I'm kinda undecided on it. There are parts of the design I like and other parts I hate. Mainly the white roof should be painted and the bumpers are ugly. I'm not a big fan of the three windshield wipers either. I think it was inspired by a cruise ship.
Hi Mr. FJ
- Thread starter MoladoGuy
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
-=JoN=-
Member
bohica-kj said:
im not saying i hate it...im just saying it looks like garbage....
i think the puke stains I had in the bathroom rug last week after my drinking insanity looks better than the FJ...(lifted or not lifted)...
i dont care much for the looks, but im sure it can hold it's own on the trail....
JeepJeepster
Full Access Member
Wow, it has 3 wiper blades... :-s Ive never seen something so ugly. I thought that I liked it, but it has 3 wiper blades? =; It really does look like a toy with those tires. Looks like a tonka truck I used to play with in the sand box. 8-[
Marlon_JB2
Kombat Edition Jeep
All of you guys just took all of my thoughts out of my mouth!!!
I *never* noticed the 3 wiper system? What's with that?
I *never* noticed the 3 wiper system? What's with that?
Corwyyn
Full Access Member
Not sayin' I hate it because its not a Jeep, but I don't really care for the design. Like Jon says to much inconsequential stuff going on with the body, and it just doesn't have good lines that flow from front to back - it just looks hacked together to me. Kinda like the *new* Charger from Dodge; to me it just doesn't seem to have as many of the classic Charger design elements. But the new Mustang on the other hand, now there is a car that celebrates its heritage in style \bohica-kj said:
/Third pillar back on the side:hyedipin said:
You must be registered for see images
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2006
- Messages
- 7,347
- Reaction score
- 7
Ok, I get it now, thanks Corwyyn
alljeep
New Member
I like it, 3 wipers and all! It reminds me of something that belongs in my kids favorite movie, Monsters, Inc.! =D> (secretly, it's my favorite movie as well...)
Here are my comparison pictures as well:
Here are my comparison pictures as well:
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
jfortier777
Full Access Member
alljeep said:
Monsters Inc.!
Thats what I was thinking of when I thought it looked cartoonish, lol! Crazy ****, stealing our childrens hearts.
Looks like something from Cars...
color makes a big difference along with wheels imho. The black lifted one looks worlds better. I would rather have a Jeep, but it can look OK. Anyway, I wouldn't have one, it is my understanding that you are supposed to burn premium in it.... #-o
color makes a big difference along with wheels imho. The black lifted one looks worlds better. I would rather have a Jeep, but it can look OK. Anyway, I wouldn't have one, it is my understanding that you are supposed to burn premium in it.... #-o
yoda13 said:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/23035.shtml
Yep. Premium gas. I didnt know that it used that.
blue gascon
New Member
It's an interesting design- but it seems they focused on making it look tough with styling that doesn't really enhance function. Personally, I find a lot of design errors in this vehicle, probably because I prize function over form. And I don't like the fact that they played the nostalgia card with the FJ designation. I owned a '71 FJ40 and this new thing is nothing like the original FJ series, either the 40 or the 55. My old FJ even had provisions for a PTO on the transfer case- seems the Japanese even marketed a portable sawmill attachment that would run off the PTO. But that's when function counted for more than the "OOOOOOOOO, looks cool!" factor. I also have a friend who used to race a modified 76 FJ40- with a 400 small block stuffed in it, and I know he would share my opinion, it just ain't a real Land Cruiser, and it ain't likely it ever will be!
We considered one briefly........... very briefly. A neighbor has one. He says visibility ***** and he didn't find out it took premium fuel until after he bought it.
Good idea. Competative pricing (except I read that they are hard to find so many dealers are gouging for well over MSRP). POOR execution.
Good idea. Competative pricing (except I read that they are hard to find so many dealers are gouging for well over MSRP). POOR execution.
2003KJ
Member
sandracer said:
Sat in one at an auto show recently....did not like the visibility at all...bad blind spots, and i didn't really care for the engine layout either....too cramped.
I like my KJ just fine \
/SnowgodCCR
Full Access Member
The FJ Cruiser is a good truck, if you need a grocery-getter and occasionaly go off road on some light rocks. The IFS is a liability in it (I know the KJ has IFS as well, and I don't like it there either...), and the fact that Toyota made so many HUGE F***-ups with it sets me off.
A) 3 Wiper Blades? For what? NO POINT. It's cheaper to buy 2 blades, and thats also one less mechanism to break when you need it.
B) Premium Gas: I've been in places before where I was lucky to GET gas, nevermind premium. It's not that the engine won't run on regular, but you sure won't be getting your power's worth out of it and you run the risk of preignition because of the higher compression ratio. You could add a water injection system, but that's just something else to break...
C) Poor Visibilty: The C-Pillar is ENORMOUS. Just too big to be able to see around. Sitting in the driver's seat, the profile of the C-Pillar can hide an 18-Wheeler that's 70 feet away.
D) The Tail lights: They stick out from the body of the vehicle. This just SCREAMS "BREAK ME ON A ROCK!!". Note how on jeeps the lights are mounted more or less flush with the sides of the vehicle, except on the wrangler, where they are mounted inboard for added protection.
E) Marketing: This is the one that irks me the most. Toyota is marketing the IFS FJ Cruiser as a vehicle to compete with the JK Rubicon, when it just ISN'T. At all. The Rubicon comes STANDARD with front and rear lockers. You can buy a rear locker as an option on the FJ, but if you are doing any serious offroading (not to knock on the KJ, we have one remember), you're going to want a front locker, which without a solid axle in the front, your SOL on. The FJ comes off the lot with a 450 something RTI, the Rubicon drives off with an 850 something RTI. C'Mon...FJ as a Rubi killer? Bitch please...
I have much more to rant about with the FJ (mostly targeting the type of people who drive them), if anybody wants to hear it, but that's another discussion for another place...
A) 3 Wiper Blades? For what? NO POINT. It's cheaper to buy 2 blades, and thats also one less mechanism to break when you need it.
B) Premium Gas: I've been in places before where I was lucky to GET gas, nevermind premium. It's not that the engine won't run on regular, but you sure won't be getting your power's worth out of it and you run the risk of preignition because of the higher compression ratio. You could add a water injection system, but that's just something else to break...
C) Poor Visibilty: The C-Pillar is ENORMOUS. Just too big to be able to see around. Sitting in the driver's seat, the profile of the C-Pillar can hide an 18-Wheeler that's 70 feet away.
D) The Tail lights: They stick out from the body of the vehicle. This just SCREAMS "BREAK ME ON A ROCK!!". Note how on jeeps the lights are mounted more or less flush with the sides of the vehicle, except on the wrangler, where they are mounted inboard for added protection.
E) Marketing: This is the one that irks me the most. Toyota is marketing the IFS FJ Cruiser as a vehicle to compete with the JK Rubicon, when it just ISN'T. At all. The Rubicon comes STANDARD with front and rear lockers. You can buy a rear locker as an option on the FJ, but if you are doing any serious offroading (not to knock on the KJ, we have one remember), you're going to want a front locker, which without a solid axle in the front, your SOL on. The FJ comes off the lot with a 450 something RTI, the Rubicon drives off with an 850 something RTI. C'Mon...FJ as a Rubi killer? Bitch please...
I have much more to rant about with the FJ (mostly targeting the type of people who drive them), if anybody wants to hear it, but that's another discussion for another place...
SnowgodCCR said:
Good post. I was actually starting to notice them around town and wondering how capable they were. I dont understand what they were thinking with premium. Very few suvs that I'm aware of take premium, never mind one's built for fourwheeling.
thecause17
Full Access Member
especially with gas prices the way they are already, who wants to run premium? I'm paying $2.35 for regular, and there are plenty of places higher than that....let alone the $2.55+ for premium in a daily driver. i had a car about 5 years ago that required it, but at least gas was reasonable back then and it got high 20's to low 30's for gas milage....an SUV like the FJ rated for 21mpg on the highway/16 city requiring premium is a little rediculous...they might as well put a V-8 in it that could run 87...probably would sell just as well.
SnowgodCCR
Full Access Member
It's not even the price of premium that gets me, since I have a Saab that requires it (high compression ratio), it's the fact that Toyota is ******* it as a go-anywhere-do-anything rubicon killer, and it requires premium. Even here in NH, there are places that just don't have premium gasoline at their pumps...and most of them are on the way to/from wheeling trails. If I'm out in the backcountry in my jeep, and I need gas, I'm gonna stop at the first station I see, whether they have premium or not. It's nice to not have to worry about the quest for premium. Even with diesel engines you could always pull up to a farm and ask to buy some fuel off of them.
