Toyota FJ Cruiser Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have read/heard a few comments here and there about how some think the new FJC does not stack up against the old school FJ40s very well. So I did a little research and looked up the original specs for the FJ40s on TLC4x4.com. I then bounced them against the specs listed on the toyota.com website for the FJC. I found it interesting how well it in fact does stack up against the old FJ40s (both have strengths and weakness when compared to one another). I only included stats I could directly compare between the two websites and didn't even go into road manners, creature comforts, lockers, ATRAC, etc. I couldnt find any info on the original MSRP of the FJ40s but would be curious how it would compare in 2008 dollars to the FJC's price tag of 22-24K.

Now before anyone flames me to bad, I have a TON of respect for the old FJ40s with thier legendary off road ability, toughness and time-less styling. This was a major reason why I looked into getting a FJC in the first place. I just thought it would be neat to do a comparison of the two.

Engine
Inline 6 cyl. 3.9 Liter F (1960-74), 4.2 Liter (1975-83), (FJC - 4.0 DOHC)

Fuel System
Carbureted (FJC - Toyota Direct Injection)

Horsepower
125 @ 3600 rpm (1960-74), 135 @ 3600 rpm (1975-83), (FJC - 239 @ 5200 rpm)

Torque
209 ft-lbs. @ 2000 rpm (1960-74) , 210 @ 1800 rpm (1975-83), (FJC - 278 ft-lbs. @ 3700 rpm)

Transmission
3-Speed (1960-73); 4-Speed (1974-83), (FJC - 5 speed auto, 6 speed manual)

Wheelbase
90 in., (FJC - 105.9)

Length
152.4 in., (FJC - 183.9)

Width
65.6 in., (FJC - 74.6)

Height
76.8 in., (FJC - 72)

Track, F/R
55.3/55.1 in., (FJC - 63.2/63.6)

Towing Capacity
3000 lbs., (FJC - 5000 lbs)

Suspension
Semi-Elliptical Leaf Springs, (FJC - coils)

Brakes, F/R
Hydraulic 4 Wheel Drums, Power Front Disc (Nov. 1975-83), (FJC - 4 piston front/2 piston rear disc brakes with ABS)

Curb Weight
3263 lbs. (FJC - 4290)

Clearance
8.3 in. (FJC - 9.6 in.)

Fuel Capacity
18.5 -> 22 gal. (FJC - 19 gal.)

MPG Estimate
11/16, (FJC - 16/20)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,479 Posts
It's too difficult to do paper comparisons. You need to wheel them both to really see the difference. With the smaller size and better visibility it's a better plat from for a trail only rig. I've not wheeled one so I'm not qualified to comment on which is better, but I know it can't be compared by stats alone as there are too many intangibles. I appreciate you compiling the stats though :).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,779 Posts
:lol:
Fuel Capacity
18.5 -> 22 gal. (FJC - 19 gal.)
Out of all the improvements we got and we still can't get a bigger gas tank? What gives? I'd like to be able to make it more than 250ish miles without having to fill up again.

Man a fre should make a commercial like the new hybrid ones. Where the hybrids just keep passing gas stations and not filling up, only show an FJ with the auxillary tank and it not having to stop to refill.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,943 Posts
And if you include both being in stock form,,,,

Not sure if Lockers (front (A-Trac:)) & rear)was a stock option back then?

Not sure if power steering was a stock option back then?

Both of these can make a big difference in certain wheeling conditions.
 

·
The Laughing Member
2007 FJ Cruiser, 2021 4Runner, 2002 Lexus SC420
Joined
·
9,119 Posts
Not sure if Lockers (front (A-Trac:)) & rear)was a stock option back then?
Not sure if power steering was a stock option back then?

Both of these can make a big difference in certain wheeling conditions.

Nope, diff lockers were not a stock (OEM) option on the FJ40. And, power steering wasn't available as an option until the last couple years of the FJ40's run ('82 and '83).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,755 Posts
if you take a stock FJ40 in any available form from dealership....and take stock FJ Cruiser in any available form directly from dealership...I am guessing the FJC will outperform due to ATrac and Locker with more ground clearance.

Be interesting if they listed wheel travel front and back as well...

Hell, if you take two of them now with similar options...locker, 6MT, same brand-design tires, same amount of lift....I dont think either is going to be a slouch on 90% of the trails. Whether some want to admit or not...the FJC is indeed a fine product to carry the torch for the FJ40. Yeah, they did not label it Landcruiser...only Crusier but I am guessing that was some marketing teams idea of "updating" its name for a new crowd more than saying it is not a Landcruiser.

I have FJ60 and consider the FJC a Landcruiser in every way.....especially after reading the intent of Toyota with this vehicle.

Any of them are great vehicles though.....wheel safe.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,364 Posts
I'm glad this thread is not taking an "us vs. them" slant in this comparison. I do love the FJ40s - and just about any old trucks for that matter. I think that the technology and age differences preclude any real direct comparison. However, if I wanted a nostalgic "blood and guts beastie" that I could cruise around in on and offroad for recreation, I would love to have an FJ40 (maybe someday...). However, I use my FJC for commuting, work, road trips, and offroad. I wouldn't trade one for the other, but would consider them complimentary and think it's great that a few forum members have both.

Here are some important data to add to this discussion. The curb weight of the FJ40 is 3263 lbs and the FJ Cruiser (w/AT) is 4050 lbs. That's quite a weight increase! :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,755 Posts
yeah a little increase....so is the daunting task of deciding A/C, AUTO, etc...to save weight. LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
I have had two FJ40's they were great ruff & tough rigs. No sissy A/C, Crank Windows, all the push & pull control knobs, that great big steering wheel, drum brakes, the remote rear heater, Armstrong Steering (manual Steering) atleast one of mine was, the other had Chevy Power Steering to go with the Chev 350 & the Turbo 400 Auto. The argument between a straight axle & independant suspension? I can say, the new FJ is much easier to drive, it doesn't change lanes when it wants to like both of my 40's did. I do miss the removable hard top, I don't miss the leaks during the winter though. My kids really like the back seat better on the new one, the 40 had opposing jump-seats. Toyota did keep the leg room-thats why I originally bought the FJ40 over a jeep, & why I bought an FJ Cruiser over a YJ. Off road, I like the fuel injection of the new one-no more stalling! I also don't understand why the fuel tank is so small on the new one, there is room under the back for more fuel! I had to add rear tanks to both of my FJ40's. I don't think the new one is any easier to get in & out of. I paid alot more for the new one, so I probably won't beat the dog snaught out of it like I did the FJ40's. I used to go wheelin, then come home, park on a hill & pressure wash the FJ40 inside & out, the interior of the FJ40 was line-x'd, it was easy to clean, but cold & noisy compared to the new one. I am probably off track from the original post, I'm just taking a trip down memory lane. I do like the comfort of the the new FJ, but miss being able to remove the top & doors & fold the windshield down on a moments notice, & being able to pick up a Chiltons guide & fix just about everything on the old FJ40, but I suppose Nowadays I take alot more stuff to the mechanic that I used to do in the driveway.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top