FusionCruiser said:
So is it elegance and comfort features (and higher cost) or capability that seperates a landcruiser from the 4runners etc?
Not looking to start an argument... I just really want to understand this.
This is my beef with the "FJ Cruiser." Cause it's not a Cruiser, it's just a monopolization of the name, just as much as the Mega Cruiser was. They aren't bad trucks, but they're not Land Cruisers. What's the difference?
They were designed as Cruisers using Cruiser parts. There is nothing they share in common with other Toyota models (other than an engine or transmission from a bus). The engine (up until that doofy V8), transmission, transfer case, axles, and frame were all designed as LAND CRUISER. You can even still swap axle parts from an early FJ40 and a newer *ZJ100/5, or *J7*.
Honestly, this starts spliting hairs between the Prado and 90 series, but they are the same as the FJ Cruiser- designed off the Hilux platform using Hilux parts. Other than a birfield, there isn't anything outside of the body that is shared between the two trucks. The FJC wasn't purpose designed other than to fill a niche- something to take a few more dollars from Dailmer-Chrysler, and it was designed as a one off, for the american market. How is anyone supposed to take it serious when the rumored rhetoric is "the FJC is for people who off road and drink beer."
This does not mean it is a bad truck, not by any means. But just because it's got a bezel doesn't make it a Land Cruiser. Otherwise, sticking a FJ40 Land Cruiser emblem on it is the same to me as sticking it on a highlander or RAV4. Take a FJCruiser and plate it with armor, or stick in a mine for service work, and then I might be impressed, just SOMETHING other than filling a marketing niche.