A little competition coming for the FJ...

[gearguywb]

One of the big issues that we tend to overlook is that no matter how much we enjoy getting out and getting dirty, the majority of these vehicles life is on spent on the road. Is a Rubicon better than an FJ off-road in stock form...probably, but if you need (or want) to drive it more frequently than for off-road excursions then it is a no brainer in the FJ's favor.

 

[jfonz]

Interiour looks pretty comfy to me....

and functional...


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

 

[Tapage]

ya, the the rear role bar is kinda goofy looking, but it looks good with the top on....

Ok it's a nice truck .. yes .. but after years come it can keep wheeling . ?

You can start all morning and go to work .. go wheeling and back without any issues .?

I'm aways asking about why Toyota don't do that or that or that or wouu long list .. after all I thought, it Toyota right now showing me alll the reazon NO ..

But keep the 1st place in reliablility and my favorite rig ..

 

[TexasBadlands]

Jeep will always have a stronger aftermarket.

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..........

Is a Rubicon better than an FJ off-road in stock form...probably, but if you need (or want) to drive it more frequently than for off-road excursions then it is a no brainer in the FJ's favor.

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.

 

[johnny4ever]

Why???

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 s*** sucks. GM makes crappy cars and they have a HUGE after market product line.

NUFF SAID

J

 

[jfonz]

now thats the cruiser owner attitude I know and love....

 

[Cruiserdrew]

Johnny-I see your point, but...this looks like a pretty impressive vehicle. How many other solid axle 4 door wagons can you buy new? Admittedly, it will suffer from Jeeps legendary build quality, but dollar for dollar and mod for mod, it will go where no FJC will go easily. As indicated here, this new Jeep has a 4:1 transfercase. Having real low range gears is usually what divides the real offroaders from the pack. It also has a solid axle up front-that's something most FJC owners who plan to offroad extensively will wish they had. It has front and rear lockers, stock. It has tiny overhangs. I'll bet with a $600 lift and a set of 33s there won't be too many places it won't go.

Don't get me wrong, I would not buy one, but this is a pretty cool concept vehicle. I just wish Toyota had stayed closer to a model like this with the FJC.

 

[tabraha]

I think it looks strong on paper too. It's just a matter of how well the details are worked out. Chrysler has always been good at spec sheets and show cars of which relatively few of either live up to the hype once they make it to the real world. There is ALWAYS some small achilles heel it seems.

I'd love to see it make it into the market and do well. Then others will follow and we may actually end up with some pretty decent options. I seriously wonder if we would even have an FJ forum if the Rubicon had not been released. Real enthusiasts knew the market was there but manufacturers have always been reluctant to have aggressive offroad packages. Even though 80's had lockers eon's ago most of the general public didn't know what the hell they were up until the last few years. Now every manufacturer has a model with e-lockers!!!

I'll tell you one thing that caught my eye is the fact that it has 4 normally opening doors. That's a HUGE plus for those of us whose working world involves a significant amount of wheeling. Had the FJ recieved normal doors I would most likely no longer have my doublecab tacoma. As it stands now it is pretty much limited to enthusiasts and fun-loving folks. No way in hell I'm going to put grown men and/or equipment in and out of access doors. Had 'em on a Tundra and they got old real quick for that sort of usage.

 

[DBS311]

Drew is right. Read his post and remember.

This is the type of vehicle Toyota should have given us.

If you think an FJC can do the trails this thing will be able to do, you are crazy.

Who cares about the stock FJC doing the Rubicon?? Anyone that has been there knows there are bypasses for most of the difficult obstacles. Did the FJC do the Little Sluice? A stock ML with bumpers removed "completed" the Rubicon. I bet you could get a lot of vehicles to "complete" the Rubicon.

For that last 10% of hardcore offroading, you need solid axles. IMO, Atrac and the rear locker are an ABSOLUTE necessity on the FJC or it isn't going anywhere on the trail. Basically a bandaid for Inferior Front Suspension.

Oh, and I guess that my 62 and EB suck because there is a large aftermarket following. I wish I had known that before I built them up. J4ever, you are crazy.

 

[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.

 

[Cruiserdrew]

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.

A diesel and a solid front axle, and I would already have an FJC. I would prefer it was a 70 series, but I guess that's out of the question for us 'mericans. That Jeep, will likely get the diesel that the Liberty got last year. You must admit, that's an apealing package. I doubt I would step away from Toyota, but the idea of a 4 door wagon, with real accessories for off-road use would be nice to have. Kind of like an 80 series...

 

[OGBeno]

For the price of one of these (probably) + the lift and new tires, I'd rather get a late 90's 80 series, build the heck out of it and still have enough money for the 2UZFE swap once the 1FZFE goes south.

You'd still be ahead and it would be a Toyota.

I don't normally go with brand association, but with a Toyota, you really have no choice...there is nothing comparable.

Just my .02

 

[FirstToy]

This topic is moving into similar territory as the "Keep my 80 or get FJC" thread.

I know it keeps coming up, so I want to leave it here in tech. That means the topic is debatable, but personal attacks of any kind are not.

I would like noobies, FJC owners of all skill levels to feel free to ask or comment in this thread.
Thanks all

btw, I agree w/ Andy I think think the Jeep is pretty darn cool.

 

[bulldog-yota]

The fundamental problem is the Wrangler is the weakest selling Jeep in the Jeep line up. So business 101 says, why would you as a competitor focus on a product with declining sales and weak market share. All the IFS Jeeps are outselling the Wrangler 2 to 1, apart from the COmmander.
http://www.daimlerchrysler.com/Projects/c2c/channel/documents/861880_IRRelease_CG_Sales___May_06.pdf

So short deduction is people who actually buy new cars don't want a solid axle. So if you want a SA from the factory start buying vehicles with SAs new. That will show there is a market and more manufacturers will take that market segment seriously.

There is a reason why Jeep started selling IFS vehicles. It is what the market wants.

 

[TexasBadlands]

I wish I had a smiley with a hand motion... Solid axles... big deal.

So where is the proof on them taking bypasses with the FJ? Maybe you should go drive one off road before talking it down. Seems a lot of people who are old 'die hard solid axle' guys are down on the new Cruiser, but I didn't hear anyone whining about the 100 series with it's IFS. Sure, they could have made a new 'replica' of the older 40, but they didn't and I see this as a modern vehicle that keeps some of the same lines, but with it's own style that can still run with the best of them.

If you don't like the newest Land Cruiser on the block, go buy yourself a rusted out 40 with horrible on road performance and trailer it everywhere. Me, I have a 40, and I know what it can do. I also know this new Cruiser can do anything my 40 could do, and with slight modification (like a mild lift), even better and with much better ride to and from the trail.

As far as that Jeep goes, yes it does look cool. However with my past experience helping tow out and tow home my friends Jeeps, I have decided to stick with what I KNOW will not let me down on the trail, my Toyotas.

 

[jfonz]

A diesel and a solid front axle, and I would already have an FJC. I would prefer it was a 70 series, but I guess that's out of the question for us 'mericans. That Jeep, will likely get the diesel that the Liberty got last year. You must admit, that's an apealing package. I doubt I would step away from Toyota, but the idea of a 4 door wagon, with real accessories for off-road use would be nice to have. Kind of like an 80 series...

Sad (but really not so sad) but true, the Libby diesel is going by by. According to Chrysler Becuase of the new standard the Fed has put out, and the recent addition of a 3.0L diesel to the Grand Cherokee, the cost of making the 2.8L CRD in the libby meet the new diesel standards just isn't worth it. And putting the 3.0 in the libby is out of the question becuase it is to big... But there is plenty of room under the hood of the wrangler for the 3.0L ....

 

[DBS311]

Badlands, if you don't think the 100 series has gotten flak from us "die hard solid axle" guys, you need to spend some time over in their side of the forum. They hear it from us all the time (especially the 80 vs 100 thread).

I have no proof that the FJC took the bypasses. So..........could somebody please post some pics they have found of it going through Little Sluice, etc. I'm willing to bet you won't find any. You would think that if it did some of the very difficult sections, pics would be all over the place. What would prove its prowess more than hammering up Little Sluice? I'd love to be proven wrong.

Let's not compare the new Wranglers with the old 40's. Everyone knows they (40s) ride harshly. I think any vehicle with front and rear leaf springs will ride poorly. There is a huge difference between the ride of a coil sprung Wrangler and the leaf sprung 40. The first time I rode in my buddies TJ in Moab it felt so smooth because all I had to compare it with at the time was my 62. Then I rode in my brothers Disco II and 80 series. IMO, solid axles with coil springs are entirely liveable and provide a very nice ride.

Again, solid axles are a big deal if you have any desire to wheel above moderate level trails. When All-Pro finishes its SAS and posts pics of the nutty trails they will indeed take it on, there will be solid axle envy going around. C'mon, we all know that the hot girls want to ride in the vehicle that can actually take on the hardcore trail and not the one that drives cush to the trailhead only to have to get out and watch!

 

[FirstToy]

Let's talk tech-
The advantages FJ Cruisers will enjoy with their rigs? What benefit does their setup give? What did Toyota do right with the heart of this rig?

Also, one advantage Mud has is a huge resource of experienced wheelers and fabricators. So, maybe an approach that explains why SFA is so coveted. Why are the Jeep's stats so enticing?

Maybe this way FJC owners can understand SFA's value and Cruiserheads can see how great the FJC is

 

[jfonz]

Hears one plus about IFS. Speed. Now for the most part I would say almost all of us are in it for the crawl, but I guarentee your going to see FJC in the Baja...

Another bit of truth that is very un spoke so far on this thread is offroading, when it comes to non buggy type rigs (for the most part), Is still 90% driver and 10% rig....

 

[Cruiserdrew]

I don't really want to debate the whole IFS vs live axle thing again, but I was present and spotting when the first 100 series (and an IFS 4Runner who has since swapped in a SFA!) went through the Rubicon along with a bunch of 80 series. Your friendly moderator was there too. All the rigs were close to equivalent--locked on both ends, 35 inch tires, 3+ inches of lift. The SFA trucks were MUCH easier to get through. The reason is that when a tire goes up on a rock, it takes the entire axle, differential, and truck body up with it, which in turn magnifies your ground clearence. With IFS, only the tire goes up leaving the rest of the front end closer to what ever it is you are trying to drive over. This is not to mention the weaker components, weaker steering, and vastly increased complexity if a trail repair is needed.

There is no question that IFS is better at high speed, but if you buy an FJC because you think offroading is about high speed, I hope you have a deep wallet and a friendly tow truck driver. While offroading, people pay big money to be able to go slower, not faster! For you FJC owners who are new to this, the 4:1 transfercase of the Jeep is a HUGE advantage. 4Wheel a bit, and then tell me you don't want a deeper low gear. Marlin may be your friend!

There is also no question that the FJC will be a less troublesome vehicle than the Jeep. It's based on the proven and reliable 4Runner, and I would expect no less. It's also likely to be a better street car for trips and the daily commute. Thus, it will make sense over the Jeep for most use. If, however, your goal is 4 and above trails, and you can choose only between the FJC and this proposed Jeep, the Jeep will get the nod.