Toyota FJ Cruiser Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
477 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Interesting to compare Wrangler to FJ. See IIHS.ORG

But, Hey, we've had 3 Wranglers and never been t-boned, so stop being so paranoid, plus, the kids look cool with mom in the Wrangler cruising through traffic with the top down and doors off, waving and laughing at the couped up FJers on a sunny afternoon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
Wow!!! That's really eye-opening about the safety differences.

Wrangler can match the FJC only in a frontal crash. FJC is rated significantly better in all other categories.

I was seriously considering a Rubicon before I got the FJC....glad I went with the Toyota.:clap:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,720 Posts
Wow!!! That's really eye-opening about the safety differences. FJC is rated significantly better in all other categories.
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
477 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
To Airbag or Not to Airbag - JeepForum.com
Here are the basics to understand. Side air bags are nice, but in a body on frame vehicle are not nearly as necessary as in a unibody vehicle. The JK has a thick boxed frame and if a car hits you in teh side, the frame is there to protect you. The doors are extra protection and they even have steel beam support for side impact. All of that, plus the fact that Jk's sit much higher than other cars, make the air bags of very little use. They would protect your upper body and head, in other words you would have to be hit by a big vehicle for them to be critically needed.

You could argue that a side impact in a JK (or CJ or YJ or TJ) with the doors off gives you equal or only slightly less protection than a Cherokee or Grand Cherokee (unibody)

Now in a rollover, side air bags could help if the roll bars crushed in toward your head, but I belive even those are strong enough not to collapse.

So wear your seat belt and do not worry. IF you want the bags for extra protection, fine, but realize you have a big boxy frame protecting you from side impacts.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,394 Posts
You could always wear a helmet. LOL I would rather crash in my FJ but if either caught on fire after an accident I would rather be in the jeep.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
393 Posts
To Airbag or Not to Airbag - JeepForum.com
Here are the basics to understand. Side air bags are nice, but in a body on frame vehicle are not nearly as necessary as in a unibody vehicle. The JK has a thick boxed frame and if a car hits you in teh side, the frame is there to protect you. The doors are extra protection and they even have steel beam support for side impact.
Wrong.

Unibody construction is much stronger in side impact than body-on-frame. The reasons are:

- In a unibody construction, the load-bearing frame (and safety cage) is on the OUTSIDE of the vehicle, with door frames and pillars being an integral part of the structure. The impact in distributed over a large number of structurally sound member, especially the door sill and B-pillar, which are the first line of defense.

- In a body-on-frame there is basically nothing to absorb the impact between you and the incoming vehicle. All you have there is thin, lightweight exterior body members that are not designed to carry any substantial load. The structural load-bearing members (frame) are below the floor, and about two feet inboard from the side of the vehicle.

In a body-on-frame vehicle, if a car hits from a side, the bumper will push the door in and hit you BEFORE it reaches the frame, which is located more-or-less under the center of your sit.

This is why Toyota uses high-strength steel in the safety cage of the body, not in the frame. If you look at the Service Manual of the FJ in the chapter that explains its structure you will see that Toyota has build a high tensile strength steel cage around the body very much like you would have one in a unibody vehicle, in spite of being a body-on-frame vehicle. The safety cage in the FJ is not even structurally bound to the load-bearing frame.

Side airbags in a Jeep are of little help. Even if the air bags deployed, the overall displacement of the doors and door pillars is so big that it would cause serious torso injuries.

It's a similar reason why Land Rover discontinued the Defender in the US. US law requires front airbags and Defender's firewall is too weak to support them adequately.

In simple terms - in a unibody vehicle you sit INSIDE a safety cage, in a body-on-frame vehicle you sit ON TOP OF the frame, with very little structure around you to protect you in case of an accident (side impact or rollover).
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
477 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
katekebo, Thanks for your insight regarding the post from the Wrangler owner.
Your statement 'side airbags are of little help in a Jeep'(Wrangler) is also something I considered when deciding between another Wrangler and the FJ. Perhaps this is why Chrysler chose not to demand a Wrangler with the optional seat mounted side airbags be tested? Maybe it wouldn't have made a major difference. Anyway, we are left to speculate as other manufacturers have worked with IIHS to have a newer or differently configured vehicle tested after one received a bad score.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top