LX450 vs. New FJ Cruiser (1 Viewer)

[knoll0351]

God, my God. If you are making this conclusion based on one Rubicon trip...that's OK. The FJC is smaller and lighter than a stock or stock-ish 80...no prob.

IF you are drawing this conslusion based on running the two vehicle types on many trails...you have blinders on. It takes only a $750 lift kit to the 80-series in order to outfit it to run almost any trail you want.

It's awesome though that you luv your ride so much.

Look again this post sounds like a guy with an 80 lookin to slam the fjc. First of even over Rubicon there were people that didn't think the fj, or the 80 should have done the one day run. The fj was too new, and the 80 was too long. Well we both did well and by the end of the day all the neigh sayers were convinced that not only the drivers knew what we were doing but the rigs were up to par.

As for your "blinders" comment. I wheel every chance I get, I have been on pretty much every trail anywhere near my home and am still impressed with my rig. As well as anyone that I've met on the trail or in our club will vouch that they have been shocked with how well the FJC performs. I think that you are the one with the blinders, not wanting to recodnize that something new has come along. I'm by no means trying to slam 80's (unlike others posting on this thread) but I am saying that the FJ is a very capable rig. With the technology that has been built into the FJ they wheel very well out of the box (with no mods).

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Again I see your speculation here, but it doesn't seem to be based in fact. As you said the FJC is a newer vehicle and hasn't "been thru the pases" over time I think we will see that they are built with durability and quality. It sounds to me that the technology that makes the FJ perform so well is what people seem to be "afraid" of failing. Untill enough time passes I don't think this argument can be won. I'm pointing out that there aren't any inherant problems with the FJ and they are being put thru the pases in places like Afganistan and coming out well. I know that mine has taken more abuse than anyone's 80 in our club and still shines. You are entitled to your opinion, but when you know little about this rig it would be better not to speculate. As an FJ owner I have spent a substantial amount of time on the MUD forum and blue forum to learn more about my rig. And yes there are less people out there that wheel their fj (but I'd speculate that the same was true with new 80's) but the problems mentioned on this thread seem to be made up.

As for the cost issue that keeps being brought up I have no idea what you can build an 80 for, but you can have a very cabable FJC for under $20,000 and if you bide your time I'd say you can have one for under $15,000.00. If you disagrea that's awsome, but if you haven't spent months looking for deals on FJ's like you have looking for deals on 80's please keep your opinion to yourself....your coments are already noted.

I am being more and more convinced that this thread had no intention of hearing the pro's of the FJ, nor an owners opinion.

OK, this post got me my answer about your other conclusion. When your infatuation for your truck wears off you will see that the 80 and 100 series are of a totally different breed compared to an FJC.

The FJC is a "light-duty" design compared to the true Land Cruisers. And Spike is also correct...4WD doesn't mean one rig compares directly to another. Compare an FJC to a Hummer H3 (and by the way, I'll take the H3 on the trail 100% of the time over the FJC capability-wise), to a xTerra, to even a JK.....not to an 80 or 100. Totally different stuff. And to infer that "FJC's are both durable and of high quality" in a comparison thread to a Land Cruiser (80-series) shows a less than objective conclusion. Next, will you say that the FJC is built better and more durable than a 100-series? That would be an even bigger laugh.

 

[knoll0351]

Oh and as for the tech failing aside from beating my rig up it has also been flooded with water. On Rubicon I got high centered in the middle of a water obstacle and had water over the rear fenders. Before I was able to get my rig recovered the water had made it's way in and was up to the rear seat and my wifes feet were wet (riding shotgun). After it had a chance to dry out even the power inverter (that was at the deapest point and fully submerged) works without a hich. I don't think I could do much more to put this rig thru it's pases and it keeps shining and getting me off of the trail.

If you don't like them that's cool, if you preffer the 80 that is also cool, but there is no need to slam them based on speculation.

 

[knoll0351]

OK, this post got me my answer about your other conclusion. When your infatuation for your truck wears off you will see that the 80 and 100 series are of a totally different breed compared to an FJC.

The FJC is a "light-duty" design compared to the true Land Cruisers. And Spike is also correct...4WD doesn't mean one rig compares directly to another. Compare an FJC to a Hummer H3 (and by the way, I'll take the H3 on the trail 100% of the time over the FJC capability-wise), to a xTerra, to even a JK.....not to an 80 or 100. Totally different stuff. And to infer that "FJC's are both durable and of high quality" in a comparison thread to a Land Cruiser (80-series) shows a less than objective conclusion. Next, will you say that the FJC is built better and more durable than a 100-series? That would be an even bigger laugh.

Now anyone to say they would take a Hummer H3 over a Toyota is now fully diluted. It is apparent that you hate the FJC if you had any evidence to support your opinion then you would have a leg to stand on. You don't so there is no point in arguing with you any further. The FJ was built to wheel and it does it well.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Look again this post sounds like a guy with an 80 lookin to slam the fjc. First of even over Rubicon there were people that didn't think the fj, or the 80 should have done the one day run. The fj was too new, and the 80 was too long. Well we both did well and by the end of the day all the neigh sayers were convinced that not only the drivers knew what we were doing but the rigs were up to par.

**SO WHAT?
A STOCK JEEP WRANGLER can (and do all the time) cross the Rubicon Trail far easier than an FJC or an 80. Does this mean you compare a Wranger to an 80-series? No. Does it mean the Wranger is as durable and of as high a quality as an 80-series? No. What it means is that "on the Rubicon Trail the small SWB vehicles have a huge advantage compared to the full-size rigs. And that's about all it means.

I think that you are the one with the blinders, not wanting to recodnize that something new has come along.

**Who are you talking too? Are you not aware of my history with my "something new has come along story" ...refering to the 100-series back in 2001? Who has said the 200-series LC is the finest built LC ever made? Yes, I have. You FJC dudes who try to equal the playing field between an FJC and a real LC's quality, durability, capability-wise just show bias and/or inexperience.

When the FJC came out I was excited. When I learned about them the excitement and desire for one left quickly...especially as I watched them on the trail. Please, please...yes they can wheel places. Difficult places as well. So can an xTerra. Go debate with them. Please stop trying to infer an FJC is very similar or the same as an 80 (and 100) in the quality/build/capability department. Losing battle.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Now anyone to say they would take a Hummer H3 over a Toyota is now fully diluted.

READ THE POST!

Capability-wise. This doesn't mean longevity, reliability, etc. It means what I said. On the trail, on difficult trails, I would rather be driving an H3 over an FJC any day. I find them more capable and that's based on numerous runs where I've led both. That said, I'll take my Land Cruisers over all the Hummers...capability-wise.

 

[knoll0351]

Again it sounds as though you just hate the FJC. No I haven't read you previous works, nor do I plan to. This thread was asking for opinions of both rigs. I offered mine as the only one posting (at that point) that owns an FJ. I think time will show that the FJC does have the quality to make it the long haul. But time will be the only way to know this for sure.

Anyone that puts an FJ in the same class as an H3; Extera; or even a Jeep is speaking blasphemy in my opinion.

 

[Devil's Slide Doug]

Why all the bias towards the 80? Oh yeah, this was posted in the 80's section. Actually, I thought the first few answers where pretty balanced. BTw, does Godwins law work on ih8mud?

 

[-Spike-]

This is by no means a defining argument, but consider the fact that 12-18 years ago the 80 series MSRP was double what today's FJC's cost. The reason for that wasn't the incredible tech or luxury the 80 offered. It was actually a pretty basic vehicle, with a few perks.

The FJC simply isn't in the same class. Literally.

-Spike

 

[fghanem]

Anyone that puts an FJ in the same class as an H3; Extera; or even a Jeep is speaking blasphemy in my opinion.

X2 on toy quality and durability to other junk, but let me put things in perspective to tone it down, when Mr Toy, goes heavy duty, and with all due respect to the 100 series, they use the 105 (solid front axles), they lose on ride quality, but it's heavier duty.

i might be wrong, but i know from the UN vehicles i see here all Toys have solid front ends, and if even heavier duty is required they ditch the coils in the back and put leafs (i.e 70 series)

this is not an opinion i am speaking facts.

i will not argue about the durability of the FJC, it's purpose built to be a fun truck, and i am sure it is.

 

[knoll0351]

Why all the bias towards the 80? Oh yeah, this was posted in the 80's section. Actually, I thought the first few answers where pretty balanced. BTw, does Godwins law work on ih8mud?

Yeah it is the 80 section, shouldn't have listened to my buddy that asked me to post up

And yes I do think that Godwins law definately works on mud

 

[FirstToy]

The only thing worse than yet another FJC debate is to let Shotts troll bait you into it.
Let the argument be settled where it should be- NOT on the internet.

 

[knoll0351]

I swallowed hook line and sinker.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

This is by no means a defining argument, but consider the fact that 12-18 years ago the 80 series MSRP was double what today's FJC's cost. The reason for that wasn't the incredible tech or luxury the 80 offered. It was actually a pretty basic vehicle, with a few perks.

The FJC simply isn't in the same class. Literally.

-Spike

Watch it Spike. First Toy might accuse you of "troll baiting".

His view is that anybody who diagrees with his opinion is a "troll bater". Well, he can read my signature.

Let's make him happy though. OK, here:

FJC's are amazing and every bit the quality, durability and capability of the 80 and 100-series Toyotas. They are all Land Cruisers and therfore of equal quality.

 

[shfd739]

I think I was the first FJC owner to post up but my post was overlooked. Knoll chill out. Yes the FJC is a capable and fun truck to drive but it isnt near the bulletproof tank that an 80 series is.

Sorry, your FJC is rebadged 4Runner. Deal with it. I love the 80 and wish I would have bought one first instead of wasting money on a building an FJC to sell it for an 80.

The FJC is nice and capable compared to it's competition i.e. Jeep JK, XTerra, H3. Dont think for one minute it can compared to a real Land Cruiser. It isnt near the league of an 80 or 100. What do you see in third world countries where toughness and strength mean going home alive...80s and 100s. Not gussied up 4Runners/Tacomas aka FJC.

 

[knoll0351]

I did miss where the question was which would I take on safari in Africa. In that case I would probably drive a surplus military HMMWV or maybe a 60. Although most of the vehicles in these third world countries not only run on diesel fuel, but are little getto vans.

 

[Voivod]

First post! Woo hoo!

At least with Toyota, the discussion isn't which one is worse, it's which one is better...

I have been an FJC owner for the last few years, and love the truck. As long as the inspection goes ok, as of the end of the week I will also have a '97 LX450.

So, as to which is better... Who cares, get one of each!

 

[Ebag333]

Okay, first off, I've wheeled with Knoll. He's been willing to do anything just about anyone else has, and the only time I've actually seen him fail was also the time the every other Toyota (including a mini truck, an uber built 60, and my 80) got smacked down by a little Sammy with huge tires. ;p


There's a couple of interesting points in the discussion, but I think a lots gotten lost in the....uh...."debate". Yeah, lets call it that. ;p



As many have said, it's largely apples to oranges. Some people have pointed out the price for a build-up, but that's not really a fair comparison. While the FJC will be more expensive to build up (especially if you go serious and swap to a solid front), mild to medium builds aren't all that much more.

So compare a brand new FJC build to a brand new 80/LX450 build. Anyone wanna guess how much of a head start the FJC could get on a build with 20k-30k?


Sure....now 80's are $5k-$10k unbuilt, but they're also 12-18 years old. In 12-18 years I have no doubt that FJC's will be similarly priced....if not cheaper (simply based on the starting price). Even estimating what an FJC would be in 15 years (at a much lower price), I doubt that the total build price would be a heck of a lot different than an 80 is now. IMHO the extra cost of certain things (like dealing with IFS for lift) would about even out the cost of the naturally higher price of an 80 due to the high new price.

So....price:
New: Nod goes to the FJC
Used: About even



Reliability:

This one's pretty simple for me. Yeah, most of the weak points on the FJC are the same as the 80 (skid plate, rockers, bumpers, lower rear control arms, etc). But the FJC still has that pesky IFS which simply adds a lot more complexity to it, if in no other way that simply protecting it. Overall what I know about the FJC has surprised me about how tough a beast it is, I think that a lot of people here are underestimating it's reliability and toughness, even in extreme and rough conditions.

But still, the IFS adds a lot more complexity, and thus a lot more room for breakage. So I'd give the nod to the 80.


Performance:

This is the toughest one because absolutely no two people will 100% agree. Toughness/reliability aside, there's no real fair way to compare an indie front end to a solid axle. There are places where each will excel. Now obviously the extra clearance that IFS gives you is nice....

I've seen nearly stock 80's walk over obstacles that FJC's hang up on like crazy. I've seen built 80's hang up on obstacles that stock FJC's don't even notice. It really is comparing apples to oranges, especially when you try and compare things like "triple locked" to "ATRAC and rear locker" (and I don't think anyone's mentioned yet that the FJC can actually do both ATRAC and the rear locker at the same time, which in quite a few circumstances is actually better then a locked/open front).

Each has the pluses and minuses, and I think you'd be foolish to drive one the same as you drove the other.

That doesn't even begin to include things such as the relative compactness of the FJC compared to the frackin' huge 80, clearance in relative areas.....etc etc etc etc

So, for performance, I'm gonna wuss out and give 'em both a nod.






For those of you quick to knock the FJC, I'd have to say go buy one and use (and abuse!) it yourself.

Knoll wheels the out of his FJC, and has gotten something of a rep in our club as the guy who will do anything (sorry, but it's true!). His FJC I would only really consider a bit more than mildly built, and for how (relative) little he's put into it it's quite an amazing rig.

Me personally, I chose an 80 because I knew I could pick up an super clean one for around $10 (actually paid $9), and build it up pretty decent for just a couple of grand, though a lot of that has been sweat equity.

If money wasn't an issue and I wanted a simple turn key solution, I probably would have gone with the FJC. Knoll's truck hasn't let him down--ever--and anywhere he's been stuck any other truck could have easily gotten stuck as well. I do think that he's paid too much for it, but I would think that of any new truck, and I'm actually quite surprised at how (relatively) little money he has into it for being "new". There are certainly quite a few 80's that aren't really much more built that his truck for as much or even more.

Yeah, the FJC could use some improvements (hey, Knoll, when we gonna do that ATRAC/Rear locker mod?), but don't knock it 'till you're tried it.

 

[retrofive]

Holy moly this thread has down hill. I asked Knolly to post up to give some good tech and info from a person that owns and FJC, wheels it like we wheel ours from a first hand POV. Of course this is the 80 section so bias follows. I do agree that test of time will show the outcome of this debate and until then the place to have it is on the trails.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Of course this is the 80 section so bias follows.

And with that comment you show your bias (unless you'd like to re-phrase?).

Some pro-80 posts might come with some bias, but not all posts. Some come with great experience and objectivity between the two models. Others are opinion-only though not with the intent of bias.