Last post on Jul 05, 2013 at 9:31 AM
You are in the Toyota FJ Cruiser
What is this discussion about?
Toyota FJ Cruiser, Jeep Wrangler
#456 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [makaser13]
Oct 01, 2007 (7:27 am)
Yeah thereís a lot to cover here. Letís start with what the FJC is not Ė It is not a Toyota FJ. Despite the similar looking grille and the white paint on the lid it is not even close. IFS, a non-removable top, doors that were not intended to be removed, are just a few of the glaring differences. By extension, you can also very easily argue that the FJC is not in the same class as a Wrangler.
The sales of the FJC have been spurred on not by those who know anything about what makes a good off-road vehicle, but by what I call Chrysler PT Cruiser syndrome. The PT Cruiser, for 2 years enjoyed record demand above and beyond all expectations at Chrysler Headquarters, not because it performed well or was of especially good quality Ė it was not Ė but because it was different, and it got the hype in the beginning. The FJC is no different, itís visibly very different than anything else on the road and it was hyped in the beginning. Like the PT Cruiser was just a different body on a neon chassis, the FJC is just bulbous sheet metal on a 4Runner frame.
As far as where the rubber meats the dirt between the FJC and the Wrangler, you should make all comparisons on STOCK vehicles. Anybody knows that $15 000.00 of the right goodies on an FJC will probably result in a more capable off-roader than a stripped base model Wrangler. Just as a Ford Fiesta with enough goodies on it could out wheel a stock FJC if enough money was poured into the project.
Second, you should decide which Wrangler you wish to compare it to, the 1997-2006 generation or the new 2007 generation Wrangler (Rubicon?). Either Wrangler Rubicon generation will waste a stock FJC on the trails in maneuverability, visibility, crawling toque, and especially in articulation. In the dunes, where the sand is soft and deep the old Wrangler (í97-í06) will not perform as well as the FJC because the Jeepís 4.0L I6 makes its power at an RPM that is too low for the high revving that required to stay on top of the sand. However, the V6 in the new Wrangler does make power at a higher RPM, which happens to mean it is quite at home in the dunes as well as king of the trails. Not to mention, that all of the Wranglers ever made, even back into the 80ís will fit places that the wide and bulbous FJC will never go.
So if you want an out of the box 4x4 that will take you more places than any other OEM four wheel drive made, then order up the 2007/2008 Wrangler Rubicon in 2-door form.
If you want a (more) comfy 4x4 with bulbous looks, and ok off-road capability, then buy the FJC. Itís pretty simple.
#457 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [fourx4ever]
Oct 09, 2007 (6:20 pm)
just to be clear - the stock FJ has made it over the Rubicon trail - so by your statements the Rubicon trail requires a vehicle that has "ok off-road capability", and by your standards is considered light off roading?
Did we miss anything in your long winded post?
#458 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [fourx4ever]
Oct 09, 2007 (10:55 pm)
so let's compare the rubi vs. the FJ. STOCK models here. The Rubi does out turn the FJ at a turning circle of 35ft. vs. 42ft. Again, long vs. short wheel base. 95 vs. 105 inches wheelbase. But a longer wheel base will take the FJ places the Rubi won't, and vice verse. Again, Apples and Oranges. What about the "bulbouse" width? Well, according the Jeeps site, the '07 Rubi is 82.8" wide and the FJ, again, according to Toyota's site, is 74.6" wide, overall. Not sure if that's right, but that's what they say. Yet, the track on the FJ is more than 2" wider, putting it on a more stable base. The Rubi has better aproach and departure angles by a few degrees. Something most of us who wheel our FJs will remedie with aftermarket bumpers, which acheaved the same angles as the Rubi. But we're talking stock, right? So we get back to solid vs. IFS. Well, yeh, you get slightly more articulation out of a stock Rubi. But you will flip over well before I do because I'm on a better footing, I'm longer, and I have a lower center of gravity. So I just go up on three wheels and lean right over. If you went up on three wheels, you'd end up on your roof. And there's plenty of footage of that on the net to prove it. The FJ is heavier, has a wider and longer footing and a lower center of gravity, all which keep it planted better than the Rubi.
So again, we argue about apples and oranges. They are both exceptional at what they do. But just as poor for other reasons. I can go places you can't and you can go places I can't. So why the hell does this lame ass arguement exist? Because in the end, no matter what, my truck looks WAY better than yours and you can't stand it! hahaha
#459 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [murphydog]
Oct 10, 2007 (5:34 am)
The Rubicon trail??? Pfff. Like that's some measure. The crappy Jeep Liberty, makes it. The Hummer H3 makes it, I'm willing to bet that a Geo Tracker would probably make it. Just because the FJC makes it through the Rubicon trail does not hold it to a very high standard. However the Rubicon trail is probably the best known off-road trial in the world, so that's what everybody talks about.
#460 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [fourx4ever]
Oct 10, 2007 (6:13 am)
OK, so are you gonne be a TROLL in here and just talk smack or are you gonna contribute? Let's talk about what and where you think the Jeep can go that the FJ can't. What is YOUR measure if the Rubicon trail isn't any measure. And remember, we are still talking STOCK vehicles here.
Personlally I think, from what I know of it, since I've never done Rubicon, I think is a pretty good test. Sure the Liberty can do it. Yes, I'm sure with some help a Tracker could do it. However, from what I understand, there's an easy way to get around most of the more dificult portions of the trail, too. So just because Jeep took the Liberty up there doesn't mean they "did the rubicon trail". They probably went around most of the hard stuff.
But the FJ hasn't just done Runicon. The Toyota trail teams have been taking it just about everywhere. They've done damn neer everything there is to do in Moab, too. Tellico, too. They've been all over the damn place. So tell me, what is a proper test that you think the Rubi can do that nothing else can?
#461 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [makaser13]
Oct 10, 2007 (6:38 am)
Dude you have to get things straight. There is the 2 door Wrangler (shorter than the FJC) and the four door (longer than the FJC). BOTH Wranglers are available with the Rubicon package. The short Wrangler will always get into tight spots more than the long Wrangler or the FJC. The short Wrangler also has a much better breakover angle. However the long wheel base Wrangler will be more stable in s very steep climb than either the FJC or the short Wrangler. Given all the different off-road situations, I would say that you will go more places on average with a short wheelbase than a long one.
The widths of the FJC vs. the Wrangler, I donít have in front of me. I have factory brochures for both some place Ė for some reason I remember the over all width of the FJC being significantly wider. One thing is for sure the FJC design team didnít plan the placement of some things like the taillights very well Ė talk about being exposed. And the totally crappy forward and front side visibility it inexcusable!! I mean really, did they want to let the driver see the trail or was a styling statement more important!? Some pretty basic stuff the Toyota team gaffed on if they were really trying to make a competitive off-road vehicle.
As for the articulation between the FJCís IFS and the Wranglerís solid axle: there is NO COMPARISON. Not even close! The FJC does 491 RTI, the Wrangler is 832.
And by the way, the Wranglerís already better approach and departure angles also get even better with aftermarket bumpers. Furthermore, there is much more aftermarket goodies for the Jeep to custom tailor it to your specific needs than any other off-road vehicle - PERIOD.
#462 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [makaser13]
Oct 10, 2007 (6:53 am)
Youíve never Ďdone the rubicon trail, but from what you know itís a pretty good testí???? Well maybe youíve never done Rodeo drive either, is that a good off-road test too??? Come on Here! Iíve never done the Rubicon either, but then how hard can it be if something like a BONE stock Jeep Liberty can do it!?!??!? I know what the Liberty is like, and saying it made it some place is not saying much. And itís a trail, to say there is an easy path and a hard one would imply there are really two trails, not one and at this point your just speculating about things you know nothing of.
The FJCís I have seen doing moderately more difficult trails are modified ones. Yeah ones that donít come with all season radials (Sorry I have to turn and laugh: ha ha ha) - what a way to launch a killer off road product into the market Ė The FJCís I have seen doing stuff have been lifted with over size swampers, rock rails, aftermarket bumpers! There is now even a kit to throw a sold axle in the front of your FJC too Ė what does that say about the adequacy of the IFS????? BTW there is no kit to put IFS in a Wrangler.
#463 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [fourx4ever]
Oct 10, 2007 (7:18 am)
Dude, I'm not mixing up anything. I'm talking about the two door.
Who cares if the Jeep has better articulation if the damn thing tips over on it's head before it ever reaches full artculation? You still have yet to answer either of my questions. Why is it that you can find dozens of videos Rubis rolling over. Especially down things like Hell's gate. Yet I've been strugling to find any video of an FJ rolling over. I found one vid that shows an FJ being recovered from a roadside ditch, but you can't tell if it was actually from wheeling. Looks more like your average everyday car accident. The FJ is simply far more stable, PERIOD. If I was to be on three wheels in a Rubi, I'd be worried about tiping over. But not in the FJ. Been there, done that, no worries.
And WHERE exactly can you take a Rubi that you can't take an FJ. What do you concider a proper test of a STOCK vehicle?
Oh, by the way, I own both a Wrangler and an FJ. I'm not sure what you mean by better forward visability. The forward visability is really only marginably better with the Wrangler. Wheeling is all about knowing your vehicle and knowing where your feet are. If you don't know where your feet are, then it doesn't matter how good you can see. And I make it a point to go forward, so I don't need to see behind me much.
As far as the goodies go, so what? Of course there is more stuff for the Wrangler. It's been around for years. The FJ is barely into it's second year. How is that even a comparison? It's not like there isn't anything out there for the FJ. I can get skids from at least five different places. Suspention from dozens. Good bumpers from least a dozen. Trust me, there's plenty of goodies for the FJ! And there's more coming almost daily. Including solid axle conversions.
#464 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [makaser13]
Oct 10, 2007 (9:29 am)
Do you even know what the point in having better articulation is??? Its to keep ALL the tires on the ground with the most contact patch. This also means you are not going to tip over. When you have wheels in the air is when you are in danger of tipping over!
Keep in mind you can tip a Ferrari over if you try hard enough. And of course youíre going to see move videos of Jeeps rolled over since there about 50 times more Jeeps on the trails than FJCs. BTW I have seen pics of a rolled over FJC too.
I also happen to know that when I have driven FJCís that they donít corner better than the old TJ Wranger, so I would really hesitate to say they have a lower CG to track ratio.
Come to the mountains in the trees and Iíll show you trails where your FJ will not be able to follow a TJ or the new Wrangler simply because it canít turn sharp enough or fit. The old Jeep CJ-5 is one of the best trail rigs ever since itís got an 83Ē wheel base and is about 5 inches narrower than the old TJ Wrangler (much less the new wrangler). When I took that CJ-5 out to the trails I could follow most quad trails where the TJ (rubi or not) would not even fit. There were times when I was on an incline and where there were two trees so close that putting the windshield down allowed me to pass. There is no way on earth your FJC would follow a Wrangler never mind a CJ-5 in that area unless you brought a chan saw.
ĎAnd I make it a point to go forward, so I don't need to see behind me much.í This right here tells me the kind of wheeling you mostly do. If you never use reverse gear you never go into tight spots. And when youíre in tight spots you take all the visibility you can get. Maybe you are, but most off-roaders arenít Jedi nights that can drive the trail blindfolded. Being able to see ground closer to the front of the vehicle over the hood and front corners is a big asset. Taking the doors off and even folding the windshield down further helps the situation. Hell, having the top off helps! Donít worry bud, when Four Wheeler magazine tested the FJC their comment about visibility was ĎI would be nice to see the trail;
The new Wangler has been around for 1 year (keep in mind it shares no components with the 2006 Ė itís an all new design) and it has more aftermarket stuff than the FJC which has been out longer. Not to say there isnít stuff for the FJC, there is, and it desperately needs these goodies to do the tougher trails.
#465 of 542 Re: Wrangler sales double the FJ Cruiser [fourx4ever]
Oct 10, 2007 (10:30 am)
Do you even know ... ???
I do know that illumination is preferable to confrontation.
SUVs and Smart Shopper