More Pictures More Colors More FJC
- Thread starter madams557
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Sun Fusion? close, but not quite...
- Thread starter
- #3
As earlier guessed by a board member, the hatch in from of the steering wheel is for a GPS unit.
loeky
SILVER Star
god, that's a horrible color.
thorvald
.......
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Threads
- 108
- Messages
- 1,569
- Location
- on the ice, wyoming
- Website
- www.pointyhatdesigns.com
in some angles it looks sweet, others it makes that c pillar uglier than it looks in blue
I just don't know.
I don't think Toyota is going to be able to re-create what the FJ40 became.
Toyota's first mistake is producing a FJ Cruiser to compete for market shares with X Terras, H3s and Jeeps.
So the FJ Cruiser is all about money?
Honestly, I'll have to see one in person. But so far I have driven an H3 in person, and the H3 in comparison to my sister's new 4Runner(FJ Cruiser platform), appears to be built with stouter components despite a lack of horsepower by comparison. As much as I hate to say it. No, I don't think a GM, despite who assembles it with whatever body, will be as reliable as a Toyota. But I do know my wife's 2004 AWD Sienna regularly needs to goto the dealer to have the check engine light warranty repaired for whatever reason. Plus dad had to take his Tundra in for a factory recall to have the CV's replaced along with a few other things here and there.
The new Toyotas through overall design in my opinion lack visual appeal. They all look really generic, more reliable or not. When the 100's came out I bought a 97 80. I did however have a 2003 UZJ 100 for a year, I do miss it simply because I had never owned a vehicle that expensive before and it was a LandCruiser of sort. I did find the 100 a tad too "fancy" for my tastes, but it was for my wife and "fancy" is right up her alley.
Maybe Toyota should fire their design teams. I'm not sure where today's "artsy" design folks find their inspiration. But then again, these are highway vehicles they are designing overall. Utility has become strictly third world.
Jeep so far has done a better job listening to consumers/core enthusiasts with their Rubicon. I suspect the H3 "Adventure Series" with the rear locker and 33's is a better 4WD off the floor as it has the departure angles and crawl ratios too, plus 4 regular doors making it more 4 person practical. I almost drove off the lot in a new H3 until my wife's excitement kicked reality in. She has always wanted a Hummer simply because they have status appeal. After watching her break out the check book, I decided we should wait, took my 80 for a spin, noticed the differences, like the fact my 80 turning 315's felt like a sports car in comparison to the very sluggish H3, read a few H3 forum posts regarding factory defects and concluded "stick with what I know, LandCruisers".
I'll have to wait and see. I've told myself I was buying the new FJ since I first heard it would be a reality. However my gut is telling me the FJCruiser is not what I was hoping for. It's like Toyota is force feeding this new FJCruiser off of the FJ40's legendary appeal. At this point the UZJ100 has a more rugged appeal than the FJCruiser. Toyota should have at least offered a bio-diesel off the bat. That would be trend setting.
I still want a 2006 or 2007 FJ40 and it seems I'll have to build my own out of my old 72 FJ40. Until then I'll drive my 80.
Toyota had it right the first time, before they decided to compete for the X generation.
But then again, who knows? Once I see the FJ Cruiser in person, or after I see one with 37's for the first time I may change my mind; but can a new 4Runner platform handle 37's? My 96 Tacoma could not handle 38's.
I don't think Toyota is going to be able to re-create what the FJ40 became.
Toyota's first mistake is producing a FJ Cruiser to compete for market shares with X Terras, H3s and Jeeps.
So the FJ Cruiser is all about money?
Honestly, I'll have to see one in person. But so far I have driven an H3 in person, and the H3 in comparison to my sister's new 4Runner(FJ Cruiser platform), appears to be built with stouter components despite a lack of horsepower by comparison. As much as I hate to say it. No, I don't think a GM, despite who assembles it with whatever body, will be as reliable as a Toyota. But I do know my wife's 2004 AWD Sienna regularly needs to goto the dealer to have the check engine light warranty repaired for whatever reason. Plus dad had to take his Tundra in for a factory recall to have the CV's replaced along with a few other things here and there.
The new Toyotas through overall design in my opinion lack visual appeal. They all look really generic, more reliable or not. When the 100's came out I bought a 97 80. I did however have a 2003 UZJ 100 for a year, I do miss it simply because I had never owned a vehicle that expensive before and it was a LandCruiser of sort. I did find the 100 a tad too "fancy" for my tastes, but it was for my wife and "fancy" is right up her alley.
Maybe Toyota should fire their design teams. I'm not sure where today's "artsy" design folks find their inspiration. But then again, these are highway vehicles they are designing overall. Utility has become strictly third world.
Jeep so far has done a better job listening to consumers/core enthusiasts with their Rubicon. I suspect the H3 "Adventure Series" with the rear locker and 33's is a better 4WD off the floor as it has the departure angles and crawl ratios too, plus 4 regular doors making it more 4 person practical. I almost drove off the lot in a new H3 until my wife's excitement kicked reality in. She has always wanted a Hummer simply because they have status appeal. After watching her break out the check book, I decided we should wait, took my 80 for a spin, noticed the differences, like the fact my 80 turning 315's felt like a sports car in comparison to the very sluggish H3, read a few H3 forum posts regarding factory defects and concluded "stick with what I know, LandCruisers".
I'll have to wait and see. I've told myself I was buying the new FJ since I first heard it would be a reality. However my gut is telling me the FJCruiser is not what I was hoping for. It's like Toyota is force feeding this new FJCruiser off of the FJ40's legendary appeal. At this point the UZJ100 has a more rugged appeal than the FJCruiser. Toyota should have at least offered a bio-diesel off the bat. That would be trend setting.
I still want a 2006 or 2007 FJ40 and it seems I'll have to build my own out of my old 72 FJ40. Until then I'll drive my 80.
Toyota had it right the first time, before they decided to compete for the X generation.
But then again, who knows? Once I see the FJ Cruiser in person, or after I see one with 37's for the first time I may change my mind; but can a new 4Runner platform handle 37's? My 96 Tacoma could not handle 38's.
I think Toyota has always been about the money, even when they made the original FJ40, nothing wrong with that. Fortunately they have stood the test of time with quality reliable products that people want, so it seems their plan is still working. The FJ Cruiser is not an FJ 40 and if Toyota wants to continue to make money, that's a good thing, they don't need to make a "wrangler" to be successful.
Jeep has built their customer base and reputation on cheap, "rugged", 4wd, not on quality or engineering, so they have to continue to provide that same product or fail. So, the Wrangler continues, while they try to widen their product offerings so that if it dies or changes, their brand won't be doomed.
Toyota has built their reputation on well engineered, quality offerings which are appealing to a large group, thankfully they have niche vehicles that are frequently based on other successful platforms, which makes them financially feasible, these niche offerings also boost Toyota's appeal to motor enthusiasts from the affected "niche" and gives them more appeal to the average consumer.
The Fj Cruiser fits right in, using another platform they can offer a capable, reasonably priced "niche" vehicle which still has fairly wide appeal. Honestly, we should be glad they choose to make these, as they could spend equal time and energy in other "niches" and forget about us, but obviously the vehicle won't make everyone happy. I just think it's a mistake to say, that Toyota has made a mistake in building the FJ Cruiser. I believe it will be a complete success for Toyota, but only time will really tell.
Jeep has built their customer base and reputation on cheap, "rugged", 4wd, not on quality or engineering, so they have to continue to provide that same product or fail. So, the Wrangler continues, while they try to widen their product offerings so that if it dies or changes, their brand won't be doomed.
Toyota has built their reputation on well engineered, quality offerings which are appealing to a large group, thankfully they have niche vehicles that are frequently based on other successful platforms, which makes them financially feasible, these niche offerings also boost Toyota's appeal to motor enthusiasts from the affected "niche" and gives them more appeal to the average consumer.
The Fj Cruiser fits right in, using another platform they can offer a capable, reasonably priced "niche" vehicle which still has fairly wide appeal. Honestly, we should be glad they choose to make these, as they could spend equal time and energy in other "niches" and forget about us, but obviously the vehicle won't make everyone happy. I just think it's a mistake to say, that Toyota has made a mistake in building the FJ Cruiser. I believe it will be a complete success for Toyota, but only time will really tell.
Last edited:
is it going to be offered in black?