Results 21 to 27 of 27
-
01-09-2007, 09:27 PM #21
FJ40 Landcruisers have always been built tough for off roading right from the factory. It has taken years for Jeep to realize that they needed to build the Rubicon. One would think that Jeep would have realized the flaws in their line a long time ago. There are catalogs with numerous after market parts specifically for jeeps to make them trail worthy. Finally with the Rubicon one could head for the trails with some confidence with out having to drop thousands of dollars for obvious items such as heavier axles. Having owned 3 FJ40's, I might be a little biased in my preference. Toyota's don't break, they just wear out eventually.
-
01-09-2007 09:27 PM # ADS
-
01-10-2007, 01:34 PM #22
Toyota issues
I've had numerous Toyotas, including an older FJ-62 and a 4-Runner. The Crusher was tough as nails but slow. The 4-Runner was great, but I didn't have it long.
Recently, I looked at several 80-series Crushers with the DOHC inline-6, and every one I tested had a bad head gasket (evidenced by "milkshake" oil on the cap and dipstick). When Toyota found the HG problem with the 3.0 v-6 (4Runners mostly), they issued a prompt recall. Yet, the Crusher never had the recall and the issue is very well-known. I was shocked to see Yota not stand behind its product, when the design is clearly piss-poor. If I had an 80, I'd dump the stock engine and drop in a Cummins 4BT. But who has that kind of jing?
That said, I like Yotas vs. Jeeps, but I'd have a hard time turning down a Rubicon Unlimted. The FJ Cruisers you either hate or love. I love the looks, and would seriously consider one after a couple production years go past.
Bottom line though is I'm a pickup truck guy. My Dodge diesel gets me anywhere I need to go. As far as the technical off-roading, that's for rich kids and fundies with enough bread to bash up their vehicles.
When the going gets too rough, I park Truckie and put on the boots.
-
02-13-2007, 06:11 PM #23Where did you hear this claim?
The test I've seen actually rated them almost equal but said the Rubicon has a slight edge due to dimensions.
Actually I admit I am a little biased towards the Toyota. Not because I've owned a Toyota, but because I have owned a Jeep. The Jeep just let me down too many times, even when fairly new. This one was an 89 Wrangler. I've heard new ones are better, but I'm still afraid to buy one. Back then they only came with a 1 year 12,000 mile warrantee (eek) and sure enough, as soon as the one year was up it was problems galore. I hear newer models are much better.
I have to admit the CJ's have style as do the older FJ40's.
Anyway, it does appear the Rubicon has a slight edge in off road capability when asking any unbiased source. From Karl on Cars (see original link):
The FJ is a screaming bargain. It starts at less than $22,000 for a 2WD automatic, and it tops out at $23,300 for a 4WD auto. If you load it up with luxury items and off-road equipment you might crack $29,000, but even a base 4x4 version will utterly destroy any remotely surmoutable off-road driving surface. It's also better equipped than the other three cars (even before you add options) and, in my not-so-humble opinion, it is by far the best looking and best on-road driving vehicle of the group, too. I'll maybe give the Jeep Rubicon a slight advantage in pure off-road ability, but only because of the Wrangler's tidier dimensions, not because it has superior equipment or any other inherent "capability" advantage. And in terms of everything not related to going off road, the FJ pummels the Wrangler (BTW, I'm a big Jeep Wrangler fan, but I'm not going to let that fact warp reality).
While the FJ is no BMW 7 Series it's a far more livable daily driver than anything remotely this off-road capable without going up to a Land Cruiser or LR3 (and it probably still has at least a slight off-road advantage over those models). So as I said in my Full Test story a few weeks ago, if you never go off road you'll like it, and if you always go off road you'll LOVE it.
Later Karl when questioned goes on to say:
Apparently, as you noted in my own quote, admitting the Rubicon is more capable off road isn't good enough. I have to say it's waaaay more capable, or something of that nature. Well, I won't, because I don't think it is. It has a shorter wheelbase and shorter overhangs, so it will likely not scrape in EXTREME off-road situations where the FJ will...slightly scrape. But it's not like one will skate over the Rubicon Trail while the other crashes and bangs and eventually brakes. It's going to be very close either way.
Let's look at some specs:
Ground clearance is close (10.3 Rubicon/9.6 FJ), but Water Fording isn't (15 inches Rubicon/27.5 inches FJ). Neither is horsepower (190 Rubicon/239 FJ). Or torque (235 Rubicon/278 FJ). Tire Height is close (31 inches Rubicon/32 inches FJ) as is Breakover angle (25.4 Rubicon/27.4 FJ)
Of course I know first hand that the FJ has exceptional off road abilitiy (probably better than almost any 4x4 except a Rubicon), plus better interior space, a quieter cabin at all speeds, better on-road steering feel, higher towing capacity (5,000lbs vs 2,000lbs) and a capable sound system (even the base audio system as auxiliary input for MP3s). Oh, and it costs $6,000 less than a Rubicon.
But, for the .1 percent of the population that ACTUALLY goes extreme off roading all the time (and not the other 20 percent that wants to act like they do), the Rubicon is better...somewhat.
Either way my original statements stand: The FJ is a screaming bargain; it's better equipped than the competition; in terms of everything not related to going off road, the FJ pummels the Wrangler
Trust me, I R*E*A*L*L*Y drove it off road, and it R*E*A*L*L*Y kicked ass. The photos in our road test don't show it because those were taken on our own drive in Hungry Valley, California. But there was a very extreme trail up north of Ojai, California that I drove during the press event (before I took the drive-away model for our own testing) and we put the FJ through very extreme stuff. The press kit has all sorts of crazy shots that show the level of wheel articulation. If you want to see them go to this site and click on the" FJ Bulletin" link and then the "Rubicon Trail" link and then the "photos" link: http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/future/fjcruiser.htmlUtah is a very special and unique place. There is no where else like it on earth. Please take care of it and keep the remaining wild areas in pristine condition. The world will be a better place if you do.
-
02-21-2007, 08:45 PM #24
I think the biggest weakness with the FJ on a "hard core" trail is going to be the IFS. No question IFS provides for better on road ride and handling. However, my experience wheeling with IFS equipped vehicles like the Hummer H2 is that the don't hold up in extreme conditions. What has Toyota done differently with their IFS which would make it as durable as a solid axle?
-
02-21-2007, 09:40 PM #25Originally Posted by UtahFire
-
02-22-2007, 07:35 AM #26Originally Posted by JP
-
02-23-2007, 02:52 AM #27Originally Posted by UtahFire
Similar Threads
-
[For Sale] Selling my 1998 Jeep Wrangler
By snccoulter in forum General DiscussionReplies: 8Last Post: 11-26-2010, 06:46 PM -
Jeep Wrangler Unlimited?
By Alex in forum Offroad 4x4, Side by Side and ATVReplies: 9Last Post: 08-12-2007, 11:12 PM -
Rubicon Suffering From Neglect
By Stuck N Utah in forum Offroad 4x4, Side by Side and ATVReplies: 6Last Post: 04-13-2007, 06:44 AM -
Jeep Rubicon vs Toyota FJ Cruiser
By Scott P in forum Offroad 4x4, Side by Side and ATVReplies: 1Last Post: 04-03-2006, 05:20 PM -
4" Lift on a YJ Wrangler
By Sombeech in forum Offroad 4x4, Side by Side and ATVReplies: 2Last Post: 08-31-2005, 03:53 PM