there's a huge article in Japan where they only bash how bad Toyota hides their mistakes. I'll find a link...but it's only in Japanese. BUT, it has numbers and everything to back it up.

and yeah, it's disappointing that the FJ Cruiser has this problem, especially since they carry the FJ name. I really wanted one after I graduate, but looks like I'll be looking at my other options more now. Gosh I love shopping for cars in my mind .

 

sounds like Toyota isn't building the upper extensions strong enough.

 

I'm not an engineer, but from what I do know about the vehicle's construction (it is basically the 4Runner platform and drivetrain with a different body/frame design), I think the problem may be coming from the fact that, like the Honda Element, Mazda RX-8, older Saturn S-series coupes, and some jump-seat crew-cab pickups, you have forward-opening rear doors that lack the added structural integrity of B-pillars. Mazda purposely designed the rear doors on the RX-8 to have a more or less built-in B-pillars in them when they close. It is possible, that Toyota simply did not do this well enough on the FJ...or give the surrounding areas of the body and frame enough extra bracing to compensate for the lack of formal B-pillars. This, of course, would be further amplified by the accumulated stresses of off-road conditions and driving over large rocks, logs, ruts, etc......which allow a lot of suspension travel and body flex, causing problems with tire rub and metal fatigue. Just one more reason why I have never liked that type of design....it can trade-off potential body integrity problems for the ease of entry/exit and loading. This is nothing new with the FJ either...we have discussed it on other vehicles in other threads.

A design like this......and its potential problems......can get past the engineers in initial design testing because the accumulated stresses of metal fatigue often don't show up for several years on the road. Even the supercomputers, which are used more and more to design vehicles these days and which project this kind of thing over time are not always accurate.

 

Sounds like a bad to worse move.

 

Nope....not by long shot. The Ridgeline has had a stellar reliablity record so far.

 

Yes, but I think the context of this discussion is durability during truck type duties like off-roading, which is not generally within the Ridgeline's best bag of tricks.

 

I agree that the Ridgeline is not quite a Land Rover or Jeep Wrangler off-road, but it can do some small-to-medium rock-crawling and cross shallow creek beds if it has to. It is not limited to just hard-pavement use.

 

no more than any other company... you can get any TSB from Toyota issued in USA, and they contain all the problems toyota's vehicles have... and TSB are usually pretty honestly written.

 

it could... didnt Edmunds blow all of their shocks on one of the easy-off road runs, in their Ridgeline long term tester?

 

I hope they take care of this the RIGHT way before the 2008 TRD comes out.

There is clearly an issue, but I do blame a lot of it on the driver. There is a technique to rock crawling and off trail riding isn’t don’t at 35mph! The idiots that think they have a bad **** 4x4 and roll at high speeds find their rigs all jacked up, it does take a skill.

 

Maybe. I didn't see that article and can't comment on the nature of the run. But you can damage the suspension with any off-roader....even an ultra-capable one like a Hummer, Mercedes Gelandewagen, or Toyota Land Cruiser...if you overextend the amount of suspension travel or hit an obstacle too hard. And you and I both know that the Ridgeline, though mildly off-road capable, is not in the same class as those vehicles.

We were originally comparing the FJ, though, to the Ridgeline. I still think that the FJ's problems (though I'm not an engineer) could be due to the rear-hinged door and lack of a B-pillar. I've seen body-flex and metal fatigue problems before in similiarly-designed vehicles in the past.....although the Mazda RX-8 and Honda Element, with the same general rear-door design, seem to be problem-free so far. The RX-8, of course, is not used off-road, and the Element, despite its rough-and tumble camping and partying image, is, like the Ridgeline, only mildly off-road rated.

 

I was looking at one this afternoon, I think it could be in the front body mounts. I did not measure it, but it almost looks like the front mounts are in a little of a bind. Road vibrations alone could cause meter fatigue let alone off road action.