on here because, well, I favor older cars. But for today, I thought we’d take a look at a couple of vehicles that are actually newer than the twelve-year-old national average.
Yesterday we looked at a Datsun truck with a dump bed and a Dodge truck with a convertible roof. I knew the Dodge was going to be a hard sell, considering its price, and I was right: you all preferred the mini dump truck by a pretty healthy margin, even with its sketchy description in the ad.


I like the idea of the Datsun, but I also know that places that sell gravel and mulch and whatnot will deliver for a fee, and that just makes life so much easier. Besides, that thing has about eighty horsepower, and I bet the hydraulic dump mechanism adds five hundred pounds to it, which cuts into its cargo capacity. It just feels like the wrong truck for a dump bed. And I have always liked the Dakota convertible. I’ll just try to talk the seller down some.
The average age for a car in the US is about twelve years old. The newest car in our household fleet is that age, a 2013 Chrysler 300 with about 86,000 miles on it, and it is just now starting to show its age a bit. Its electronics are getting a little glitchy, and the transmission isn’t as silky-smooth as it once was, and there’s a rattle in the dash now and then. But still, it doesn’t feel old. I’ve sent cars to the junkyard that were newer than it at the time, and at least one with fewer miles on it. “They don’t make ’em like they used to,” the older generations are fond of saying, but I’m beginning to think that’s a good thing. Cars are expensive; they should last.
So today, we’re going to look at some newer cars for a change. I chose two fairly run-of-the-mill crossover SUVs, the sort of thing that sells like hotcakes these days. Could you drive either of them for a good long time yet? Probably. Would you want to? Well, let’s take a look and see.
2015 Jeep Compass Sport SE – $4,999

Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter DOHC inline 4, CVT automatic, FWD
Location: Burleson, TX
Odometer reading: 164,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
Probably no car brand has been more diluted over the past few decades than Jeep. “Jeep” used to mean stick axles, a rough ride (even in the “luxury” models), and the ability to traverse pretty much any solid ground. You bought one because you needed that capability, or wanted to look like you needed it. Now, in many cases, it’s just a grille design and a badge. Yes, I know the Wrangler is still more or less a proper Jeep, but then you have this little front-wheel-drive poseur.

I’ve actually never driven one of these, so I guess I shouldn’t be too hard on it. They’ve been a staple of rental car fleets for years, but somehow I always ended up with something else. This is a basic Sport model, with a 2.0 liter version of the Global Engine Alliance four, backed by a Jatco CVT. It’s basically the Applebee’s Appetizer Combo of drivetrains – a bunch of stuff nobody really wants, but everyone will pick at if there’s nothing else. It runs and drives fine, the seller says, and everything works.

It looks fine inside, and since it was a fairly cheap car new, it doesn’t have half its controls on a touchscreen. Looking at this photo, I’m reminded of why I don’t typically feature cars this new, and why there’s no way I could report on new-car news. I’ve just got nothing to say about it. Modern car interiors have become as homogenized as waiting rooms, all function and no personality – not uncomfortable, but not a place that inspires you to spend a lot of time there.

Jeep restyled the Compass in 2011 to look more like the Grand Cherokee, and less like a bug-eyed alien. It’s handsome enough, and this one looks like it’s in good condition. The real reason this type of car is so popular has nothing to do with styling, however – it’s all about that tall seating position for visibility, and a big hatch in the back for stuff. And if you want a car to fit into your life, rather than define it, it makes a lot of sense. I guess.
2018 Fiat 500X Urbana Edition – $5,000

Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter DOHC inline 4, nine-speed automatic, AWD
Location: San Francisco, CA
Odometer reading: 89,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
When Fiat came back to the US market in 2010, it was with the 500 subcompact, a retro-styled shot directly across Mini’s bow. It was a big success, so of course, all Fiat’s subsequent models had to be called the 500 something, because everyone loves a franchise. First there was the 500L, a four-door version of the 500 that looked oddly inflated, and then this car, the 500X, came along, with better proportions and all-wheel-drive, but still clearly a 500.

A 4WD Fiat isn’t as new a concept as it may seem to Americans. The little Panda that was never sold here was available with 4WD way back in 1983, and before that, Fiat made a Land Rover-esque SUV called the Campagnola. The 500X probably doesn’t have the goat-like off-road abilities of those two, but I bet it does well in the snow. Powering its all-wheel-drive system is a 2.4-liter “Tigershark” inline 4 and a nine-speed ZF automatic. You could get a 500X with a manual, but only the base model, and only front-wheel drive. This one runs and drives great, and doesn’t have many miles on it.

This one isn’t all that exciting inside either, especially compared to the small 500’s stylish interior, but it looks functional enough. It looks like it’s in good shape in the photos, but we don’t get a clear view of the driver’s seat, which always gets the most wear and tear. I’m not saying that the seller is necessarily hiding anything, but they could be. I’ve gone to look at cars before that didn’t show the driver’s seat in the ad, and found popped seams and worn-out fabric. They do say everything works as it should.

It’s the Urbana Edition, which apparently accounts for the blacked-out trim and gunmetal gray wheels. (I’ve spent quite a bit of time in Urbana, and I don’t recall that being the fashion there, but whatever.) It has the requisite crossover SUV black wheel arches, but at least Fiat was fairly restrained with them; they’re not big flares sticking out or anything. It’s in good condition, especially for being a city car; I don’t see any door dings or scuffs on the bumpers that you might expect from a life in the concrete jungle.
I have to be honest: neither one of these is very inspiring to me, but from a pragmatic point of view, I can understand why someone would want one. They just work as transportation, and sometimes, that’s all you need. So what do you think? If you had to choose between a Jeep that’s not really a Jeep, and a Fiat that’s only kind of a 500 (and you do; that’s how the game is played), which one will it be?
When picking up the keys to your 18 hour rental car….the only thing that feels worse than getting the Versa…is having them dump a Compass on you.
That look in the agent’s eye when they just know that they just saddled you with a total piece of crap. At that point…yes I will fork over the extra $49 to get the RAV-4.
A CVT-equipped Compass or a Fiat?
Neither.
Once I had the misfortune of having a 2016 Jeep Compass–or maybe it was a Patriot–as an insurance rental for over 2 months and it was hands down the worst car I’ve driven that’s been produced in the past 25 years. It was slow, noisy, uncomfortable and got lousy gas mileage; it had no redeeming qualities. There is no way the Fiat can be any worse than this miserable little Jeep.
100% this, I too had one as a rental, it had 7 (seven) miles on and it rattled and whistled more than my 230k Subaru. Luckily I only had to put up with it for a day or so..
If my son who was in high school at the time had been covered to drive it I would have given it to him and driven his old Volvo 850 instead.
My only two rentals were a Nissan Altima (2014? 2015?) and a Dodge Charger (2020). I feel lucky.
Initially I thought «fuck no» too the Fiat,but the Jeep is just horrendously boring. I don’t appreciate that they have messed with the Fiat 500 platform,but at least this one isn’t the even more worse «L».
A: Please don’t ever use “stick axle” again. Someone introduced that phrase to C/D in the early aughts and they used it multiple times in the same article every month for years. It’s a stupid phrase.
B: The 500X is twice the driver’s car as the Compass. Neither of these are “bad,” but the 500X is more pleasant. The Compass is the Mitsubishi GS platform, and by 2015, it had the updated interior that’s way better than the cost-cut original, and they always drove okay, just felt like an economy car. It’ll probably run longer and more trouble-free than the Fiat, but, again, neither of these cars are bad and they’re both good deals.
How soon we forget Benjamin B. Hotchkiss and his euphonious Hotchkiss drive. For shame!
No low floors without Hotchkiss
At least the Fiat will be fun until something blows up.
It’s not clear to me that this Compass has the CVT or the 2.0L. They were also available with a 6 speed (Hyundai sourced!) automatic which were far more reliable. You almost never see the Jatco CVT ones still running with that many miles on them.
EDIT again: damnit the brochure I linked:
https://www.auto-brochures.com/makes/Jeep/Compass/Jeep_US%20Compass_2015-2.pdf
contradicts itself in places and now I don’t know what to think. Someone with more direct knowledge of these cars can say for sure.
If it has the 2.4 it could have the Hyundai 6 speed, but if it has the 2.0 it seems like that was only available with the CVT in FWD. There are actually a dizzying array of combinations available.
Thank you! That might’ve changed my vote, actually.
Ugh, barf. I’ve got no problem with crossovers. There’s an 11 year old CX-5 in my fleet. But at least that’s a GOOD one.
I’ll take the Fiat, because it has a real transmission.
But I’d rather have a non-running project shitbox.
No.
Fiat 500X for me. I have more confidence in the 2.4L/9 speed powertrain with half the mileage than I do with that 2L/CVT powertrain.
The only positive with the Compass has over the Fiat is I get to piss off all the people who care about what a “real Jeep” is… especially with it being FWD.
AWD v FWD. ZF v Jatco. 89K v 164K. It’s not a hard choice for me.
The Jeep is handsome, but it’s a poser. And I would not want to put up with the derision from owners of “real” Jeeps.
At a lower price, I could’ve been swayed to the Compass, but I voted for the lower mileage Fiat. Basically a coin flip.
Can anyone lend me $1? I only have $4,999 on me right now.
I can give you a nickel…
Can’t do it, sorry.
Guess you’re stuck with the Jeep.
The Fiat looks good, better than the other 500 four-door and you might have moments of enjoyment driving it. That’s never gonna happen in the Compass.
Realize there’s probably a little cross pollination between these two, but I don’t know if I could face the day listening to the wheezy drone of the engine/CVT in the Jeep. Yeah, I’ll take the more tempermental one.
Fiat all day. The 500X has practically nothing in common platform-wise with the 500. Under the skin it’s identical to the Jeep Renegade, even being built side-by-side in the same factory in Melfi, Italy.
This one doesn’t have my preferred powertrain, that would be the 1.4L turbo/6-speed combo. It’s curious that the 500X wasn’t offered with AWD and the manual powertrain, when the Renegade was.
The Tigershark/9-speed combo had its teething troubles in 2015-16, but was somewhat improved by ’18. Even so it does not have a reputation for longevity, which I think contributes to the low price. I’ve heard of 2.4L Renegades reaching above 150k, but it seems to be a crap shoot.
Even so, I would put money on that drivetrain being less of a headache then the 2.0L and Jatco combo…
The Fiat is somewhat interesting to look at and has fewer miles, so it wins today.
Hey, where is the Jatco Xtronic CVT troll? 😛
Honestly, as bad a shitty Compass is, the 500X is still even scarier in terms of reliability and repair costs. So, if you have to drive a shitty Chrysler product, it might as well be the simpler CompASS even if it’s not Trail-Rated (let’s be honest, hardly anyone does that shit anyway LOL)
My roommate had a compass. I’d rather walk than drive that thing again. Oh wait. It’s already been sent to the junkyard as mechanically junked with less than 80k miles.
The 500X wouldn’t be any better, and it would’ve racked up a lot more repair $ too 🙁
“I’d rather walk than drive that thing again. Oh wait. It’s already been sent to the junkyard as mechanically junked with less than 80k miles.”
So if you pick the Compass, you’ll get your wish to walk!!!
“Hey, where is the Jatco Xtronic CVT troll? “
I wonder which way he’s gonna vote… LOL
Ugh. If I had to choose between these two (neither is the proper answer), I would have to go with the Fiat, just to avoid the CVT.
Jeep. Not because of any redeeming value of the vehicle per se, but I’d use it as a winter beater with no guilt about that and then buy something enjoyable but impractical for the summer.
The parts availability for it will be much better versus the Fiat.
5k for that Fiat seems like a great deal
Lower miles, looks better, no CVT. Fiat gets my pick easily.
I can’t pass up the legendary Jatco CVT…
Since these share a lot of the same terrible qualities we have come to expect from Stellantis products, the fact that the Fiat is new, has fewer miles, has a better engine and transmission option, and is AWD rather than FWD, it is hard to imagine any selecting the Jeep.
I had a 500 Abarth for 7 years with very little trouble. My GF decided to get a 500X, either ’17 or ’18, and currently has about 160K miles. She loves that damn thing.
I’ll also add we took it to the Dragon a few years ago, w/ the kiddo and our luggage, about a 6hr drive. No complaints, she even put it in “Sport” mode for the Dragon. I got to be a passenger for a change.