A little competition coming for the FJ...

[jmode]

Looks like a plastic covered, want-to-be rugged 4x4 to me. To be completely honest i would rather have a rusted out fj40 then that. No matter what it comes down to, toyota is built for strength and will always be 10 times more rugged then any f**king heep.

[mattfl750]

If they put the CRD in that thing, i might consider it. 22-27 mpg's sounds really good.

[rfjtoy]

MPG is over rated, when OFF-Road fun is the goal.

[BC_FJC]

WHO CARES.... Go wheeling

[Dragon]

I'm sure it's nice, but I'll keep my FJ

[gpwpat]

I like it.

my 4 runner is getting old and will need to be replaced soon. I really wanted a FJC but after trying to figure out how to use it with 2 small kids and carseats it just isn't going to work.

Problem is all the car manufactures kep getting bigger. compare the size of the new 4runner with my 96 and the new one is huge. To big for my tastes. the FJC is perfect but it doesn't work with my family needs.

But heck I like jeeps. I have never owned a new jeep all my jeeps are real jeeps. to me no real jeep was made after 1945. Now I own 4 wwii jeeps. But only one looks like it did in 1942. So too I need to be able to tow that to shows.

Today you can't buy a SUV without all that plastic. It is really to bad. I think it is so the plastic will break down and you will be forced to buy a new vehicle.

Why is it that every time a utility vehicle is made to look utilitarian which is made for practicality and simplicity, people say it looks like a hummer. Has anybody ever seen the old willys wagons from the 1950's. maybe the hummer looks like that? I like simple flat sided retro styles.

I will look at it when it comes out with much interest. But would rather get a 4 door FJC that would actually hold my family. or maybe I should just stick with my 4runner and have all the interior replaced. My parents have a 60 series but it was in an accident and needs a new front pillar and doors. Humm maybe I should look for some doner.

For you guys calling jeeps heeps. if you go back far enough. toyota based its first FJ (Fake Jeep) on a jeep. but to me all jeeps made after 1945 don't appeal to me much. Just to much ugly plastic.

[BobN]

Originally Posted by FJBen

Over the years, much ado has been made over the name Jeep having been derived from its military nomenclature, GP, for General Purpose. This can be disproved easily by noting that until mid1942, the Army designation for the truck was command reconnaissance, not general purpose (that would come later). No doubt the demise of the 1/2ton Dodge Jeep as standard equipment contributed to the use also. When Willys began using the term "Jeep" in advertising, MinneapolisMoline balked. In June 1942, the House Committee on Military Affairs substantiated MM's claim to the name, citing numerous references in newspapers and magazines dating back to before 1940.

While I do not dispute that that GP is not exceptionally likely to have developed into jeep tho' there are WW2 based arguments for the development of the word from geepie (from GP) and then onto jeep.

However, anyone that states that a jeep was not a general purpose vehicle does not understand the development of Army vehicles during WW2. When the jeep was first under development it came under the purvue of the Quartermaster Corp. This is because it was not an armored vehicle, it was not a combat vehicle. If it were it would have been developed by the Ordnance. The Quartermaster was responsible for the developement of general purpose vehicles. General purpose vehicles were either tactical (like the jeep) or administrative (like a sedan). Don't let anyone tell you that the jeep wasn't a general purpose vehicle but by the same token there is only a very small amount of evidence that would demonstrate that jeep came from GP. This includes a couple of brief paragraphs from the US Army's mechanics and drivers magazine during WW2 - called "Army Motors."

Sorry if this is a rerun as I didn't read the whole thread before responding.

Now back to our show.....

About the Jeep Unlimited with 4 doors? What concerns me is flexibility. The Wranglers seem to be very light weight in the rated towing capacity. As far as I know, DMC has n't released tow capacity for the Jeep Unlimited 4dr. But I would almost bet it is less than or equal to 3500lbs wereas the FJC can tow 5000lbs. That's important to me as I'm downsizing from a Suburban and still have a "lightweight" trailer to pull...or even better my WW2 Ford GPW (jeep) on its flat bed trailer. I imagine that gas mileage will really suck when towing but overall it should be better than the Sub when daily driving is added in.....if only it came with a 35 or 40 gallon fuel tank!

[gpwpat]

Bob

we went round and round on the towing capacity on G503.

there is no official rating on the 07 unlimited yet. but if compared to similar vehicles in wt and power drive train it should be 5000 lbs.

Either that or the fjc shouldn't be rated at 5000. as the jeep is longer than the FJC and it is the wheelbase that gives the short wb wranger its low tow rating due to the moment forces a trailer has on the rear of a vehicle on coners and during braking. Being that the 4door has the same drive train and is longer than the liberty there is no reason it can't tow 5000 lbs. so unless Jeep has posted a towing capacity for the 07 unlimited. which they have not. we can't even compare that spec.

[roscoFJ73]

Originally Posted by saskdiesel

Well, since I've owned Jeeps, Cruisers, Fords, Chevs, Toyota's of all sorts (Including my diesel Surf) and the odd Dodge, I have to say..............I really like that 4 door Jeep with solid axles and a deep low range!
If Toyota had built a solid axle FJ Cruiser (Maybe even a diesel!) I would probably have one.
4 Doors just sweeten the deal for my needs. That truck will sell very well. It may not appeal to an FJ owner but I will not argue the off-road merits that vehicle will have.

I agree and that V6 diesel is already on sale in Australia(in the Commander) and other countries.
The motoring journos cant say enough nice things about the 3.0 V6 with 160 kw and 510nm of torque
Its supposed to be faster than the 4.7 gasser and get 10 ltr per 100klm or about 25 mpg US gallons.
The Discovery is also using the same V6 (mercedes I think)and is also getting the treatment normally reserved for the Japanese 4x4 here.

However the motoring journos never give the jeep very good ratings on interior space ,suspension or the dodgy auto trans that doesnt like hot desert driving.

[mattfl750]

If MPG is over rated, when OFF-Road fun is the goal.
Then, is low-end torque, longer intervals between fill-ups (ie. longer trail time) and schedueld maintainance also over rated?

There is a benefit to diesel engines. My feelings are the option for a diesel powered vehicle should be there, and the Chrysler-Benz, or whatever they call themselves, is recognizing this fact. Thats why that corp is growing on me. They don't care that these vehicles are only 45 state smog legal. and dont get me wrong i beleive Toyota builds the highest quality product, i just wish they would give us the option of diesel.

[mattfl750]

PS Toyota already makes the d-4d a 3.0l 4 banger turbo diesel w/about 280 ft/lbs of torque. Also they put it in the prado, the FJ's sister vehicle.

[Full_M3tal]

Originally Posted by jfonz

Interiour looks pretty comfy to me....






and functional...


Though the super cool little outlet the FJC has would be nice....

But Is It Water Proof Like The FJ, The FJ Is 100% Outdoors, It Can Be Spayed With A Jet Spay/ Car Wash Spayer And Mothing Will Be Damaged......

And For Off Road....

It Went Every Where We Went On Hells Revenge Even Up Hells Gate, Uf It Had The 3" Lift Im Sure It Would Of Made It Up The Hot Tub. But This Is Just Me, Say What You Want About The FJ. It Is Still A Toyota the Best There Is, And Is Still Running The Mini Truck Rear Axle ( Dont Belive Me Just Ask A Dealer{If He
Knows His Junk}). And All In All I Love Toyotas, I Hate My Izuzu (Like The Gearing Though). Need To Find Me Another Mini.......

Just My Two Drunken Cents .02

Peace

[jfonz]

Originally Posted by Full_M3tal

But Is It Water Proof Like The FJ, The FJ Is 100% Outdoors, It Can Be Spayed With A Jet Spay/ Car Wash Spayer And Mothing Will Be Damaged.............

Suposidly you can do the same with the wranglers. I know that you could with the TJ, and I'm pretty sure the new ones are the same. They do have carpet but the carpet is removable which is really nice when your cleaning it & the rest of the interior. I would think that making it able to handle water would be kind of a given sense it comes with a removable top.

Originally Posted by Full_M3tal

And For Off Road....

It Went Every Where We Went On Hells Revenge Even Up Hells Gate, Uf It Had The 3" Lift Im Sure It Would Of Made It Up The Hot Tub. But This Is Just Me, Say What You Want About The FJ.......

I like the FJCruiser. I think there a solid rig. If I didn't like them I would be spending so much time designing stuff for them, though I'm not one of thease people that looks at jeeps as Heeps, or thinks My Toyota, just because it says toyota or Land Cruiser on it magically makes it the offroad king past present & future, Nor do I think jeep puting some silly trail rated badge on the side of there jeeps, then calling them trial rated, makes them any better than any other rig. I think over all its a matter of what you like. I've wheeled IFS for a long time before I got my Jeep, and I liked it and did fine where ever I went. I would think that for most people that get a FJC the IFS is going to do just fine. I would have no hesitations takeing one on most of the trails in Moab. I think people should be proud of there rig & there choice in picking a FJcruiser, but I don't think its going to kill people to admit that jeep has made some good stuff, starting with the TJ, and is now makeing somthing that the market has been wanting for years with the introduction of the new 4dr unimiteds. I'm a land cruiser fan and have been one for years. I have one sitting in my garage right now as a matter of fact & amazingly almost every time I go to moab I'm sandwiched on a trail with a toyota mini truck a 40, and 2 80's. So the land cruisers are great, But IMO, so are the newer Jeeps....

[FJMouse]

[quote=jfonz]Suposidly you can do the same with the wranglers. I know that you could with the TJ, and I'm pretty sure the new ones are the same. They do have carpet but the carpet is removable which is really nice when your cleaning it & the rest of the interior. I would think that making it able to handle water would be kind of a given sense it comes with a removable top.



I have a Jeep and often wonder WHY IN THE WORLD they put carpet in it! I removed all of my carpet and had it Rhino lined. Now it is truly water proof. The Jeep (Wrangler) holds up well in water. My Jeep Cherokee (that was traded in for my beautiful Mr. FJ) would short out going through a mud puddle! Unfortunately that happened to me A LOT. That was the only selling point I used with my husband when I decided to buy the FJ. I kept saying, "But, it can go through water!!!" I am very excited about this!

[FirstToy]

Originally Posted by Full_M3tal

But Is It Water Proof Like The FJ, The FJ Is 100% Outdoors, It Can Be Spayed With A Jet Spay/ Car Wash Spayer And Mothing Will Be Damaged......

I am scared if you took a jet spray to the inside of the FJC!
I think the floor is rubber, and seat fabric is 'water resistant' but that's as far as it goes, correct? I would hate to see you short out the entire dash!

[BobN]

Originally Posted by gpwpat

Bob

we went round and round on the towing capacity on G503.

there is no official rating on the 07 unlimited yet. but if compared to similar vehicles in wt and power drive train it should be 5000 lbs.

Either that or the fjc shouldn't be rated at 5000. as the jeep is longer than the FJC and it is the wheelbase that gives the short wb wranger its low tow rating due to the moment forces a trailer has on the rear of a vehicle on coners and during braking. Being that the 4door has the same drive train and is longer than the liberty there is no reason it can't tow 5000 lbs. so unless Jeep has posted a towing capacity for the 07 unlimited. which they have not. we can't even compare that spec.

Pat it just took a little more digging and here it is at 3500lbs...

"Even More Powerful and Fuel-efficient Engine
New on all 2007 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited models is a 3.8-liter overhead valve V-6 engine, with 205 horsepower and 240 lb.-ft. of torque – producing more horsepower and torque than its predecessor with improved fuel economy. A standard six-speed manual transmission or an available four-speed automatic transmission is offered.
Jeep Wrangler Unlimited features a towing capacity of 3,500 lbs. and an optional towing package that includes a 4.10 axle ratio, class III trailer hitch and two front tow hooks. For key diesel markets outside North America, a diesel engine will also be available – for the first time in a Jeep Wrangler – with a five-speed manual transmission. "
http://www.jeep.com/jeep_life/news/a...unlimited.html

Sure you can pull anything you can get moving but I want to focus on safety and not adding excessive wear and tear. Ratings are decided by the manufacturer based not solely on wheelbase but frame strength, engine capability, radiator cooling and perhaps other factors I can't recall. It's a shame as I have said before becuase I like the looks of the jeep...but I'm going with the FJ...maybe as early as August. Fingers crossed.

[lcwizard]

i agree with 'sask' on this one. since i was old enough to buy my first truck, a brand new '78 Fj40 , i haven't spent a single year in the last thirty without a Land Cruiser as my primary transportation. Either a 40, 55. or 60. The new FJ is a disappointment, i couldn't take it the places i go. I would probably go to the trouble of importing a 70 series if given the choice, but if my only options were the current
FJ or a Rubicon....... i don't see toyota in the driveway. Thank god they made the old cruisers last 50 years. We'll be lucky if the new FJ lasts ten

[greytandy]

Originally Posted by lcwizard

The new FJ is a disappointment, i couldn't take it the places i go.

How do you know this?

Originally Posted by lcwizard

I would probably go to the trouble of importing a 70 series if given the choice, but if my only options were the current
FJ or a Rubicon....... i don't see toyota in the driveway. Thank god they made the old cruisers last 50 years. We'll be lucky if the new FJ lasts ten

There are still new Land Cruisers sold here in the US. The 100 Series? Why not buy one of them?

[JimWise]

Originally Posted by johnny4ever

Why is this INANE argument even happening here? Did I just wake up in some parallel universe where IH8MUD is a Heep forum??

Does anyone ever wonder what it does to an Auto company to basically be an unwanted orphan??? Jeep has changed hands how many times now? And you expect us to believe that because Mercedes has something to do with it, that it makes the Heep any better? Puuuuuulease. Jeeps are great for tooling around town or taking the dogs to the park and pretending that you have a rugged 4 wheel drive. When pretend time is over and you wake up, Toyota is the vehicle of choice to rescue your stuck Jeep.

Ever seen the Hilux video???

P.S. After Market add ons? Who cares how strong the after market is? Strong after market is a good indicator that the stock **** sucks. GM makes crappy cars and they have a HUGE after market product line.

NUFF SAID

J

That's because the Heep Trolls can't get over the FJ envy.

[fj40charles]

Originally Posted by TexasBadlands

A Cruiser has always had the "Face a only a Mother could love", or Father since mostly guys own em.

A Jeep is a jeep is a jeep is a jeep........ If they were REALLY serious about that vehicle being sturdy, why put the whimpy Dana 44 on a vehicle with 37's? Get down to it and put Dana 60's on there if they are SERIOUS.

Jeep has always made things that BREAK. Look at the old CJ.... Dana 20 rear end? That POS was just begging to blow with larger tires over stock!

I have NEVER had a Toyota break and leave me stranded off road -ever.

Hard to break anything when the largest tire you run in 33"

I don't see a problem running a D44 with 37" tires if you upgrade to aftermarket shafts. Dana 60 IMHO would be overkill for 37" tires.
Did Toyota ever put axles in the same strength category as the D60?

fj cruiser rear axles are nothing to brag about.. They are breaking.

[fj40charles]

Originally Posted by TexasBadlands

blah blah blah...... I am sick of this thread. I never had a problem wheeling with IFS, and have seen plenty of yotas on sledgehammer and other hard trails with IFS doing fine. In my opinion it boils down to underside armor, and driving ability.

Yep, you have lots experience here.... I think the thread might be sick of you.

[fj40charles]

Originally Posted by TexasBadlands

Now this is totally bologna........ Everyone knows Toyota is as strong or stronger than Jeep in the aftermarket add on dept. Look at how fast these new lifts, bumpers etc are popping up, and the FJ is barely on US soil..........



We have all seen the FJ do the Rubicon in stock form with only a change of tire type to all terrains - no lift, special bumpers etc. I for one feel the new FJC is a much better vehicle than the Jeep Rubicon, but to each their own. I would rather have the Cruiser when the chips are down at any rate than a Jeep.

This is an age old Jeep VS Land Cruiser argument. The Jeep guys say this, and the Land Cruiser guys prove that. I've never seen a Jeep rescue a Land Cruiser but I've seen plenty of Land Cruisers rescuing Jeeps.

You need to read this thread. You have never been to the Rubicon so I don't see how you can make that comment.

I have seen plenty of Jeeps rescueing Land Cruisers. It works both ways... Sooner or later, you will have a failure.

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showt...hlight=rubicon

[DanKunz]

No amount of engineering can make up for bad driving...

[k_os]

All this talk about the FJCruiser didn't do the whole rubicon. They took them through everything except little sluice or something like that. My source? Chris from the Trail Team he's fullnelson on here ask him yourself.

Also nowadays in this capitalism driven world. Where there aint not outbacks to be driven on 24/7( here in the US atleast). No serious need for a extremely tough vehicle (thanks to good roads that go pretty much anywhere). An FJ40 type vehicle will be a failure in today's market. You can see that through the evolution from the 60 to 80 to 100 series.

The FJC is capable of more than 99% of buyers will ever take it through. If you say it's not capable. Well Upstate cruiser's last run to tellico took 5 FJcruisers through tellico ( trails 4, 5 & 6) 2 of them with street tires in the rain. One of them had a 3" lift and, mine was completely bone stock street tires and no lift. Just rockrails., and no it didn't suffer any body damage at all. The other 3 were Dan's sister FJC and the 2 from the FJC trail team. Like robbie said it just takes a little finesse, a little patience and, a little rock stacking.

I also talked to chris from FJCTT about SFA for the FJC. He said he'd rather have the IFS because sometimes they can slide through stuff( becuase of the skid plates) whereas a front Diff would just get stuck or banged up against something.

[Cruiserdrew]

I'll post up a bit, since I have done the Rubicon Trail 10+ times and am going through again starting tomorrow. I had the Yellow FJC trail team rig in my group at Rubithon.

Most people going "through" the Rubicon avoid Little Sluice. It has huge truck-sized gnarly boulders that basically can't be done in a normal truck. I take the upper bypass in my 40, then traverse the upper half of the Sluice. The lower part has almost become "buggy only". Most normal street driven trucks will tip over or break in there. Seriously, it's fun to watch, but not for the people who want to drive home. The Big Sluice is more doable, but none of the FJCs went through there as far as I know. I have done that, and broke an axle, despite being careful and cautious.

The FJCs I saw go through at Rubithon, went the same way. They tended to stack more rocks, and take longer, but they ran the whole trail to their credit. This is not to say that the Rubicon was easy for the FJCs-the drivers had to work hard to make it happen. The FJC has too much body and too little clearence to do the trail easily. RObbie, Gustave and those guys are really skilled with these trucks.

The bit about skid plates vs solid axle is just uninformed. The skid plates got trashed at Rubithon, and in fact at Buck Island Lake, one of the trail team rigs was looking for hardware to repair the skid plates that had been installed. The advantage of a solid axle was very appearent. With a solid axle, your wheel and tire will lift the axle, body and undercarriage away from the bad stuff. With IFS, that doesn't happen. Your average guy driving an FJC will be very sorry he attempted the Rubicon Trail. It's doable, but not without significant risk. And yes, a Jeep Rubicon, is far better suited to this trail than an FJC, don't kid yourself.

In the future, I hope to see more FJCs on the Rubicon, just be realistic, and leave the macho posturing at home. Breaking something serious SUCKS, and it happens to all of us. Bring spares!

[fj40charles]

Originally Posted by k_os

All this talk about the FJCruiser didn't do the whole rubicon. They took them through everything except little sluice or something like that. My source? Chris from the Trail Team he's fullnelson on here ask him yourself.

Also nowadays in this capitalism driven world. Where there aint not outbacks to be driven on 24/7( here in the US atleast). No serious need for a extremely tough vehicle (thanks to good roads that go pretty much anywhere). An FJ40 type vehicle will be a failure in today's market. You can see that through the evolution from the 60 to 80 to 100 series.

The FJC is capable of more than 99% of buyers will ever take it through. If you say it's not capable. Well Upstate cruiser's last run to tellico took 5 FJcruisers through tellico ( trails 4, 5 & 6) 2 of them with street tires in the rain. One of them had a 3" lift and, mine was completely bone stock street tires and no lift. Just rockrails., and no it didn't suffer any body damage at all. The other 3 were Dan's sister FJC and the 2 from the FJC trail team. Like robbie said it just takes a little finesse, a little patience and, a little rock stacking.

I also talked to chris from FJCTT about SFA for the FJC. He said he'd rather have the IFS because sometimes they can slide through stuff( becuase of the skid plates) whereas a front Diff would just get stuck or banged up against something.

Are you saying the Jeep TJ is a failure in today's market? I'm sure they sell a bunch of them. I have no doubt that it will out sell the fj cruiser easily. If I wanted a mild to moderate trail ready rig, I'd buy a Rubicon over an fj cruiser any day... I have no doubt that it would handle majority of the trails out there.

As much as I like Toyota, the fj cruiser does not appeal to me for looks or functionality. I know for a fact, that I will not be buying one since it does not suit my needs.

Nobody said the fj cruiser did not do the Rubicon.... Just disputing the fact that it did not do little sluice. Also, they were very slow and stacked lots of rocks.

Tellico has some very easy trails. How do you think it would do on lower and upper #2, guardrail, school bus, and helicopter pad?

IFS has its place. I perfer the durability of a solid front axle.

My opinions are based on my 2 trips to Tellico and 1 trip to Rubicon.