If Toyota had called it the new "Trekker" or "Stout", etc... I'd have probably shouted accolades....

But not a Cruiser... Too transparent...

Watch out for the cruiser police, only the fj55 is a "pig".

YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT! For one thing, the motor is a big departure from the historic 120K mile-before-rebuild Chevy knockoff pushrod six that got terrible mileage, terrible power, and everybody replaced with a Chevy smallblock.

How dare they. 250K mile+ 4.0 V6 VVTi my eye. Waaay too much of a break with tradition. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

(Sorry, I banged my rude button against the chair and off I went.... just wanna put things in context here...) <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/evil.gif" alt="" />

Bill - you entertain me. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

The 3fe and 1fz's were great engines that can easily push 300K... The F and 2F are very simple and reliable... but that's really not the point.... With the exception of the American 100 series, every Cruiser built has significant beef and off-road capabilities... The FJ Cruiser does not come from that same mold.

I disagree. I dont' think some of you guys realize just how beefy the 100 series really is. And same goes for the 4Runner, but to a lesser degree. Yes, the 100 is IFS, yes it's not 10 feet off of the ground. Overseas versions, are not that unlike our U.S. models, except for the solid front axle version, which is literally just an 80 series with a 100 series body. The 100 series is used all over the world in very extreme environments and has proven it's strength and worth.

The current IFS 4Runner is much stronger design than prior models too. It rides on a frame that is much stronger than the prior models, especially the 1996-2002 version. And the current 4Runner has an 8" front axle which is hasn't had since 1985. In my mind, Toyota is actually improving things on certain models. Especially in the areas of strength and capacity. More so on the Japanese designed and built models, like the LC100 and 4Runner.

The LC100 comes with more power engines, and a very strong frame. It's load capacity is higher than the earlier models. How many Chevy Trailblazers, or "insert any domestic SUV here" would you expect to survive pulling this duty in Africa? This is your same IFS Land Cruiser that supposedly is not worthy of the prior generations:

Don't argue with me... <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/nana.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

The non-US 100 series are phenonimal vehicles. The US 100 series are not as well built as the 80 series they replaced, in my opinion...

Brian (McCammish, not Gallus) you crack me up. The new "FJ Cruiser" (which is what they are calling it) is nothing but hype. Spin it any way you want, it is not an off road machine. Rack and pinion steering, IFS (with no lockers or gears available), and poor visibility are not the hot set up. Can it be made to work? Sure, there are some good components. I don't see this going anywhere that Monteros and Grand Cherokees cannot tread though.

Remember when the Supra was a fun, affordable sports car before it got bloated, heavy, gadget laden, and expensive? The same thing is happening now with Toyotas trucks and SUVs...

Harry,

Did you miss the part about how it comes with a rear locker, 6 speed manual, and 32" tires? The redesigned 8" front 4Runner diff and relocated rack and pinion that is superior to the older Tacoma/4runner design? (Believe me, I'm no rack and pinion fan either)

I don't think you realize that you and I completely agree in a lot of ways. I am dissapointed in the FJ in a lot of ways. Not the least of which is the styling, the interior and the name, but it's a start in the right direction. Especially after we were just sacked with a C-channel framed oversized Tacoma, that we're going to have to live with for another 10 years.

When I compare the LC100 or the 4Runner, I'm comparing it to current models in it's "class" offered here in this country. I'm also taking into consideration modifications that would need to be done. For example, a bit of a lift, taller tires, and lockers.

I'm not praising the set ups as a factory off road package, like the Rubicon and the Powerwagon obviously are. I'm praising them as a very beefy base, with strong frames and suspensions, that could be built up into a very capable dual purpose rig. A long distance trip rig / and a decent off roader.

If you think that I think a factory LC100 or 4Runner can outdo the likes of the Rubicon off road, that's not what I'm say. Even a factory LC80 had major short comings. The running boards need to come off, they need a lift and they need taller tires, before they are really capable.

I like the FJ in that it appears it might be a good base rig to build on. But I completely agree, it's not Rubicon killer. It's not a rock crawler. On the flip side, no one is going to use the Rubicon as an long distance expedition
rig. It lacks any real load capacity for starters. Ultra low T-cases don't work well in the desert, etc.

I think the problem here is that we are comparing rigs that are in totally different classes and used for different types of off roading.

Anybody else notice it has 3 windshield wipers? <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cyclops.gif" alt="" />

not having seen this, i'd say it should live up to its name -- the *real* jeep gladiator was a fullsized truck, the predecessor to the J series(the truck in the movie "tremors" was a jeep gladiator), was available with a buick 350.