2012 unlimited or Toyota fj

[Corey]

JPK, there is not enough interest in solid axles from Toyota for the US market, this has been hashed out on countless forums.
Not even the flagship Land Cruiser has a solid axle for the US market, only overseas can you still get a front solid axle on a Toyota.

The average person does not take their rig rock crawling.
And most who do end up in the sport of rock crawling build trailer queens that can not be driven to a course, but trailered there.
It all depends on what you want to do with the rig.

As was mentioned earlier in this thread, the FJ will win hands down for on road comfort.
Admit it, most are going to rack up miles driving either the Rubicon or FJ Cruiser to work, the mall, or the occasional trail or camping spot on the weekends.
They are not going to be using the rig full time rock crawling.

Miss FJ's rig did not stay stock for long though, she SAS'd it.
http://www.fjcruiserforums.com/forums/4x4-off-road-tech/29771-missfjs-project-sfa.html

But then she married one of the FJ Cruiser Trail Team guides too who went around the US showing how the FJ Cruisers worked off road.
That was how they advertised them back in 2006, no TV ads, just word of mouth and live demos from the four Trail Teams that went around the US back then.

I am on my 4th Toyota now since '86, and not a problem with any of them except for the '91 4Runner I traded in on the FJ.
The 3.0 engine had issues with blowing head gaskets, and my engine had been replaced by Toyota for free with the previous owner, but it started to go amongst valve issues, and I was not going to sink the money into a tired rig.

The FJ Cruiser came along at a perfect time for me.

The reliability of the FJ Cruiser should be just as good as the 4Runner or the overseas Land Cruiser Prado since they share the same frame and many major suspension components.
Took delivery of mine July 24th 2006, and it has not been in the shop except for routine oil changes and one spark plug change at 30K.
No bulbs have burned out yet either

 

[imagrsmnky]

If memory serves I believe the respective manufacturers of both of these vehicles took more or less stock examples out and successfully negotiated the Rubicon Trail. I'd argue that establishes that both vehicles have a level of trail performance that is suitable for the vast majority of what most of us here would consider "expedition travel." Most of us are not here for serious rock crawling, a domain where I suspect most would agree the JK is going to come out on top.

Does the JK offer more off road performance oriented features (front locker, sway bar disconnects, greater articulation ...)? Clearly it does. Do you need those features for the type of travel and trails you anticipate? Only the buyer can answer that question.

Does the FJ with it's IFS offer the potential for a more comfortable day to day drive on the streets where many of us spend the vast majority of our time driving? Probably the case. Do you value the history of reliability that Toyota has established over the years? Again, these are tradeoffs that the buyer needs to make based on their priorities.

There is no universal right or wrong answer here. Both are highly capable vehicles off road. I suspect that within the realm of the typical trails travelled by folks here on ExPo, there are few situations where either of these vehicles wouldn't get you where you want to go.
JPK

this is basicly what I was trying to convey. Thanks

As for the videos.. its hard to compare a stock vehicle not outfitted with an idiot and a modified vehicle with one. I have seen many vehicles stock to very modified doomed from poor driving.

 

[K2ZJ]

Stone stock FJ Cruiser on Hells Gate in Moab.
Even the tires are stock.

Same place a Jeep flipped.

Granted it has a lot to do with spotting, but the FJ was designed to tackle this stuff right off the show room floor with stock tires.

Personally I am biased towards the FJ, not because I drive one, but because of the reliability that goes into Toyota, and less trips to the dealer for warranty work.

First, that is a silly video for a comparison. Second, can show me where your warranty comparison comes from. It should be on a % of vehicles sold, not on # of warranty items as I am sure there are more JKs on the road than FJs.

 

[toylandcruiser]

Man what a bunch of whining little girls. Especially the jeep crowd. Toyota will be leaps and bounds above a jeep in reliability. Awesome the jeep has a solid axle. Rock on. But that's all it has going for it. Buy whatever fits you better. If the jeep works then get it, if it's the fj then get that one. All these posts do is get people in defensive mode. I'll drive my 6000 dollar Unimog that will destroy both off road and be way more reliable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[imagrsmnky]

Corey,

It wasn't so much the poor spotting in the Jeep video, it was the moron for a driver who gunned it to flip it over. For a more representative look at Jeeps' performance on Hell's Gate, take a look at the next video that pops up at the conclusion, the AEV Jeep on Hell's Gate. I think the driver is sipping his cofee and chomping on his Egg McMuffin on the way up...

Yeah, the Toyota appears stock, and there a tons of video of stock Jeeps on Hell's Gate too.

In the Toyota video there is a moment when the FJ clears the top that reveals the limitations of the FJ's and the advantages of the Jeep. When the FJ clears the top, the crowd errupts clapping and cheering, the crowd was excited. When a Jeep clears the top no one errupts clapping and cheering, might be a wave, a nod, or a muted "well done" but it is so ordinary course that it is unremarkable. Its why the black (Jeep) tire marks are so bold.

Go the Toyota website for the FJ and take a look at the photo of the FJ on Hell's Gate. Three friggin' tires on the ground. Almost no articulation. You gotta be kidding!

If the FJ was designed for more than mild off road terrain from the get go, it would have solid axles front and rear, just like the Toyotas that ARE designed for off road. And like Jeeps and Land Rovers which are also designed for off road.

But in any event, the slick rock stuff is for the most part thrilling but not actually challenging, which is why it is so much fun. On that climb there are no approach or departure issues, no breakover issues, not much articulation issue with a decent spotter.

On reliability, so far so good for our Jeeps. One trip to the dealer for a minor recall issue and only one tail light bulb in a combined 50k miles. But it would be hard to bet against the Toyota for long term reliability/ resistance to wear and tear - but based on the track record of other than FJ trucks.

JPK

I commend your brand loyalty, its is good to see. I to am partial to jeeps (I have a few myself). But having seen both the FJC and the JKU in multiple wheeling situations i believe the FJ is still a formidable opponent. The jeep is more capable but the FJs went everywhere the jeeps did with no more damage. But then again maybe the FJs had more experienced drivers.

This debate could continue forever.

 

[imagrsmnky]

The average person does not take their rig rock crawling.
And most who do end up in the sport of rock crawling build trailer queens that can not be driven to a course, but trailered there.
It all depends on what you want to do with the rig.

Actually I would say 70% of Rubicon trail users drive to and from the trail.

 

[jeep-N-montero]

If it makes you feel better about your FJ, 3 years ago I watched a bone stock mid-90's Isuzu Trooper do all of Hell's Revenge including Hell's Gate....And where are the Youtube videos of that dude driving his Crown Victoria all over Hell's Revenge, here they are....enjoy!! http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=crown+victoria+hells+revenge&aq=f

And I would wager to say that 80-90% of JK owners drive their rig to the trail head, as they are easier to live with on bigger tires and the like. I would also wager that at least 70% of JK owners have their Jeep as a second or 3rd vehicle, whereas the FJC is the primary vehicle for most of its buyers. Education brings wealth, wealth buys multiple vehicles, so this leads me to believe that the JK buyers are making very educated buying decisions....just maybe?

 

[cnynrat]

And I would wager to say that 80-90% of JK owners drive their rig to the trail head, as they are easier to live with on bigger tires and the like. I would also wager that at least 70% of JK owners have their Jeep as a second or 3rd vehicle, whereas the FJC is the primary vehicle for most of its buyers. Education brings wealth, wealth buys multiple vehicles, so this leads me to believe that the JK buyers are making very educated buying decisions....just maybe?

So you are trying to say that JK owners are smarter than FJC owners?

Just maybe ... This is a complete fabrication on your part.

Show me some data. Here's one data point for you to start with: Our FJC is a third vehicle for us.

 

[Topgun514]

Being a Jeep guy my whole life, I would definetly go JK on this but thats only because you are going against an FJ.

FJ's will have a much better ride quality on road and be quieter as well. You will have more blind spots in an FJ and your field of view is like a bad pair of glacier glasses while in a neck brace. The older style Land Cruiser in the 90's would be a better choice I believe for both options though, but if you would like a newer vehicle, then my opinion does not help.

The JK will be reliable and easier to manipulate for offroad use. The FJ is awesome, and I do love the look of them though, for the average overlander, it will exceed the JK in comfort probably due to IFS. The only bad thing though is IFS, which will be worn down quicker and needs replacement parts that are much more expensive.

The JK is awesome, roomy, and for a fully solid axle vehicle, very cozy. It is no cadillac but not too far off being made by Jeeps "road standards."

The JK will require a lower cost of maintenance from what I have heard but have no personal experience with either. The JK also has all the aftermarket support in the world. If I had 40K to spend on a vehicle, I would personally get a Tacoma probably and get some weight in the bed (Set up like Curts), or the JK.

If I had 40K to spend I would do a lot of things though, college loans would be the first though.

Summary, of the 2 choices, the JK wins out. Of many choices though, other vehicles would be a better pick maybe- coming from a loving Jeep guy who would love a 4door wrangler!!!

 

[JPK]

JPK, there is not enough interest in solid axles from Toyota for the US market, this has been hashed out on countless forums.
Not even the flagship Land Cruiser has a solid axle for the US market, only overseas can you still get a front solid axle on a Toyota.

The average person does not take their rig rock crawling.
And most who do end up in the sport of rock crawling build trailer queens that can not be driven to a course, but trailered there.
It all depends on what you want to do with the rig.

As was mentioned earlier in this thread, the FJ will win hands down for on road comfort.
Admit it, most are going to rack up miles driving either the Rubicon or FJ Cruiser to work, the mall, or the occasional trail or camping spot on the weekends.
They are not going to be using the rig full time rock crawling.

Miss FJ's rig did not stay stock for long though, she SAS'd it.
http://www.fjcruiserforums.com/forums/4x4-off-road-tech/29771-missfjs-project-sfa.html

But then she married one of the FJ Cruiser Trail Team guides too who went around the US showing how the FJ Cruisers worked off road.
That was how they advertised them back in 2006, no TV ads, just word of mouth and live demos from the four Trail Teams that went around the US back then.

I am on my 4th Toyota now since '86, and not a problem with any of them except for the '91 4Runner I traded in on the FJ.
The 3.0 engine had issues with blowing head gaskets, and my engine had been replaced by Toyota for free with the previous owner, but it started to go amongst valve issues, and I was not going to sink the money into a tired rig.

The FJ Cruiser came along at a perfect time for me.

The reliability of the FJ Cruiser should be just as good as the 4Runner or the overseas Land Cruiser Prado since they share the same frame and many major suspension components.
Took delivery of mine July 24th 2006, and it has not been in the shop except for routine oil changes and one spark plug change at 30K.
No bulbs have burned out yet either

The average person doesn't rock crawl - because their vehicle isn't capable of doing it! But then there are Jeep owners:exclaim:

While a majority of Jeep owners won't ever take their Jeeps into the rocks, a remarkable number do, especially when compared to other marks' owners, but then, that is because Jeeps are capable right from the dealers.:victory:

I have to disagree regarding the % of Jeep owners that rock crawl and still have road worthy Jeeps. Unlike an FJ, a JK is easy to build into a very capable off road rig, including rocks, and still maintain even DD capability. With a JK, you can even do it with bolt on components. Not so with the FJ.:Wow1:

And again, I have to say that my AEV suspension provides a ride better than my wife's Range Rover Sport, which is ALL independent, than my Suburban, which is IFS. It also rides better than my wife's nearly stock JKU too.

OK, so if you want to debate Jeep reliability, then lets throw in my '06 LJ, with no trouble ever in the five years I owned it, and the three other Jeeps, all Cherokees, with no issues that I can recall. The only two Jeeps that ever gave me trouble were old and beat when I got them, a '74 CJ and an old Wagoneer.:smiley_drive:

That thing you show in the photo in your post does more to prove my point than yours. It has an FJ body and... What else? Oh yeah, a solid front axle with coils... Hmm, a Jeep front end! Gee, why go to that much trouble? Oh, that's right, to make it capbale off road. Like a Jeep!:bowdown:

I don't believe that it is a lack of demand for a solid axle Toyota in this country. If Toyota could bring in the current 70 series, 78 and 79 iirc, with the coil front and leaves in the rear, they would sell a ton I think. The problem is with our government and the silly over regulation. The diesel can't be imported and the crap that would have to go into it and onto it to make it legal would need to be added. Too damned bad...:safari-rig:

But don't feel too bad about your FJ.:sombrero:

JPK
(I do hope everyone takes this post in the spirit it is meant..., )

 

[cnynrat]

OK, so if you want to debate Jeep reliability, then lets throw in my '06 LJ, with no trouble ever in the five years I owned it, and the three other Jeeps, all Cherokees, with no issues that I can recall. The only two Jeeps that ever gave me trouble were old and beat when I got them, a '74 CJ and an old Wagoneer.:smiley_drive:

From another thread here on ExPo:
Oil Pump Failed and Destroyed 2005 Wrangler Engine

To be clear, I don't think either of these anecdotes serve to support a conclusion, positive or negative, about the reliability of Jeep's products. Reliability is about statistics, and requires large samples evaluated over a period of time in order to reach valid conclusions.

The FJC has a well known problem with inner fender wall deformation. The fact that my FJC doesn't exhibit this symptom isn't sufficient reason to argue the problem doesn't exist. For the same reason, one's experience with a small number of Jeeps, positive or negative, is not sufficient basis for reaching a conclusion about the typical reliability of those vehicles.

 

[JPK]

From another thread here on ExPo:
Oil Pump Failed and Destroyed 2005 Wrangler Engine

To be clear, I don't think either of these anecdotes serve to support a conclusion, positive or negative, about the reliability of Jeep's products. Reliability is about statistics, and requires large samples evaluated over a period of time in order to reach valid conclusions.

The FJC has a well known problem with inner fender wall deformation. The fact that my FJC doesn't exhibit this symptom isn't sufficient reason to argue the problem doesn't exist. For the same reason, one's experience with a small number of Jeeps, positive or negative, is not sufficient basis for reaching a conclusion about the typical reliability of those vehicles.

I saw that thread. Odd and unfortunate too since the 4.0 has a tremendous reputation for trouble free service and longevity.

Yeah ancedotes don't mean much, but with over 400k trouble free miles with six different Jeeps, its more than ancedotal.

JPK

 

[cnynrat]

J

Yeah ancedotes don't mean much, but with over 400k trouble free miles with six different Jeeps, its more than anecdotal.

JPK

Sorry, but your experience is the very definition of anecdotal.

There were 603,303 Jeep TJ/LJ jeeps sold from 1996-2006. Assume they each are driven an average of 15,000 miles per year. That means they accumulate a total of 9 billion miles per year. Your total of 400,000 miles represents, 0.0044% of the total miles accumulated per year. So, even if you drove your Jeeps 400,000 miles in a single year it would still represent a tiny, tiny fraction of the annual miles driven by just this one model in a single year.

More realistically, assume your 400,000 total miles was accumulated over the 10 year production run of the TJ/LJ model. In that case your total mileage would represent 0.0004% of the total miles driven on these Jeeps.

I am really happy you have had a great experience with the Jeeps you've owned over the years. Nevertheless, your experience is in reality anecdotal, and you can't use that limited sample size to support any meaningful conclusion about the overall reliability of Jeep's products.

 

[jeep-N-montero]

Now this thread is just entertaining....

 

[Bennyhana]

Now this thread is just entertaining....

And the OP probably gave up and bought a Disco anyways.....