Toyota FJ Cruiser Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Anyone have a clue on what the performance specs will be like?

Such as:

0-60 times
60-0 times
1/4 mile times
top speed
slalom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Here are the specs i've seen. From Inside Line's full test of the rig!!


Vehicle Top
Model Year: 2007
Make: Toyota
Model: FJ Cruiser
Style: SUV
Base Price: Not Available
Price as Tested: Not Available
Drive Type: Four-wheel drive
Transmission Type: Five-speed auto
Displacement (liters): 4.0
Engine Type: V6
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 239 @ 5,200
Torque (ft-lbs @ rpm): 278 @ 3,700
Braking System: Ventilated disc
Steering System: Power-assisted rack-and-pinion
Suspension Type (front): Double A-arm, coil springs
Suspension Type (rear): Four-link, solid axle with Panhard rod
Tire Size (front): P265/70SR17
Tire Size (rear): P265/70SR17
Tire Brand: Bridgestone
Tire Model: Duehler H/T
Curb Weight (lbs): 4295
Recommended Fuel: 91-octane unleaded
Fuel Tank Capacity (gal): 19
EPA Fuel Economy (mpg): 17 City 21 Highway
Edmunds Observed (mpg): 15.7

Conditions for Testing Top
Temperature (Fahrenheit): 82
Humidity: 15%
Elevation (ft): 1050
Wind: 0

Performance Top
0 - 30 (sec): 2.8
0 - 45 (sec): 5.0
0 - 60 (sec): 7.8
0 - 75 (sec): 11.9
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 15.64 @ 86.91
30 - 0 (ft): 30.25
60 - 0 (ft): 126.6
Braking Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Good
Slalom (mph): 56.4
Turning Circle (ft), curb-to-curb: .69
Handling Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Good
Db @ Idle: 45
Db @ Full Throttle: 71
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 69
Acceleration: All runs performed in "drive" with no manual shifting.
Braking: No ABS noise. Plenty of pitch and dive at full ABS activation.
Handling: Heavy VDIM activation, and no "off" switch direction was an issue in getting quick times. Directional control was difficult with VDIM activation on front brakes at this speed. Resulted in severe understeer.

Specifications Top
Length: 183.9 in.
Width: 74.6 in.
Height: 71.6 in.
Wheelbase: 105.9 in.
Legroom (front): 41.9 in.
Legroom (rear): 31.3 in.
Headroom (front): 41.3 in.
Headroom (rear): 40.3 in.
Maximum Seating Capacity: 5
Cargo Volume: 27.9 cubic feet
Maximum Cargo Volume (rear seats down): 66.8 cubic feet

Warranty Information Top
Bumper-to-Bumper: 3 years/36,000 miles
Power Train: 5 years/60,000 miles
Corrosion: 5 years/unlimited miles
Roadside Assistance: Not available
Scheduled Maintenance: Not available

Safety Information Top
Front Airbags: Standard
Side Airbags: Optional
Head Airbags: Not Available
Antilock Brakes: Standard
Electronic Brake Enhancements: Optional
Traction Control: Optional
Stability Control: Standard
Rollover Protection: Not Available
Emergency Assistance System: Not Available
NHTSA Crash Test Driver: Not Available
NHTSA Crash Test Passenger: Not Available
NHTSA Crash Test Side Front: Not Available
NHTSA Crash Test Side Rear: Not Available
NHTSA Rollover: Not Available
IIHS Offset: Not Available
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks Elwood. That's exactly what I was looking for. I know the FJ isn't a sports car, but I appreciate some UMPH!!! Heck, if the '06 XTERRA can put out some impressive numbers, I'm sure other SUV's will too.

The performance doesn't look too bad, especially at what price range the FJC is geared towards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
the acceleration numbers are pretty similar to the Xterra and a fully loaded FJ comes in at close to $2000 less than an Off road package Xterra...of course that's before discounts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Elwood said:
the acceleration numbers are pretty similar to the Xterra and a fully loaded FJ comes in at close to $2000 less than an Off road package Xterra...of course that's before discounts.

Even more music to my ears. I'm guessing the 6-speed should be just a tad faster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
982 Posts
HamsFJ said:
Even more music to my ears. I'm guessing the 6-speed should be just a tad faster.
Hmmm. the manual tranny is Full-Time 4WD, so I would think it might be a tad slower than the 4WD automatic. But I don't think it will be significant and I don't think that's the 'value proposition' of this truck. It's actually to go get dirty, and that's (usually) at lower speeds where massive acceleration isn't necesary. That's what you get a Porsche 911 for....lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I forgot about the full-time 4WD. It probably will be slower than the auto then.

A 911 sounds good. Or a CL65.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
963 Posts
JohnGalt said:
Hmmm. the manual tranny is Full-Time 4WD, so I would think it might be a tad slower than the 4WD automatic. But I don't think it will be significant and I don't think that's the 'value proposition' of this truck. It's actually to go get dirty, and that's (usually) at lower speeds where massive acceleration isn't necesary. That's what you get a Porsche 911 for....lol
4wd should actually give better performance numbers. In 2wd mode on the Auto, the front is just adding drag thus slowing you down. In 4wd mode the front and rear is powered so there's no drag on either (other than drivetrain drag which ails any vehicle with a transmission). This is why cars like the Mitsubishi EVO and Subaru WRX have such good accelleration numbers because they use AWD which just grips instead of possible rear wheel slipping and extra drag of unpowered wheels.

Of course, on the FJ we're probably not talking very much improvement but I would hazard a guess that in 4WD mode the numbers would be slightly better.

- LC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Yet again, I'm guessing the 6-spd will be a tad faster. Plus, the clutch will let you launch it at a higher RPM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Elwood said:
'96-'98 911 C4S would be the car I have lost sleep over. I will have one...I must!
Don't forget the 3.6 Turbo like the one in the original Bad Boys movie. The new '06 Turbos don't look bad. Porsche did away with the Boxster front headlights ( thank goodness ) and looks the way it's supposed to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Nothing will ever compare to the 993 body style...a true classic. obviously the turbo would be fantastic, but in reality someday I might be able to afford a C4S but a turbo will be a stretch for a long long time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
The "First Test" of the FJ from Motor Trend's Febuary Issue yielded these performace specs for the AT
0-30 2.5 sec
0-40 3.9
0-50 5.7
0-60 7.6
0-70 10.3
0-80 13.6
0-90 17.7
Passing, 45-65 4.0 sec
Quarter Mile 15.9 @ 86.1
Braking, 60-0 130 ft
600-ft Slalom 55.7 mph avg
Lateral Acceleration .71 g avg
MT Figure Eight 29.5 sec @ .55g avg
Top-Gear Revs @ 60 mph 1750 rpm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,874 Posts
I'm bettin' I can beat those figures. I know they use some race drivers, but it's the insanity factor they leave off. I'm pretty crazy so I am certain that I can top those 0-60 times. Mine will be a manual though so who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,537 Posts
Percy said:
I'm bettin' I can beat those figures. I know they use some race drivers, but it's the insanity factor they leave off. I'm pretty crazy so I am certain that I can top those 0-60 times. Mine will be a manual though so who knows.
I got a myself more then a couple washingtons saying not
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,874 Posts
Rooster, give me a month after I get this bad boy and I'll see what I can do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
963 Posts
HamsFJ said:
Yet again, I'm guessing the 6-spd will be a tad faster. Plus, the clutch will let you launch it at a higher RPM.
Launch maybe but in the end an auto is better for accelleration since there's no manual clutch-shift-clutch-gas that requires you to be quick on the feet. The auto still has a tiny bit of lag but it will always shift faster than a manual in the end by a tiny bit. It also depends on the torque converter as well, and the shift points.

It's just the launch that kills it.

- LC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Percy said:
I'm bettin' I can beat those figures. I know they use some race drivers, but it's the insanity factor they leave off. I'm pretty crazy so I am certain that I can top those 0-60 times. Mine will be a manual though so who knows.

I also have some Washingtons that don't think you can do it. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
I'm going with Percy on this one, never underestimate a crazy who has been waiting for his rig for 3 years. However Percy, the skid pad test doesn't count if do 60-0 in 49 ft while trying to test how strong your new ARB is. (unless you are testing the ARB on an H3, then we will count it)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,874 Posts
Gnzo said:
I'm going with Percy on this one, never underestimate a crazy who has been waiting for his rig for 3 years. However Percy, the skid pad test doesn't count if do 60-0 in 49 ft while trying to test how strong your new ARB is. (unless you are testing the ARB on an H3, then we will count it)
I was talking accelleration alone. Every nut-less automatic I have ever driven could be spanked rudely by it's manual counterpart. I would bet the FJ is no different. Those tests were all done in the Automatic. So, I would bet 0-60 and 1/4 mile times to be a tad better in the manual. Especially first thing in the morning after a starbucks....

:cool:
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top