^^what hasn't been objective?

4/11/2007 5:40:38 PM

nobody liked my long story that i clogged this shitty thread with

4/11/2007 6:31:39 PM

I've test driven both vehicles, tho not had a chance to put either in 4wd. I try to be objective, but my hatred of all things jeep sometimes clouds my opinion. this comes from having owned and cursed at many jeeps.

4/11/2007 6:40:11 PM

Quote :

"the jeep will murder the toy off road"

is that because it is Trail Rated?

with the same tires on each, the FJ would keep up with the Rubicon if not out perform it

4/11/2007 6:49:33 PM

absolutely not. the rubicon, has FAR superior equipment for off road use.

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 6:55 PM. Reason : and i'm a much bigger fan of toyota over jeep...]

4/11/2007 6:52:19 PM

i saw an fj cruiser today looked gay woman was driving it too...

4/11/2007 7:08:29 PM

i think most things in here have been helpful - keep posting by all means though. i personally liked the way the jeep drove better and was pretty sure that it would do better off road (not that the fj wouldnt handle its own) i was more or less wondering if there were any real problems. for instance "i dont like jeeps/toyotas" isnt exactly a fair (or objective) reason to go with one or the other, maybe actual things/events that in your opinion make one better or worse.

Quote :

"having owned and cursed at many jeeps"

anything in particular i should watch out for?

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 7:29 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2007 7:28:30 PM

the fj cruiser would have been awesome if they would have did what the original did...
take a jeep and toyotafy it.

if the fj cruiser would be
1. toplessable
2. sas locked front and rear
3. 4:1 low range..

it would have been perfect... ohh wait... the jeep already has those things

4/11/2007 7:29:23 PM

fj cruisers look like giant mini coopers

mini coopers are mini for a reason

4/11/2007 7:34:42 PM

Quote :

"is that because it is Trail Rated? with the same tires on each, the FJ would keep up with the Rubicon if not out perform it "

uhh, no. even besides the tires, the Jeep has more ground clearance, solid axles front and rear with sway bar disconnects--which is better suspension (for off road use...not for pavement use), and lockers front AND rear. I'm fairly confident that it has better approach/departure angles. It has a tough drivetrain that will stand up to a lot of abuse.

A Rubicon vs FJ Cruiser match--off road, that is--would be a slaughter. At the very best, I don't think the FJ Cruiser would have anything over a run of the mill Wrangler off-road (given similar configuration in terms of tires and rear diff configuration). The Rubicon would absolutely crush it.

And while we're hypothetically taking tires out of the equation, I'll also bet that the Rubicon will accept larger tires in stock form...and if you want to talk about lifting them both, it's just going to get more one-sided, because at some point, the Rubicon would win out in terms of having a stout enough drivetrain to keep accepting bigger tires...then you're talking about swapping out axles and T-cases, and it's a pointless discussion at that point (although still in the Jeep's favor, because you'd be looking at a solid axle swap for the FJ, which would be a shit ton more difficult than throwing an even bigger solid axle under the Jeep--or just beefing up the stock Dana 44...and you'd be looking at unstreetable, totally dedicated monster truck offroad rigs by the time you got to that point).

Quote :

"the fj cruiser would have been awesome if they would have did what the original did... take a jeep and toyotafy it. if the fj cruiser would be 1. toplessable 2. sas locked front and rear 3. 4:1 low range.. it would have been perfect... ohh wait... the jeep already has those things"

hell yeah...it would've been sweet. the old FJ-40 is one of my favorites that I intend to own an example of one of these days.

and on that note, that's the way I feel about Nissan and the 350Z...I wish they'd lived up to the hype they were spreading about it being a return to the 240Z roots.

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 8:32 PM. Reason : Oh, and good luck locking the front end on that FJ Cruiser.]

4/11/2007 8:30:32 PM

fj's look bloated but im sure they ride better(on road) unless theyre sprung real soft for a "car-like ride" like ppl go for today.

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 8:34 PM. Reason : ()]

4/11/2007 8:32:29 PM

that was pretty much my take on the fj too - i do like the older fj's but this one seems more like a car than i was looking for. plus im sure the wrangler would be something i would actually keep when i got another car, whereas the fj cruiser would just get sold

^ theyre not "car like" as much as some i guess, but they are way more car like than the wrangler. plus, ive had a car, and i much prefer the "truck" ride.

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 8:39 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2007 8:37:38 PM

JK, because it's a JEEP. And it has a SOLID FRONT AXLE.

4/11/2007 8:45:53 PM

so seriously, there have been a couple people praising jeeps, and a few "bashing" them for lack of better words - for those against it - what specifically would really make me want to consider another car (even if not the fj)

4/11/2007 8:48:29 PM

i find it funny that its jk and it was supposed to have ifs.... jk

4/11/2007 9:03:02 PM

^^ the Wrangler Rubicon is THE solution if off-road capability is what you are going for, and you want it straight out-of-the-box. Period.

(arguably an H1, or something like a Unimog, etc...but then it becomes academic...we all know you're not going to buy--much less daily drive--a fucking 'Mog.)

Even if you want to modify stuff, the FJ-Cruiser (and any other competitor I can think of, for that matter) is going to play second fiddle (or at least a lot of catch-up, in some cases aside from the FJ) to the Rubicon off-road. It would take a SUBSTANTIAL amount of modification (and expense) to make the FJ even close to a break even proposition.

The Jeep has some less endearing qualities as a daily driver. They're loud, ride rough, suck more gas, etc. In general, they just are comparatively crude and are simply not going to have the refinement of an FJ Cruiser or any other 4x4 you might consider. They've improved a lot over the older models, but a Lexus it is not.

On the other hand, many consider the ability to drop the top and yank the doors in a couple of minutes an attractive, fun feature that justifies some of the crudeness.

Basically it comes down to whether you value a considerable margin of off-road supremacy coupled with the fun factor of the ability to strip away the top and doors, or whether you value a substantially more suitable tool for taking road trips and being a daily driver (although the Rubicon could be driven from NC to CA no problem, even if it isn't the best tool for the job...the FJ-40 is completely incapable of doing some of the things than the Jeep can.)

On the other hand, a Jeep is by no means an everyman vehicle. It is a comparatively uncompromised, niche market machine, and it may very well not be what you will be most pleased with.

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 9:14 PM. Reason : asdf]

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 9:15 PM. Reason : my only real beef with the Rubicon is that I'd never wheel the shit out of a 30k vehicle.]

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 9:16 PM. Reason : asdf]

4/11/2007 9:11:48 PM

i'm not totally a fan about the new body style of the jk. the fender flares look silly. i'm sure someone like btf or metal fusion or someone will put out a flat fender kit that will make them look MUCH better. i would still choose the jeep. also, i'm pretty sure that i've read you can do a 4 inch lift and fit 37's. i bet i could do a lower lift and still fit em

the fj cruiser looks like a turtle. i hate the tail lights, i'm sure i'd bash them on something because they stick out so far. the front en disn't that bad, but still not great. i've seen both wheeled at uwharrie on the same obstacles, and the rubicon made it look easy, the fj cruiser had to beat on it to go up the same spot. during the romping on it they crushed their fancy factory side steps. not saying if you lifted, locked, etc. it wouldn't be a good rig, just stock vs. stock off road the fj is lacking majorly. on road is probably a different story.

to the original poster, i think either would be a good vehicle. if you want more off road capabilities, get the jeep. if you won't be going off road very much, and want a better ride, get the fj.

[Edited on April 11, 2007 at 9:21 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2007 9:17:32 PM

gas mileage wise

17/19 for the jk
http://autos.yahoo.com/jeep_wrangler_unlimited_rubicon/

19/22 for the fj
http://autos.yahoo.com/toyota_fj_cruiser/

4/11/2007 9:21:16 PM

i'll take upper 2 in an fj. what.

4/11/2007 9:24:35 PM

[image]i'll take upper 2 in an fj-40,45. what. [/image]
fixt

4/11/2007 9:27:25 PM

Here's a decent FJ. Notice the duct taped taillights.

4/12/2007 6:42:10 PM

those red x's are hot.

4/12/2007 8:02:28 PM

yeah i noobed all in my pants

4/12/2007 8:09:35 PM

despite most jeep owners being total pussies the new rubi unl is comparable to a new corvette in the following way. if you want to go buy a new vehicle and beat it on the track or the trail you would be hard pressed to find a better fit.

4/12/2007 8:53:09 PM

bang for buck mind fuck

basically for 75k i can hit 200mph
for 30k i can get locked dana 44s with 4.11s 4:1 xfercase and the ability to fit 37s on 4" of lift and still not have a stupid high center of gravity.


[Edited on April 12, 2007 at 9:06 PM. Reason : .]

4/12/2007 9:04:38 PM

i can fit 37s and possibly 38's on 4.5 inches of lift already have run 36's on it and they rub a TINY TINY bit

4/12/2007 10:16:40 PM

4/12/2007 10:29:15 PM

^^yeah, you might fit them but that d30 is going to be screaming at you. i'm surprised you haven't broken anything yet with 35's since it's locked, even with the anemic 2.5.

4/12/2007 11:33:50 PM

Ok I had to say so FTW

4/12/2007 11:37:12 PM

ohh yeah and thats only mildly modded


btw WWEEEHOOOO BUCKSHOT MUDDERS!!!

also i don't know if this is true but i've heard the dana 44s are much beefier this time than in the tjs
has anyone seen them in person?

cause the old rubicons... sure they had 30 spline axle shafts but they had weak axle tubes.


[Edited on April 13, 2007 at 6:23 AM. Reason : .]

4/13/2007 6:20:23 AM

I'd take the jk. hopefully it wouldn't be a POS like my previous jeeps- 51 willys P/U, 53, 56, 59, 61 willys wagons, 73 cj6, 83 cj7, 88 and 89 xj's, 93 zj, and 98 tj. actually the 89 xj, and tj weren't so bad.

4/13/2007 11:09:53 AM

Quote :

"^^yeah, you might fit them but that d30 is going to be screaming at you. i'm surprised you haven't broken anything yet with 35's since it's locked, even with the anemic 2.5. "

i've been working on crawlin more and less romping on it. and my 2.5 is lightyears ahead power wise of the one that got swapped out

4/13/2007 11:53:33 AM

percentage wise yeah.. but i mean 25hp x 2 is still only 50

4/13/2007 12:04:33 PM

^ hey now.

no, seriously i swapped the original engine out and put in an 01 engine. my old one was totally ragged out, the bottom of the bore on the cylinder walls all were egg shaped. burned a quart every 200 miles or less.

4/13/2007 12:12:36 PM

New Rubicons still come with the 4.0L?

Thought i read they might be doing away with it.

4/13/2007 12:38:39 PM

yeah, the 4.0 is gone. V6 from the Chrysler minivans now.

4/13/2007 12:43:50 PM

i wonder how hard the v6 -> srt hemi swap would be ?

4/13/2007 4:37:06 PM

so in considering these two cars (leaning more toward the rubicon) is there anything similar that would be good to consider that might be a good option: truck, (slightly)larger suv, etc.?

4/15/2007 6:51:59 PM

umm... as far as offroad capability nothing is as good as a rubicon
as far as convertibles go nothing is as good as a wrangler
as far as daily drivers go....
almost everything is better then a wrangler... but you'll learn to love it
and i def miss mine.

point being

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU LOOKING FOR IN A VEHICLE?

[Edited on April 15, 2007 at 6:56 PM. Reason : .]

4/15/2007 6:56:09 PM

The JK is 100 times better as a DD than a TJ.

4/15/2007 7:01:24 PM

im currently trying to replace the yukon - its good to be able to get shit in the back and it not get wet, but still a little too big, plus its just too vulnerable off road (understandable). i like the wrangler cause i could pretty much wheel it anywhere and still have room in the back to carry shit (with the unlimited), i was just wondering if the "wrangler ride" is too much do deal with everyday, even though the jk is supposedly improved or if the 4 door is too much of a stretch from the original 2 door to warrant getting a completely different vehicle

4/15/2007 7:02:50 PM

^^ and the TJ is better than a YJ, which is better than a CJ.

the JK Rubicon would prob be pretty doable as a daily driver, but it's still gonna be worse than pretty much anything else, other than its own Jeep predeccesors.

the 4-door Unlimited will also be better in terms of interior space and ride quality (due to the longer wheelbase), but prob not QUITE as capable offroad (but still WAY better than the FJ Cruiser or anything else).

4/15/2007 7:10:58 PM

i guess my thought was if it was worth it to get a wrangler thats a 4 door, or should i just not worry about it and get a better 4 door car like a grand cherokee or something similar. i know it wouldnt be nearly as good off road, but with the 4 doors, would it be worth it.

4/15/2007 7:40:54 PM

^^^i don't know about 100x, but it's certainly an improvement. the unlimited especially.

Quote :

"btw WWEEEHOOOO BUCKSHOT MUDDERS!!!"

try again. denman ground hawgs. about as old school as buckshots though. i don't know why more people don't run them. the performed comparable to a swamper, were alot cheaper, had decent road manners for that kind of tire, and wore like freakin iron. my only complaint was the sidewalls were a little stiff on the bias plys, but at 3-5psi anything will flex. i ran them in a 38x14.50 radial and a 40x17 bias. i had planned to groove the 40's a bit, but never got around to it.

Quote :

"also i don't know if this is true but i've heard the dana 44s are much beefier this time than in the tjs has anyone seen them in person? cause the old rubicons... sure they had 30 spline axle shafts but they had weak axle tubes."

i don't know the exact specs of the new ones, but the tj ones weren't anything great. they retained d30 parts where it really matters.

Quote :

"i've been working on crawlin more and less romping on it."

not me, i'm too impatient. if it doesn't get crawled in the first one or two tries, i'm breaking out the skinny pedal and going to work on the shifter.

4/15/2007 7:43:42 PM

Quote :

"the 4-door Unlimited will also be better in terms of interior space and ride quality (due to the longer wheelbase), but prob not QUITE as capable offroad (but still WAY better than the FJ Cruiser or anything else)."

never went up a steep hill with bumps in a short wheelbase/tall vehicle have ya???
i've seen a couple jeeps go over and a bunch of sparetire wheelie bars.

its really preference... if someone is planning on putting 35s/37s on it... its plenty of 4x4 to do almost anything but deep ass mudholes in nc



↑ damn you're right i actually knew that.. i've always confused their names
i knew it was something really redneck but i picked the wrong one.

[Edited on April 15, 2007 at 8:14 PM. Reason : .]

4/15/2007 8:10:29 PM

yeah. denman makes the gumbo mudders too. another quality name.

4/15/2007 8:36:44 PM