Verdict
2017 Jeep Compass: Complaints, Recalls & Known Issues
What the public record actually says about the 2017 Jeep Compass — every figure below is a NHTSA or EPA number, not an opinion.
The read
More reported complaints than most SUV.
Owners filed 228 NHTSA complaints — more complaints than 68% of 2017 SUVs. Electrical System leads the reports (29%). 4 safety recall campaigns on record — check the VIN and remedy terms with a dealer.
Based on NHTSA complaint volume against 2017 SUVs, not adjusted for how many were sold. It describes the model year, not the individual car you are looking at.
Complaints filed
228
Reports to NHTSA, 2017
Safety recalls
4
NHTSA campaigns on record
NHTSA crash test
Overall NCAP rating
Combined MPG
24
EPA estimate
Complaint volume vs. segment peers
More complaints than 68% of 2017 SUVs
The bar is this car's percentile among 2017 SUVs by complaint volume — a full bar means the fewest complaints in its class. Not adjusted for sales.
Known issues
Electrical System issues lead owner complaints (29% of 228 reports), followed by power train (17%).
+ 12 more component categories with fewer reports.
Share of all 228 NHTSA complaints for this model year, grouped by the component owners named. Bars are scaled to the largest category. Examples: ODI 11298278, ODI 11173579, ODI 11121846, ODI 11728909, ODI 11728362.
Recalls(4)
Open a recall to read what NHTSA says is wrong, what can happen, and how it gets fixed. Check the VIN and remedy eligibility with a dealer; federal no-charge requirements have an age limit, though a manufacturer may offer more coverage.
Power TrainSep 2017 · 17V301000Details +Close −
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling certain 2017 Jeep Compass vehicles equipped with a 6-speed transmission. The left front halfshaft may not be properly seated, and, as a result, it may disengage from the transmission and/or break.
Risk: If the left front halfshaft disengages or breaks, the vehicle will have a loss of drive. Additionally, if the vehicle is parked without using the parking brake, the vehicle may roll, despite being in 'Park.' Either condition may increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Chrysler will notify owners, dealers will inspect the left front halfshaft for engagement and replace any that are not properly engaged in the transmission, free of charge. The recall began on June 12, 2017. Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403. Chrysler's number for this recall is T26.
EquipmentJul 2017 · 17V433000Details +Close −
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling certain 2017 Jeep Compass vehicles. The affected vehicles have User's Guides that contain incorrect information regarding the jump start procedure, specifically, the polarity of the battery terminals are reversed in the battery terminal graphic.
Risk: If a customer follows the User's Guide, they may hook up the battery jumper cables incorrectly, increasing their risk of injury.
Remedy: Chrysler will notify owners and will replace the User's Guides with a corrected version, free of charge. The recall began August 22, 2017. Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403. Chrysler's number for this recall is T46.
Electrical System · 17V740000Details +Close −
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling certain model year 2017-2018 Jeep Compass vehicles. The brightness of the backlighting for the Instrument Panel Cluster (IPC) cannot be adjusted. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 101, "Controls and Displays."
Risk: An instrument cluster that is too bright, and cannot be dimmed, can reduce the driver's ability to see at night, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Chrysler will notify owners, and dealers will update IPC software, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began December 8, 2018. Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403. Chrysler's number for this recall is T70.
Equipment · 17V824000Details +Close −
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling various Dodge, Chrysler, and RAM vehicles equipped with Kidde Plastic-Handle or Push Button 'Pindicator' Fire Extinguishers. A list of the affected trailer models is available at: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2017/RMISC-17V824-0103.pdf. These extinguishers may become clogged, preventing the extinguisher from discharging as expected or requiring excessive force to activate the extinguisher. Additionally, in certain models, the nozzle may detach from the valve assembly with enough force that it could cause injury and also render the product inoperable. For a full list of the affected fire extinguisher models visit: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2017/RMISC-17E062-5427.pdf
Risk: If the fire extinguisher does not function properly, it can increase the risk of injury in the event of a fire.
Remedy: Chrysler will notify owners instructing them to contact Kidde for a replacement fire extinguisher, free of charge. The recall began February 14, 2018. Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403 or Kidde customer service service toll-free at 1-855-262-3540, or online at www.kidde.com and click on "Product Safety Recall" for more information. Chrysler's number for this recall is T82.
A campaign can apply to this model year without being incomplete on a specific vehicle. Check the VIN with NHTSA or a dealer to confirm whether a particular car needs repair.
Investigations
3 NHTSA investigations on record
Investigations are agency reviews, not findings that a vehicle is defective.
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE19014 on September 9, 2019, to investigate 128 consumer complaints alleging that the Active Head Rest (AHR) inadvertently deployed without the occurrence of a crash or other rear impact event in model year (MY) 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango vehicles.When ODI opened the investigation, ODI was aware of thirteen alleged injuries.A small number of Early Warning Reports identified driver and/or passenger front seat AHR inadvertent deployments without a rear impact event.Reported safety consequences resulting from the AHR deployments include concussions, headaches, soft tissue injuries, disorientation, nausea, vomiting and/or loss of vehicle control as a result of being surprised and distracted by being struck in the head by the inadvertent AHR deployment. On September 24, 2019, ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA).ODI requested certain detailed information from FCA related to the following subject vehicles: MY 2010-2014 Dodge Avenger 200, MY 2010-2014 Dodge Calber, MY 2010-2014 Chrysler Sebring, MY 2013-2015 Ram Tradesman, MY 2012 Ram Van, MY 2010-2019 Dodge Grand Caravan, MY 2010-2016 Chrysler Town and Country, MY 2010-2017 Jeep Compass, MY 2011-2020 Dodge Durango, MY 2011-2020 Jeep Grand Cherokee, MY 2010-2019 Dodge Journey, MY 2010-2012 Jeep Liberty, MY 2010-2011 Jeep Nitro, and MY 2010-2011 Jeep Patriot vehicles.On December 2, 2019, ODI received a response from FCA that included vehicle production data, consumer complaints, field reports, warranty claims, manufacturer actions, production changes, and other data related to the alleged defect from the start of production (2010) through September 24, 2019.On January 27, 2020, ODI received an update to the December 2, 2019, IR response from FCA.On September 22, 2020, ODI requested additional subject vehicle AHR information from FCA.ODI received FCA's response on October 21, 2020.ODI subsequently received an update to FCA's October 21, 2020, response on February 16, 2021.During the investigation, ODI requested updates to certain IR questions on two occasions.FCA provided updates to question #2 on March 5, 2021, and questions #2 and #5 on May 26, 2023. FCA’s IR response data identified approximately 7.5 million subject vehicles (with approximately 15 million AHR assemblies).Due to the large number of vehicles and failure reports, ODI focused its analysis on the FCA vehicle model with the highest failure rate to represent the worst-case scenario.For this purpose, ODI focused on MY 2012-2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles for its analysis.This population includes 710,890 vehicles that FCA manufactured between August 19, 2011, and August 8, 2015.ODI identified 2,839 alleged AHR failures within this limited population.ODI identified 263 alleged injuries that were caused by AHR failures in MY 2012-2015 Grand Cherokees vehicles.Of these alleged injuries, ODI categorized them as eighty-two (82) soft tissue (neck/whiplash, bruise) injuries, four (4) concussions, fifty-nine (59) headaches, and one hundred eighteen (118) without a specific injury description.Although complainants have alleged injuries, ODI has been unable to obtain evidence to substantiate or validate any injuries where medical treatment was required.Consumer outreach was conducted by ODI, where sixty-three (63) FCA complainants with alleged injuries were contacted.Twelve of the sixty-three FCA consumers responded and were interviewed by ODI.ODI requested medical records, however, only one response was provided. Attorneys representing the responding complainant provided a synopsis that indicated they had experienced prior neck-related injuries dating to the mid-1990s.ODI also contacted one hundred (100) consumers who submitted Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQ) in an attempt to validate alleged injuries. Despite the efforts of ODI, the office has been unsuccessful at obtaining substantive documentation/evidence supporting complaints that allege serious injuries (where pre-existing medical conditions did not already exist). In addition to the low severity of alleged injuries caused by AHR deployments, there have been eleven alleged crashes and two alleged lane departures within the entire subject vehicle population that has been in the field up to sixteen years (with over 8,500 AHR inadvertent deployments).ODI was not able to validate that the alleged crashes were the result of inadvertent head rest deployments, and the crashes were minor in nature. ODI has conducted a thorough investigation of the alleged safety defect and with up to sixteen years of exposure for some vehicles and over 8,500 inadvertent AHR deployments, no serious crashes or injuries could be validated in the sub-population of focus.The lack of serious injuries validated by ODI with such large period of field exposure is consistent with thework done by NHTSA’s Human Injury Research Division and the Biodynamic Research Corporation, which support that an inadvertent AHR deployment is not likely to cause serious injury.In addition to the low risk of injury, FCA released an extended warranty program that covers inadvertent AHR deployment for ten years / unlimited mileage from the vehicle's in-service date. PE19014 is closed with the FCA extended warranty program.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist, and the Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by new circumstances. To review a complete closing summary, please the attached closing report. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect. During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW. The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications. The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU. In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment. FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle. Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW. These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes. An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time. In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU. This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners. Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW. The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation. The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage. There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation. The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU. If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC. Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC. All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled. In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024. With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
NHTSA opened AQ17-004 to determine whether Northwest Chrysler Jeep Dodge of Houston, Texas (Northwest) has complied with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 (Safety Act) and its implementing regulations. The Safety Act requires, among other things, that a manufacturer notify its dealers of defects related to motor vehicle safety and non-compliances with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and, in turn, that a dealer not sell a new vehicle subject to a recall unless the recall remedy has been performed (49 U.S.C. 30120(i)). NHTSA issued information request letters (IRs) to Northwest and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles US LLC (FCA) in August 2017, and again in October 2017 and December 2017. NHTSA's investigation indicated that Northwest sold and delivered at least 310 recalled vehicles that did not have the recall remedy completed at the time the vehicles were delivered to the customers. On August 19, 2020, NHTSA entered into a Settlement Agreement with Northwest and its parent company, Ken Garff Automotive LLC, to resolve the Audit Query. In the agreement, Northwest agreed to pay a $100,000 civil penalty and Ken Garff agreed to certain training and auditing requirements. The training relates to company policy, procedures, and compliance to prohibit sales of motor vehicles with open recalls and the integration of FCA's recall notifications into the dealership's inventory system.This Audit Query is closed.
Crash-test ratings
2017 Jeep Compass SUV 4WD NHTSA source
- Overall
- Frontal
- Side
- Rollover
2017 Jeep Compass SUV FWD NHTSA source
- Overall
- Frontal
- Side
- Rollover
Fuel economy by trim
| Trim | Engine | Drivetrain | Transmission | City | Hwy | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compass FWD | 2.0L 4-cyl | Front-Wheel Drive | Manual 5-spd | 23 | 30 | 25 |
| Compass FWD | 2.4L 4-cyl | Front-Wheel Drive | Manual 5-spd | 23 | 28 | 25 |
| Compass FWD | 2.0L 4-cyl | Front-Wheel Drive | Automatic (variable gear ratios) | 22 | 26 | 24 |
| Compass 4WD | 2.4L 4-cyl | All-Wheel Drive | Manual 5-spd | 22 | 27 | 24 |
| Compass FWD | 2.4L 4-cyl | Front-Wheel Drive | Automatic 6-spd | 21 | 27 | 23 |
| Compass 4WD | 2.4L 4-cyl | 4-Wheel Drive | Automatic 6-spd | 20 | 25 | 22 |
| Compass 4WD | 2.4L 4-cyl | 4-Wheel Drive | Automatic (variable gear ratios) | 20 | 23 | 21 |
EPA laboratory estimates by trim and engine. Actual mileage varies with driving, weather, load, and maintenance. EPA source.
Before you buy
Useful next checks
Federal records tell you about patterns. These checks can tell you more about the specific car in front of you.
These are affiliate links. TireKick may earn a fee if you use one.
Compare model years
"Fewest reports" and "most complained" describe raw NHTSA complaint totals, not vehicle reliability. The last few model years are left unlabelled because they have had less road time.
2017 Jeep Compass: frequently asked
What does the complaint record show for the 2017 Jeep Compass?
Owners filed 228 NHTSA complaints about the 2017 Jeep Compass — more complaints than 68% of comparable 2017 SUVs, so it sits toward the weaker end of its class. That's a signal, not a guarantee about any single car.
What are the most common problems on the 2017 Jeep Compass?
The most-reported problem areas are Electrical System (29% of complaints) and power train (17%).
How many recalls does the 2017 Jeep Compass have?
4 recalls have been issued that affect the 2017 Jeep Compass, covering components such as power train. Check the VIN with NHTSA and ask a dealer to confirm remedy eligibility; federal no-charge requirements have an age limit, though manufacturers may offer more coverage.
What gas mileage does the 2017 Jeep Compass get?
The EPA rates the 2017 Jeep Compass between 21 and 25 mpg combined, depending on trim and drivetrain.