Test Drive Jeep Compass since 2011 SUV

FIVE POINTS

Out of ten possible
Without this parquet class no longer costs any manufacturer. And the share of this segment in the overall range is growing steadily. In addition to the five models presented easily, you can easily pull here at least as much as much. But almost all of them are veterans that have long existing on the market and soon leave the scene.
What is something
Toyota RAV4.
Price $ 39250.
Max. Power 152 liters. With. at 6000 rpm / min
Max. Speed \u200b\u200b180 km / h
Acceleration 0100 km / h 10.5 s
Hyundai Tucson
Price $ 34290.
Max. Power is 175 liters. With. at 6000 rpm / min
Max. Speed \u200b\u200b180 km / h
Acceleration 0100 km / h 10.5 s
Honda CV-R
Price $ 39500.
Max. Power 150 liters. With. at 6200 rpm / min
Max. Speed \u200b\u200b170 km / h
Acceleration 0100 km / h 12.2 C
Jeep Compass.
Price 29000.
Max. Power 170 liters. With. at 6000 rpm / min
Max. Speed \u200b\u200b185 km / h
Acceleration 0100 km / h 11.3 s
Suzuki Grand Vitara.
Price $ 31900.
Max. Power 140 liters. With. at 6000 rpm / min
Max. Speed \u200b\u200b170 km / h
Acceleration 0100 km / h 13.6 s
SUMMARY
In this case, talking about priorities is easier than usual all applicants are bright, noticeable. Honda occupies a special place. The new model made a wide step forward compared to the predecessor. This is a unconditional leader in the classroom. Beautiful, high-quality, stylish and spacious car hit the coming season. We collected the whole five when it was not known that the queue on Honda would grow more than a year. Netting one no more powerful modification.
With the second place to decide more difficult to Hyundai or Toyota? But after fairing oscillations, we choose Tucson. It is noticeably dynamic and yurt, he is easier to interface, there is a plastic body kit at the bottom of the body. And also, it is important, it is noticeably cheaper. Or someone believes that Korean cars are obliged to take the price? Now it is not so! Tusan a pleasant exception.
 
Toyota Standard. In good sense and in bad. Not ideal, but the Golden Middle. Not expensive, qualitatively, nonsense, in price loses slowly. People respect, but the black envy is not tormented by the Landcruser, as in any way! HAIR? So inside! Queues on the service? As if there are no others! Every third time has the same raffik. Well, here is the case of taste to stand out or be like everything.
 
Suzuki somehow I don't even want to push the fourth place the car is quite worthy. But it does not ride quickly. Yes, and the quality of materials is so-so. It seems as if the creators did not have enough spirit to bring all the quality of the car to the desired condition.
And Jeep? In this company, he is perhaps an outsider.
 
HOW DO THEY LOOK
Nikita Rozanov
Toyota RAV4.
The first show of 2006 design under the leadership of Vekhei Hirai (Wahei Hirai).
Hyundai Tucson
First show of 2004. Design Hyunday-Kia Europe under the guidance of Michael Kink.
Honda C-RV
First display of 2003. Design Honda.
Jeep Compass.
First display of 2003. Trevor Creed Design Director (Trevor Creed).
Suzuki Grand Vitara.
First display of 2003. Design Suzuki.
 
1ST PLACE
Honda CR-V
+ Carburity Conduct and the best smoothness of the stroke. Cozy, modern interior and understandable control interface for all functions
- Lack of speakers can scare active drivers
2ND PLACE
Hyundai Ticson.
+ A real livelist and on dynamics, and the competitiveness is resting competitors! Cozy salon. Good landing and review.
- There is no pronounced zero on the steering wheel. In the port of excessive valve.
3RD PLACE
Toyota RAV4.
+ Wonderful handling. Excellent visibility. The computer informs you in Russian.
- Hard pendant response on any traffic jokes. Flat front armchairs. Not too comfortable buttons.
4th place
Suzuki Grand Vitara.
+ Real SUV. Energy intensive suspension.
- Ridge from the front armchairs. No stabilization system. Rolling salon finish.
5th place
Jeep Compass.
+ Pretty masculine appearance. Unusual feature for a jeep-parcktail.
- interior reliance in the maximum manifestation. Unsuccessful landing at all places. Bad visibility. Handling with pronounced insufficient turning.
Text Vladimir Smirnov
Photo Leonid Dedukh
 

A source: Cars

Crash test Jeep Compass since 2011

Crash Test: Details
61%
Driver and passengers
23%
Pedestrians
76%
Children-passengers
43%
Active security system