Why shouldn't i buy an fj cruiser??

why shouldn't i buy an fj cruiser??

it floods every now and then where i am.

also id like to get into off roading even if i dont know anything about it atm

Other urls found in this thread:

jalopnik.com/americas-2019-ford-ranger-wont-look-like-the-new-one-yo-1790982136
youtube.com/watch?v=oNvG8Kj2DWY
youtube.com/watch?v=7HxtTgpm0V8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Really reliable and great offroad but
>terrible mileage
>bad visibility
>overpriced
interior feels cheap

honestly i'd go with a jeep in your situation, cheaper and can take a few knocks while learning to offroad

It's the Japanese version of a H2, and drove by a similar crowd.

15 year old TJs in my areas go from 15-25k. Rusty ones go for 10. Jeeps aren't cheap.

tf, where you live

I'm a purist, I believe in solid axles and coil springs. Interior sucks ass, especially considering the price. The whole vehicle looks like ass, sometimes I think it would grow on me, but I see one up close but nope, still disproportionate and hideous.

Texas. Prices are better in rural CLs but still high

>H2
I'd say H3. But fairly similar demographic.
One thing about these is they hold their value, so while they may seem like shit value to buy outright, it'll still be worth something down the track. 4x4 Toyota tax, it's fucking real.

Jeeps have insane resell value, similar to Toyota trucks. There's really nothing like them capability wise.

They look p cool when built up

They are worth it if you have the money to throw at one. Travel outside your state for a jeep dont pay that overpriced bullshit.

Jeep will have way more replacement/aftermarket parts for much cheaper. not to mention the jeep community is gigantic so you can buy second hand decent stuff for a killer price if you watch forums

I really want to like them, I think it looks good in pics, but it loses its appeal to me personally in real life. I'm sure they are fine vehicles and you'll be happy if you bought one. I have no doubts that F O R D will fuck up the Bronco in similar fashion.

Knowing frod the bronco will be the next H2/H3.
Being that it will be a soccer mom vehicle in cali. they will offer a "performance offroad" model with no changes but a lift and bigger tires and aesthetics.
2 years later after they start making some money off it they will make 2-3 more versions of it and change aesthetics again.

Well the Bronco remake's meant to be in similar fashion to the FJ, a rebody build on the company's midsize pickup/SUV architecture. Can't really see it being too different to this desu

Just get a 4Runner. More cargo space and you can see out of it.

>I'm a purist, I believe in solid axles and coil springs.

Then you are not a purist. You are a kid or a LARP.

I'm just worried about the "retro" styling that looks inspired by Fisher-Price. If they would make a 2 door f150, ranger, excursion, or Everest(love it) I would be super happy.

Now post the front end.

Y'know. I wish Toyota would make cool offroaders like this again. We have the TRD Pro line, but it feels like i'm overpaying for outdated crap. Sure you got the reliability, but I want more if i'm spending about $45k for this.

Aint a jeep if it has coil overs, kid.

Coils are best

Except the JK is clearly superior to the CJ.

Just say no to coil springs.

try sitting in one
you don't realize how tiny that windshield is until you do, and how far that giant stupid hood sticks out

Updates made to compromise for on-road ride.

Jeeps are not made for taking kids to school. Jeeps are made to be washed out with a hose.

noted , but tell me something i dont know

jeeps are more expensive here in flipland
personally one reason im considering one is cause it looks like it will age well. i dont intend to get a second car for a while

You can do that with a JK.

Get a 4Runner instead. It's the same thing but nicer.

It aint a jeep if it has coils.

If you live in Asia, buy the Toyo. If you live in NA, buy a real Jeep.

>Canadian springs

Bro I'm not trying to be a dick here. Personally, I'm in the market for a TJ. But the JK, with coils, is superior to the CJ in almost every way.

sometimes "newer" and "more civil" are not always better... besides, wranglers are getting way too big.

Go look at any Jeep forum, most TJ/CJ owners will agree the JK is superior.

Toyota is never gonna change, they will always be the same boring company since day 1.

just remember that the mileage is shoddy and the visibility while driving in the city is awful. Other than that it's a great offroad vehicle, drove these in Bolivia last summer and had a blast, VERY sturdy and surprisingly comfortable.

Toyota skipped aluminum, and there is cost effectiveness in designing new steel body on frame designs (for NA)

Land Cruiser 300 will not arrive until it can be carbon fiber.

As for engines, the HCCI skyactiv-x engines will be the most significant change. These are never going to be mounted in Toyota steel frames.

And heavy duty lockers disappear for sensors and even electric motors.

Perhaps portal electric motors, carbon fiber on whatever frame, and a wankel apu.

(no) cost effectiveness

(but) these are never

mounted in Toyota steel frames (body on frame current gen steel trucks)

The TRD Pro is $42k and you can probably get them down to 40. Name a more capable, reliable off-road vehicle at that price.

This isn't wrong ^

Had one, loved it.
Has a fun tanklike sound on startup, feels that way with the low windshield. The breakover and approach angles are really good for a 20__ stock vehicle.
Has enough space to be pretty practical for a lot of things. Comfy roadtrip car - but no not the best. Particularly when the wind on the highway gets going,
>pepper your angus

But it's a well executed offroady midsize SUV, not 'sperged up with
>Muh leather
>muh 20in screen system

Sound system was good with the factory woofer and the sound transducers running through the headliner. With the ring sound you were sitting in a rolling amphitheater.

Supposedly if you want to lift it, you can only go up to like, 33s before having to chop the body to make the tires fit in the front.

Watch for engine bay rips when buying used.
It's believed that guys running 285s E-rated tires and winches, the harsher bounce over bumps was causing the rips.

I think it's 07-2011 the engines were meant to run on 91 octane.
You're also going to get ~V8 mileage with V6 power. Not quite true, but you're in that ballpark MPG wise.

Highway passing power was not great.

Still loved the damn thing. Hard to back into spots because of the blindspots
>Yes they're bad, but they're not impossible. They aren't
Short-spots aren't bad because of the short wheelbase.

Watch the roofrack in parking garages

Never got it stuck. Ever. Granted I didn't wheel it hard but, it never got stuck and there wasn't a "oh fuck, dat snow" "oh shit, it's ice rain, that hill" moment where the truck wouldn't climb

I loved it, I can't say that enough, but being honest, I'm really not sure the toyota tax is worth the premium when compared to say, a Nissan XTerra of similar age.

philippines spec ckmes woth a reverse camera so that shluld help me

alot of doctors and lawyer types own em here so their quite plentiful

it costs roughly 38k USD here compared to the similar spec jeep being around 45kish
btw what color does the gauge cluster glow? not something really important but i cant tell if its gross neon green or comfy orange

Those are little autism on wheels very cringy fan base

FJ owner here.

Most of the common gripes ITT are correct: they have some blindspots, handle like a heavier truck, and get bad gas mileage.

You're best to test drive one and see if you like it.

FJs do have coil springs, but you are correct in mentioning that they don't have a SFA.

For the amount of off-roading most FJ and Wrangler owners ACTUALLY do in their rigs, a SFA is a moot point. Unless you're purposely buying it primarily for offroad use, IFS and a SRA is really the better choice. Wranglers handle like absolute garbage, and their reliability is quite poor. This really isn't a meme or debatable, the Toyota FJ is a much better built vehicle in terms of quality. Wranglers have a cool factor, and you can take the top and doors off. There's also a bigger aftermarket for them, no doubt.

But if you're buying it to be a memequeen and cruise with the wind in your hair, an FJ probably isn't for you.

Ford will definitely ruin the Bronco, they've already made a point of trying to ruin the Mustang and they successfully ruined the GT. The North American Ranger is already scheduled for massive disappointment when it launches too.

The 4Runner really needs an updated engine. The 1GR-FE is fantastic and reliable, but it's sluggish in the 4Runners. I don't know why the FJ is so much quicker when it has the same engine, but they need to go back to offering 4Runners with a small V8.

A fucking LEAF spring.

I can name two dozen vehicles with a cringier fan base famalam. 75% of FJ owners are late 20's or 30-somethings who offroad them or do a lot of outdoors shit. They really don't attract the same caliber of douchebags as Jeeps. Wranglers are being deliberately marketed to douchebags with stupid shit like CALL OF DUTY packages.

Attached: DSC_0726.jpg (1445x960, 383K)

>a Nissan XTerra of similar age.

Don't forget the Xterras came with glass transmissions and had cross-contamination issues with the cooler.

About the only Xterra I'd consider is a 2015 Pro4X version, anything before that is really iffy whether it'll last forever or cost you $5K in repairs.

And you're really spot-on with your critique. Can confirm all of this shit is true. Passing power is not too bad if you are running all-seasons, but if you go to All Terrains, especially plus-sizes, it starts to slow down. I'll probably be getting a sprint booster to get rid of the stupid throttle lag as well, I really hate that.

And technically you can run them all on 87 octane, but you won't get the factory quoted horsepower. I run 91 because I want all 260, but regular works fine too.

Attached: FJ - Red Beast_1.webm (640x480, 2.95M)

Gauges are white with black lettering. Rest of the vehicle glows orange.

The white is necessary for daytime, the cabin is so dark that any other colour wouldn't be visible.

Attached: DSC_0719 - Copy.jpg (1416x941, 423K)

>but they need to go back to offering 4Runners with a small V8.

I strongly agree. Sales would shoot through the roof if they offered a V8 not just for the 4Runner but the new Tacos as well. Toyota is missing such a perfect opportunity here.

>t. Former owner of a 2008 4runner with a 4.7L iForce V8.

Attached: 2008_toyota_4runner_picture (14).jpg (760x505, 75K)

was sorta hoping theyd glow orange

Orange would've been nicer, I agree. But in the daytime, and especially with tinted windows, white with black is the only visible colour.

Even my old RAV4 had better colouring IMO.

Yes. Fuck yes. They should've offered the FJs with this engine, but I guess it might've fucked up weight distribution or something. Probably would've gotten better gas mileage with a 4.7 V8 than a 4.0 V6.

Attached: 20140823_184914.jpg (3264x2448, 1.39M)

don't worry lads. toyota is finally giving the 4runner a major refresh. maybe Toyota will return the V8 for the 4runner or do what FOrd is doing by giving you a TTV6 which would probably be much more durable than the tt ecoboost anyway .. What I wished for is a hino diesel in both a tacoma and 4runner but due to these retarded stern EPA regulations its just not gonna happen... ever

They need to shoe-horn that fatass 5.7 in there. I don't want a turbo, it will detract from the reliability of a N/A, larger displacement engine. If anything, they should be fitting the TRD supercharger onto the 1GR-FE as a stock powertrain.

But of course that'd just make MPGs worse, and they couldn't jury-rig the numbers the way companies do with turbocharged cars.

>see, see it gets 32mpg if you treat the gas pedal like an eggshell and literally never use the boost
>oh boy sounds legit OK Ford here's your 32mpg rating go sell some of these cuck cars to unsuspecting morons now

>You're best to test drive one and see if you like it.

He'll probably buy it, they're fun as fuckin hell
>Was thad a speedbump? can't tell, fuggg :DDDD

>For the amount of off-roading most FJ and Wrangler owners ACTUALLY do in their rigs, a SFA is a moot point.
Factual. 4x4, good tires, ground clearance etc etc will get you over and around most responsible trails that you're comfortable taking your "fuck I need to drive this home" vehicle on.

>Ford will definitely ruin the Bronco, they've already made a point of trying to ruin the Mustang and they successfully ruined the GT. The North American Ranger is already scheduled for massive disappointment when it launches too.
They told us the ranger would NOT be a rebadged overseas ranger. If you showed pics of the two to your lady, she'd say they are. Mustang's identity is gone (car handles good though supposedly), GT's engine is wrong. Very sad. BUT, the Ranger's lower trim levels look great, absolutely great.

> I don't know why the FJ is so much quicker when it has the same engine
I think the FJ was geared around low end torque. IT really seems to do that 0-30 fantastically, it's the highway passing that gets iffy

The fact that Ford didn't think it would be necessary to offer a diesel option in the Ranger really kills me. Especially when GM is offering one in their competition. I constantly talk to people who want a diesel option in their Tacomas and SUVs, it's not just Veeky Forums.

Automakers are so fucking gay sometimes.

Attached: TRD supercharger.jpg (640x480, 66K)

>The Xterra's transmission is basically a series of gummy-bears suspended in packing peanuts

Did not know about the Xterra's glassjaw transmission
>FJ transmissions aren't the best of the toyota vehicles, srs. Were issues with them on the forums way back when. Junky? no no, but for what one expects of toyota

>Passing power is not too bad if you are running all-seasons, but if you go to All Terrains,
That's the weird part about the FJ. 0-30, great.
50-65 uphill to pass the guy? Sheeeiiiittt.

>. I run 91 because I want all 260, but regular works fine too.
Back in 2007 it was like, 239hp/268lb ft,
>in the snow, uphill, bothways, barefoot fuugggg :DDDD

?They need to shoe-horn that fatass 5.7 in there. I don't want a turbo, it will detract from the reliability of a N/A, larger displacement engine. If anything, they should be fitting the TRD supercharger onto the 1GR-FE as a stock powertrain.

>But of course that'd just make MPGs worse, and they couldn't jury-rig the numbers the way companies do with turbocharged cars.

>see, see it gets 32mpg if you treat the gas pedal like an eggshell and literally never use the boost
>oh boy sounds legit OK Ford here's your 32mpg rating go sell some of these cuck cars to unsuspecting morons now

Oh my goodness, you mean, they didn't pick it because
>Muh performance
It's a fucking gimmick because of EPA cuckery? Mileage they won't see in exchange for a more complicated motor that sounds like ass, isn't literally the best thing forever and ever?
>In before you're accused of being a GM-guy for not liking muh-EPA compliance.

Because Toyota is releasing the FTAC next year and it'll probably cost as much as some guy's old beat up inflated price FJ..

They're all about protecting the sales of the F-series. 100%. It's a major factor in them killing the Ranger to begin with, big factor. Their sales force then told people they didn't want a midsize truck. Go figure with GM offering theirs (of course Toyota never leaving the game), NOW they're offering a Ranger.

It was hypothesized that Ford wouldn't do this until they felt the F-series had peaked. Now, they have a diesel coming out in their F-150 right? Why sell a midsize ranger that looks fuckin excellent even in the "cheap" trims (it does. I'm not a reliable ford fan, anymore, I like what they did) with a diesel, if it cuts into muh F-series numbers?

That's literally why.

GM doesn't give a fuck, they want to sell units period. 2 brands, 6 trucks or whatever, for them it's trucks period. They'll offer that variety.

>"Nah man a Fullsize truck with a 2.7Lturbo and a spartan interior is a total 1 for 1, when compared to a truck with more luxurious interior, a larger NA engine - that's easier to park and fit in your garage but still suits your usage, for the exact same money."

Diesel ranger would be sex. They won't do it.

The FTAC seems more geared at the Jeep Compass-Trailhawk buyers. That "I need a car, I don't want a compact, but I don't have THAT much money" vehicle buyer segment.

Attached: FTAC.jpg (1280x720, 134K)

>They need to shoe-horn that fatass 5.7 in there.

That... would be interesting. I mean if Jeep can fit a fuck huge V8 truck engine in their Grand Cherokee, Toyota sure can with the 4Runner if they design it right.

they're expensive as fuck where i live too. they're great for snow so they're valuable because of winter

>FJ transmissions aren't the best of the toyota vehicles

The problems being reported were primarily with the 6 speed manuals IIRC, and it was the same tranny used in the Tacos of those years. Taco owners also reported the same problems.

>Back in 2007 it was like, 239hp/268lb ft,

Yeah, that's why I purposely sought out a 2011. They changed the compression, intake, added dual valve timing, and gave it a bit of a tune. I've driven my dad's 2008 and there's a noticeable difference in pickup from 0kmh.

But then I put heavy, plus-size memeterrains on it so no more zoom.

Attached: DSC_0502 - Copy.jpg (2065x1372, 1.02M)

>SWAP to Chadterrains
>Softish sidewalls, traction in, EVERYTHING other than pure ice

KO2s are a hyped up tire, and IMHO worthy of it. They're a bit soft/mushy in the sidewalls in the big burger trucks, but they grip on anything other than ice. Did need to be roadforce balanced though.

>roadforce balanced

Lots of people keep saying this, but I haven't had any issues thus far. I have about 30,000km on this set and they're good to go. I run them at about 60PSI so I don't have issues with mushy sidewalls, but they are stiff as fuck in the winter and do slide around on ice.

But that's why I have 4WD and traction control.

Attached: DSC_0612 - Copy.jpg (2065x1372, 1.31M)

Looks like a Landcruiser trying to be an old Cruiser/Jeep and failing in every way possible. Never see these offroad for a reason.

You buy used. Bought this for 42k. Only 9k miles and the original owner spent 10k on mods and install.

Attached: s-l400.jpg (400x300, 25K)

>They told us the ranger would NOT be a rebadged overseas ranger.Ah, who told you that? Because they'd be lying if they said that.

>no diesel
into the trash it goes

>Never see these offroad for a reason
Only reason is you'd have your eyes closed.

there actually is a diesel option

but not in my market

the FJ is a fun truck, decent aftermarket.
nice for the winter climate, pretty much all the buttons are sized to work with thick gloves. approach angle goes from good to really damn good if you swap bumpers (which you will do if you want to off road, buy a winch). easy af to work on, tons on engine bay space. Japanese model has a fender mirror.
like others said, terrible milage, awful rear visibility. you come to rely on the rear camera. Belt driven fan is loud on startup. Looks naked without roof rack.

jalopnik.com/americas-2019-ford-ranger-wont-look-like-the-new-one-yo-1790982136
>Mike Levine, Ford’s former truck communications chief recently promoted to Product Communications Manager, has actually tweeted two significant statements about the Ranger here.

>The first is the phrase “all-new,” which in auto industry speak means “completely redesigned.” For example the F-150 was “all-new” for 2015 when it underwent dramatic interior and exterior design changes, but it is only “revised” for 2018 with its upgraded engines and an aesthetically tweaked front end.

I 100% believe the Bronco is a re-grillle'd everest with an ecoboost

Hmm, I did have to roadforce mine. They didn't balance twice, 3rd time, roadforce, presto, fine.
>60PSI

Man! 60PSI is what the ram powerwagon airs up to, at 4600lbs and change that miiiight be a bitch high my main man

>sidewalls
To be fair the guys stating that are the guys with the E-rated tires, running them on trucks that weigh 6,000lbs on up. IIRC there's a topic on a Ford powerstroke forum about it for instance.

BFG KO2s can run as high as 80PSI and as low as 15PSI.

Running a hard tire like that at low PSI leads to uneven wear/cupping

Well hey that's true, also true that "muh door sticker" isn't always true once the tire was changed. But if you can get ahold of the load tables for that tire, you can figure out what PSI it needs for the "loaded to GVWR" weight of the vehicle.

IIRC the door sticker for the FJ was noowhere near 60. All I'm sayin man, you might be able to run lower PSI in a vehicle of that weight, that PSI is for a ~6000-7400lb truck ballpark for the E-rated tire

you can blame the epa for that.

>I run them at about 60PSI
the fuck? you're about 15 too high.

>as low as 15PSI
lol. they'll hold a bead lower than that without locks.

Which market?

>you're about 15 too high.

Based on what? They can run up to 80. 60PSI is preferential, it gives me good wear, better fuel economy, better acceleration, and better handling

Attached: bb.png (500x566, 137K)

A Tahoe with some aggressive tires would easily keep up. If you can live with a truck, That much gets you the superior Colorado with front and rear locking diffs and even a diesel for that much. Or a full size truck with some aggressive tires and a slight lift.

Modern Toyota's still have their fair share of small issues. Most domestics will be just as reliable if you don't get a lemon and take care of it.

That's just too much money for 280hp and a horrible interior.

A Trail Teams FJ.

check mate atheists.

Attached: FJ_offroad.jpg (1244x829, 280K)

>Most domestics will be just as reliable if you don't get a lemon and take care of it.

Tahoes are notoriously unreliable vehicles. Everything from door weatherstripping to power window switches will fail inside of 50,000 miles. They are poorly made, overpriced domestic vehicles sold to crawl malls and transport kids.

A Tahoe isn't even in the same neighbourhood as offroad vehicles like the FJ, and the 4Runner TRD Pro is at least 10x more formidable.

Most domestics will not be as reliable, and the Tahoe definitely won't be. I really struggle to comprehend how people can still be so ill-informed. Is it just the marketing that you fall for?

You forgot to mention that they also suffer an infamous rattling problem called the "Chevy Shake".

youtube.com/watch?v=oNvG8Kj2DWY

The Tahoe is based on a Silverado which is one of the most reliable gas trucks with more than one example doing a million miles on the original engine. The "unreliability" is soccer moms not getting the android auto to work on their iphone.

>is one of the most reliable gas trucks

Factually untrue. GM trucks are trash, you can really stop the shilling now.

now compare the handful of examples with high mileage to the countless examples that fail well before they should

not to mention GM interiors are complete trash, worse than any plastic toyota interior

only the poorest of poorfags find GM shit appealing

Attached: 12345.png (532x353, 365K)

>more than one example doing a million miles on the original engine.

Lemme guess, same engine but some things had to be replaced huh?

That running up to 80 is most useful for the 3/4ton trucks and the like running those tires.
Try to get a hold of a load table and figure out what your vehicle should be running

If it's actually high for my 5900lb ram (that's 6100+ with me in it), its high for your FJ which clocks in at 4600 IIRC for the auto. I had an FJ but it's been a long time since I saw that door sticker, I think the stock PSI was 37?

Your tires work in concert with your shocks and suspension setup to absorb bumps and the like. By having the tires significantly overinflated for the vehicle and loads, the tires are hard as shit, and now they're transmitting that cushioning duty (and the significant tirebounce - 60PSI, on an FJ?) to your suspension.

Tacoma owner here, R2.8 or 4BT would be so sweet in these trucks of any model.

The only reason I was looking into the GM twins at the time was because they had a small diesel offering, However reliability testing isnt there.

>the virgin door sill pressure vs. the Chad tire PSI

>lol'd hard

It's true, doorsticker pressure is a good guideline. Under tends to be a bad idea. But it's also good for a ballpark.

Loadtables for the tire are best!

sheeit

Attached: dubman_harriet.jpg (248x300, 45K)