Sulu

The reason that Toyota is thinking about producing this new TJ Cruiser as a car-based crossover / softroader is because it seems to be the current fashion and what consumers are looking for. Consumers are NOT looking for a true, body-on-frame utility vehicle, like the 4Runner or Mercedes-Benz G-Wagen (at least not in large numbers); they are looking for small, relatively fuel-efficient but butch-looking softroaders.

There is no accounting for taste. Has no one ever seen a 2nd-generation Hyundai Sante Fe (a station wagon on stilts if there ever was one) with a bull bar? Too bad that once seen, it cannot be unseen.

KahnBB6

iTrader: (5)

^^ This is true and it's perfectly fine if only a small number of customers are looking for a rugged, body on frame SUV (and woe to anyone who desires a short wheelbase version with only two doors and a rear hatch. And a diesel engine. And a manual transmission).

However the potential issue is the TJ Cruiser being basically the same thing as a FWD, Auto, non-turbo, non-diesel Scion xB with a lift. I can totally see a place in the Toyota lineup for a small unibody micro-SUV that gets good fuel economy (turbo, turbodiesel, turbo-electric hybrid, etc) but which can also do what it's styled to look like it can do.

There are mini Japanese Kei SUVs that are better equipped for both city and light off-road use than your garden variety RAV4. The not-for-USA Suzuki Jimny (aka modern Samurai) is a popular tiny 4x4 (with a 6-speed manual option) that would theoretically be the TJ Cruiser's direct competitor... if Toyota were aiming for that as their competition.

I know I'm dreaming though. We're the only country in the world where such things do not exist. Unless they're 25+ year old imports.

If Toyota is playing upon our understanding and love of the FJ series by naming this thing "TJ" then I do hope it won't be another forgettable FWD city box that couldn't get itself out of a light dirt and rock trail in Death Valley. The right leadership is in place in the company to do it right. I hope they do. There is no reason it can't be a rugged little light off roader and efficient city vehicle.

Jeep had the right idea by importing the Fiat Panda as the Renegade and selling it in multiple AWD trim levels including a 1.4L 4 cyl turbo 6-speed manual version. The only problem is that you THINK the Renegade is a small SUV but it's actually slightly bigger than a Wrangler when you compare their dimensions. It's no compact at all and it makes a Wrangler look like the more attractive buy. And for such an urban-focused small SUV there is curiously no short wheelbase two-door version. It's much too big for what it's supposed to be.

If the TJ Cruiser can at least match the Jeep Renegade's mechanical formula but in a much smaller and much shorter chassis I think Toyota will have a winner.

Sulu

It is obvious that you do not understand the station-wagon-on-stilts / crossover-as-fashion-symbol fad that is currently happening in North America. That is understandable, as members of an automotive enthusiast forum are not the intended audience for vehicles that place useless form ahead of function. A station wagon on stilts is already taking form too far from function, in my opinion.

I do not understand why someone would buy a station wagon (on raised suspension or not) and then put a bull bar on it. That bull bar on the Santa Fe serves absolutely no purpose other than to butch-up the appearance of an otherwise non-offensive family vehicle.

I do understand, however, that there seemingly is a market for butchy-looking vehicles such as this TJ, even if the function of the vehicle is so far removed from the form of the vehicle. Vehicles like this TJ are NOT meant to be functional competitors with rough-looking Jeeps; they are meant for people who want to look rough but would only take it as far off-road as the front lawn of their house in the suburbs.

mmarshall

That, I have to agree with. The way you describe it, that type of vehicle walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, but looks like a hawk LOL.

In the American market, outside of the Jeep Wrangler, the last true compact body-on-frame SUVs capable of significant off-roading were done by Suzuki, who, of course, is now gone. (the 4Runner and FJ Cruiser were mid-sized, not compact). The Suzukis, of course, were sometimes sold under the Chevy and Geo Tracker nameplate, with the regular Suzukis known as the Sidekick, Vitara, and Grand Vitara. (yes, there was the primitive Samurai, but its excessive crudeness and dangerous handling eliminated it as a serious contender)

Torii

that bull bar is for city driving imo, ever been to asia? crazy driving.

mmarshall

That bull-bar makes the Santa Fe look like a typical Toyota front end, with its droop-face, bulldog-look.

KahnBB6

iTrader: (5)

I recognize there is such a widespread fad and the supposed reasons for it existing. I just can't wrap my head around the ridiculousness of those reasons or the fad in general.

The TJ Cruiser (so far just the concept) doesn't at all give me the impression that it would compete with a Jeep Wrangler which is a much more serious off-road vehicle with huge aftermarket support. My idealistic pie in the sky musings for the TJ just pitted a hypothetical "good" version (which I doubt Toyota was even remotely considering) against the Suzuki Jimny (aka Samurai) kei SUV or maybe the Jeep Renegade. Neither of those are anywhere near in the same class as a Wrangler, 4Runner, FJ70, FJ80, G-Wagen, etc.

At the very least I'd love to see Toyota employ some of their subsidiary Daihatsu's knowhow in the kei car market to the TJ cruiser for at least an AWD system. I wouldn't dare expect this concept to be able to rock crawl but if equipped for dirt trails I'd expect it to at least be as capable as the old 1983-1985(?) Tercel SR-5 4WD wagon (or its competitor the 1988-1992 Honda Civic Wagon AWD 6-speed) was. That's the class and capability of "ruggedness" I expect from a little compact SUV-ish thing called a "TJ Cruiser". And that would be a fine bar for it to match while also offering good city and highway fuel economy.

But of course this thing will probably just be a FWD-only city thing which will get a manual transmission option if we're exceptionally lucky.

^^ Yes. I tried to recall any other true compact SUV offerings and only the Suzuki Samurai and Suzuki Sidekick come to mind. There was also the cute-tiny Suzuki X-90 (which was AWD?) but I don't think that was meant for even dirt roads.

Toyota does need a proper replacement for the FJ Cruiser or at least a more back to basics variant of the current land barge Land Cruiser but I'd never expect this concept vehicle to fill those heavy duty shoes.

Aron9000

What Toyota needs is a back to basics, no bull****, 4wd vehicle that can compete directly with the Wrangler. Base it on the Hilux, Tacoma or Land Cruiser 70 platform, make it look like a vintage FJ40, give it great visibility like the Jeep, make it in 2 door, 4 door, hard top, soft top, crank windows, vinyl floor hose out version, price a luxury leather, soundproofed, heated seat model about 10-15k more than the base hose out version, like the Wrangler.

I damn well bet you people would buy a Toyota Jeep. Vintage Land Cruisers are red hot and very pricey for a good one now days. Come on Toyota, cash in on the back to basics trend, all your 4wd vehicles now days(at least in the US market) are too big, too complex, and too expensive. IMO its bull**** you charge 32k for a basic 4wd V6 Tacoma.

mmarshall

Daihatsu did (briefly) offer the body-on-frame Rocky in the American market, but it was not successful. The company itself did not stay very long.

I think the main problem, today, is that, aside from a few dedicated off-roaders, most of the public just isn't being SUVs any more for that purpose......today, they are mainly all-weather suburban station-wagons.


Thanks for bringing up the X90...... I had forgotten that one when I mentioned the other Suzukis. Yes, it was AWD...actually a true off-road 4WD. I used to give the X90 the nickname "Off-Road Miata".

KahnBB6

iTrader: (5)

^^ Yes. I have seen one of these in L.A. in the last couple of years. I figured it was a Canadian or 25 year import but lo and behold it was an original U.S. spec model. Good small SUV's, those old Daihatsu Rocky's.

In Japan, Suzuki is more well known for their AWD kei cars such as their sporty Alto Works hatches but I think Daihatsu offers AWD kei's as well. The more I think about it since the TJ Cruiser will not be close to the size of a kei chassis and probably closer to a Kia Soul in size it will utilize larger, more conventional Toyota AWD hardware modified from their passenger car line... although they did say many times in the concept vehicle reveal for the press that it is intended to have a true 4WD system. I would not expect there to be a dedicated transfer case however.

It's the shape that is throwing me off and making me think this will be a very compact and very car-based model that would negate a transfer case as a possibility.

^^ Absolutely. And as such, there is a sea of mostly useless (if FWD only) land barges with very high centers of gravity that make the true land barges of yesteryear seem appealing by comparison

Actual all weather station wagons like the Subaru Forester, Outbacks and Audi Allroad are totally perfect because they recall the excellent groundwork laid by the 4WD AMC Eagle wagons and 80's Audi Quattro wagons. But these are far and few between.

Even normal wagons are rarely offered when three nearly identical and equally middling SUVs are filling up inventories. I have recently read that midsize sedans are on the decline. I can't imagine not being able to buy a normal sedan when a coupe is not available or desired.

Were they really that good? I know the Samurai very well and even the Sidekick was okay even if it didn't replace its predecessor but the little X-90 always seemed like a good stylish personal mini SUV. True 4WD in that little thing is so cool!

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

please try to be more respectful and avoid starting posts like this going forward... maybe instead "have you considered..."

call them what you will but it's not just fashion/fad. have you considered that people buy crossovers for the higher seating position that's easier to get in and out of? because probably the vast majority of consumers in north america are out of shape and over weight? or the ease of putting shopping and stuff in the back vs. a trunk, and the flexibility of folding seats flat with full width and height opening so MUCH larger objects can be transported, including furniture, dogs, etc.?

it is the 'utility', comfort (ingress/egress), and high seating position that drive suv/cuv sales, not just a fad. it was started en masse with the ford explorer, and now everyone's on the bandwagon, including porsche (who would have thought ), jaguar - can a ferrari ute be far behind?

no different than people who put fancy rims, lift kits, air suspensions, stickers, tint, additional lights, or any of a million other mods. may not be for you. but then not everyone wants a hybrid either and many don't understand why anyone would.

probably so... just like i'd never take my grand cherokee off road in the wilderness where it would get dinged and scratched.

i agree with this.

mmarshall

No question about it....like the original Mini-Cooper of 1959, The Eagle was 15-20 years ahead of its time. Its Achilles heel, though, was the poor AMC build-quality. But, nonetheless, it set the stage for what would become a huge part of the industry in later years.


Actually, I thought the X-90 was quite awkward looking. I gave it the nickname I did (Off-Road Miata) because of its 2-seat nature, semi-open top for fun in the sun, and off-road capability.