Toyota FJ Cruiser Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
552 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Info thanks to http://www.edmunds.com great article

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
·
92 Posts
numbers are almost identical to the Xterra. Braking is better. A bit worried about the way the reporters really hammered stability control. However, I'll take one any way they come.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
totaleclipse02 said:
Thanks for the info!

I'm guessing since they recommended 91 octane fuel, that the hp rating is with that gas?

"With dual-overhead cams, 24 valves and VVT-i technology, the engine manages 239 horsepower at 5,200 rpm, and 278 pound-feet of torque at 3,700 rpm. Note that both numbers are based on 91-octane fuel, which isn't required but is recommended."

I guess that answers my question
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,874 Posts
Yeah, but you get more horses with the TRD sport tuned exhaust package... definitely gotta have that. I wonder if you get a bit better mileage with the exhaust package, or worse? Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,537 Posts
Percy said:
Yeah, but you get more horses with the TRD sport tuned exhaust package... definitely gotta have that. I wonder if you get a bit better mileage with the exhaust package, or worse? Any thoughts?
Like anything else the helps with hp the engine becomes more effecient. Though the likely hood you ll drive with a heavier foot. I would think about the TDR exhaust depending on the price it is the Catylatic converter that is the really choke the flow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,874 Posts
Kruiser said:
They always got the slowest 0-60 (most often 0.5~1 second slower than others)
They did say that when testing they allowed the transmission to shift for them... you could get a better time by shifting your auto, manually from D1 - D4 so that you can control the shift timing....

My time will be MUCH better.... I'll let you know as soon as it's official! If I can smoke the tires on a five ton, I can promise you better than 7.8 with the six speed and the sport tuned exhaust - now, just wait for the supercharger....

MUHUHAHAHAHHAHA.... (sorry. It slipped.).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Elwood said:
numbers are almost identical to the Xterra. Braking is better. A bit worried about the way the reporters really hammered stability control. However, I'll take one any way they come.

I don't consider 239hp vs 265hp to be identical, nor is the the cargo capacities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
I wasn't talking about horsepower and other numbers we've known for months and months. Talking about those "numbers" would be redundant now wouldn't it. Let's keep focused on things we didn't know before the article was published!!!!
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top