Toyota TJ Cruiser. Build it.

[PeterScott]

I really like the packaging on this one. I think it is about the size of a Rav4, but you can carry a 10ft step ladder with the fold flat passenger seat. Versatility and Utility.

https://www.topspeed.com/cars/toyota/2017-toyota-tj-cruiser-ar177847.html

 

[rstrohkirch]

Looks like something LEGO would sell

 

[JulesMaximus]

Christ that's ugly...

 

[PeterScott]

Christ that's ugly...

I like it. It's different.

 

[QueBert]

holy crap that thing's ugly, and if it's anything like restaurants menu pics of food, it will be even uglier in person.

 

[Yuriman]

I thought the FJ was hideous too, but after they'd been on the roads a few years I came to appreciate their weirdness. Too many cars look the same these days.

 

[deadlyapp]

Looks like a Ford Flex had sex with an armored truck.

 

[FeuerFrei]

What would really sell it ... is full-on fender flares. Maybe even running boards. And smaller wheels.

Also, the gray isn't helping.

 

[ElFenix]

is this supposed to be a commercial van and offroader?

 

[PricklyPete]

Will sell TERRIBLY. Do I like it at some level...yes...but it is ugly and would not connect with the general public.

 

[PeterScott]

is this supposed to be a commercial van and offroader?

The T stands for Toolbox, so the focus is on versatility/utility.

 

[JulesMaximus]

What would really sell it ... is full-on fender flares. Maybe even running boards. And smaller wheels.

Also, the gray isn't helping.

Man, it's almost as ugly from the rear as it is from the front. There isn't a single bit of that car that looks good.

 

[bradly1101]

You would certainly get noticed, and to some that's what matters most.. My priorities are under the skin.

 

[PeterScott]

You would certainly get noticed, and to some that's what matters most.. My priorities are under the skin.

It's the utility that really appeals to me. It smaller on the outside than a Rav4, but looks to be able to carry more on the inside.

 

[pauldun170]

(Looks at picture) - "Looks like they are patching a video game and adding additional vehicles. Vehicle pictured is the Clumpson Boxtin GTS.
Speed: ====>
Capacity: ===========>
Durabilty: ===>
Price: ===> "

(Focuses on being an adult for a sec) - "Looks like they are trying to cash in on the Honda Element market. Here you box of quirky ugly so you can and your dogs can keep your other car from smelling like crap. Not something I'd buy."

(Finds out that its offered with a manual transmission) - "When and how much?"
(Remembers that he has a wife) - "Never mind...will never sell in the states. Needs more red velvet like the K-cars from the 80's"

 

[gorcorps]

I like it. It's different.

It's a box, that's not different. You could have told me it's a Ford Flex concept and I'd believe you. Or a Scion xB. I actually think Toyota said they were going to stop using the Scion name and just adapt them into Toyota models... so maybe this is the first step towards a Toyota branded xB.

 

[IronWing]

I like the interior but if you recall the concept FJ Cruiser vs the production model, a huge change we would likely see if this TJ makes it to production is that every hard, angular surface and metal anything will be replaced with curved plastic. The concept FJ had metal grab bars on the dash that would have been useful for offroading but also useful for smashing one's face in an accident. I see the same type of issue with the TJ concept.

Not sure why Toyota gave it that name as it will confuse the public into thinking that it is a successor to the FJ Cruiser when they are radically different vehicles with different uses. The FJ is a great offroad vehicle for two people and a cooler and horrible for everything else. This concept looks like a great work van/grocery hauler and is clearly not an offroader. Hard to tell if it would be good for long roadtrips. If Toyota sticks with the fold flat seating, it would be great as one person could sleep in back while the other drove, like the Brady wagons of yesteryear.

Door handles would drive people nuts. I can't see that configuration surviving to production.

Edit: I just saw that it has sliding rear doors, blech.

 

[bradly1101]

Edit: I just saw that it has sliding rear doors, blech.

Sliding doors can be really convenient.

 

[ElFenix]

Edit: I just saw that it has sliding rear doors, blech.

sliding rear doors allow larger cargo through them, don't close in a gust of wind or due to gravity, and don't hit the car next to them. they're vastly superior to swinging doors for all these big cargo carriers we've convinced ourselves that we need, and yet, this is the reaction people have to them. "if it's got swinging doors I can pretend its not a minivan!" quit lying to yourself.

 

[IronWing]

My experience has been that sliding doors jam a lot. The powered ones are worse but even the manual sliding doors are forever getting stuck or not closing on the first, second, or third tries.

 

[JCH13]

That is a spectacularly unappealing vehicle. People made all the same comments about the Pontiac Aztek, and look what happened there... 'it's different,' 'it's about utility,' hell, the Aztek could fit a 4'x8' sheet of plywood or drywall inside! It had good driving dynamics, was reasonably reliable, and reasonably priced. Yet it managed to be perhaps the biggest automotive flop of all time. Arguably this is because of the horrendously bad styling, at the end of the day most people won't buy an ugly car even if it has the features they're looking for. I predict a similarly bad outcome for the TJ if it ever sees production.

 

[Insomniator]

Arguably this is because of the horrendously bad styling, at the end of the day most people won't buy an ugly car even if it has the features they're looking for. I predict a similarly bad outcome for the TJ if it ever sees production.

The Aztec just looked... incorrectly designed. I see Nissan Cubes all the time so I do think people will buy anything, for whatever reason they need.

This doesn't look too bad, looks very useful and is from a company isn't know for making complete garbage like Pontiac was.

 

[JCH13]

The Aztec just looked... incorrectly designed. I see Nissan Cubes all the time so I do think people will buy anything, for whatever reason they need.

This doesn't look too bad, looks very useful and is from a company isn't know for making complete garbage like Pontiac was.

Aztek sold >92k units over 8 years in the US. http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/pontiac/pontiac-aztek/

Cube sold <78k units over 8 years in the US. http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/nissan/nissan-cube/

To put these numbers in perspective, Ford sells 400k-900k F-series trucks per year. http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/ford/ford-f-series/

By at least one measure the Cube failed harder than the Aztek. A prime example of how one person's observations are usually quite skewed.

I liked Pontiac as a car company. They did weird things regularly, sometimes well and sometimes poorly. They're above-average in manufacturer reliability, certainly higher than Nissan, ( http://www.dashboard-light.com/reports/Pontiac.html ) Love or hate them, Pontiac made numerous iconic American cars ( https://jalopnik.com/5229443/the-ten-greatest-pontiacs http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a4183/4315235/ and so on).

Weird styling turns some people away and many people don't need (or want) super-utilitarian cars. Market numbers indicate that people getting utilitarian vehicles buy trucks. And often buy luxury trucks at that ( half of super-duty sales are luxo-optioned https://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/the-100-000-luxury-ford-f-450-truck-an-idea-whose-tim-1818972116 ). I posit that the niche for car-platform utilitarian vehicles is just too small to support a model like the TJ in the US, not with the For Transit/Transit Connect and similar vehicles already sating the limited need.