So I am debating going from a '95 FZJ80 Land Cruiser to the FJ. The LC is OME'd out with 3", ARB Bull Bar, 295/75/16. Yakima roof rack etc... What I am wondering is the durability factor. The FZJ is the only vehicle to ever win the Dakkar rallye stock in 1st and 2nd place. It has run on all 7 continents w/o fail. It is built like a tank, over built if you will. The downside is it's power, it is way underpowered, the straight 6 is a great engine, but underpowered for the size of the truck. It does have straight axles, but that can be a downside as the birfields have to be redone every once and a while. Gas mileage is horrible especially lifted and with larger tires, but that is the price you pay for full time 4wd. All in all the FZJ is one of the quintessential land cruisers beside the FJ-40. Any ways I think the FJ should have carried the Land Cruiser badge, but I guess Toyota figures there is more to a name than just what it is ie. the 100 series which has little off road potential. To make a long post shorter I like the FJ even with the minor quirks you read about, it seems trail worthy and all of the things I have read about it impresses me. One thing that worries me is the DIY factor. The FZJ had the straight 6 and man was it easy to work on if you had to, the FJ however has the newer engine and I am wondering how easy it would be to work on if you had to. Any ways, just a few questions for the FJ forum....
The new FJ is legit off road in factory trim. It out-performs the modern stock Jeep hands down. As far as working on the newer motor, don't sweat it, it's brand new and it is a Toyota! Good luck with your decision!
I went from FJ40/FJ60 straight to the FJC and Im still a little turned off by all the computer components and electrical items that could fail and be hard as hell to diagnose and fix on the trail. I still have the 40 and 60 so I dont wheel the FJC since Im scared of screwing something up that would be expensive to fix. Id rather wheel the 40 where you can fix almost everything w/ a simple tool set and basic mechanical skills. All this new stuff (new to me) like the IFS, fuel injection, electronics, auto hubs, traction control, and other high tech sh!t is a little strange to me so I don't really trust it. A lot of people on here wheel there's w/ little to no problems, its just I dont know much about "modern cars". So if your comfortable with the the smaller gap in technology between the 80 and the FJC Do it! Better yet keep you 80 and get the FJC!!!
__________________
"The calvary ain't riding in to save us, folks. It's up to us to save Texas." -- Kinky Friedman
So just out of curiosity, what do all you guys think... Should the FJ have taken the Land Cruiser nomenclature as the original land cruiser was made to do what the FJ was made to do too. I always thought after the FJ 60 series they catered the land cruiser here in the US to the lux crowd w/o keeping one as the off road capable one. The 80 came back a little with the lockers and coil sprung straight axles, but I just can't go on with the 100 series being "related" to the FJ 40... It just ain't right
They can't do that to the Land Cruiser brand, since it has become a high-profit luxo-crawler for the suburban executive set. Maybe 1 in 10,000 of those folks might want an FJ. Plus the looks are way off for what that brand has become.
Might have been good if they had just called the by a number like FJxx, whatever that should be.
__________________
Black Cherry
+Goodies
Stock for now
I had a '93 80 when I bought my FJ. It was lifted with bigger tires, ARB bumper w/winch, TJM rear tire carrier, etc., etc. I loved the vehicle but the lack of power always bugged me. After more than a few modifications to the FJ I don't miss the 80 at all. There's nowhere I could go in the 80 that I can't go in the FJ, and maybe some places I can go in the FJ that I couldn't in the 80. There's also nearly as much aftermarket stuff available for the FJ as there is for the 80, which is a real plus as far as I'm concerned. As far as durability, how rugged the FJ is remains to be seen; and as you said, the 80's are built like tanks. I certainly wouldn't presume to tell you what to do, but I'm awfully happy with the decision I made.
If you go to the history of the land cruiser; Toyota Land Cruiser History
Enter the site, and in the flash pages eventually find the 'Through Time' tab you'll see that Toyota includes the FJ in the evolution of the Land Cruiser......So it seems that even Toyota considers it an LC of some sort!
Quote:
medic0203 previously said:
So just out of curiosity, what do all you guys think... Should the FJ have taken the Land Cruiser nomenclature as the original land cruiser was made to do what the FJ was made to do too. I always thought after the FJ 60 series they catered the land cruiser here in the US to the lux crowd w/o keeping one as the off road capable one. The 80 came back a little with the lockers and coil sprung straight axles, but I just can't go on with the 100 series being "related" to the FJ 40... It just ain't right
I'm not getting into the who LC debate. Your talking about two totally different price ranges.
One is around 10k with over 100k
The other is around 28k-30k with no miles. Both wheel really well. If I wanted the most I could get out of my money I'd buy a locked 97 80. If money was not an issue I'd buy a FJC, better milage, traction contol, new.
__________________
Marshall Shepherd
Vice President Upstate Cruisers
Upstate of SC
Just came back from dealer myself looking to trade in FJ Cruiser for a
97 80 series. I think the fact that someone would want to trade in a brand
new truck under warranty for a used without should answer your question.
Worst move I ever made getting rid of my 80. Hate myself for that.
Rest in peace little buddies
"No man stands taller than when he kneels to help the fallen".
Linear Mode
