Unassuming. Conservative. Mild in appearance. All of these terms — and more — perfectly fit the Subaru Forester XT I picked up yesterday morning, bitching and moaning all the while about the miserable cold weather.
Boxy. Tall. Big greenhouse. Yes, the slab-sided Forester’s proportions haven’t changed much since arriving on these shores in the late ’90s. Even the Burnished Bronze Metallic paint is reminiscent of the ubiquitous early-2000s metallic gold of my friend’s long-gone ’02. No aggressive fender bulges, diagonal character lines, coupe-like roofline or ground effects package for this little rig. That simply wouldn’t suit the Forester’s staid-but-capable persona.
Cranking the seat warmer to 11, I drove off. Man, I thought, this thing goes like stink.
Okay, there’s faster, far more svelte rigs out there, but those models at least look fast. The Forester, bless its heart, not so much. Still, with a 0-60 mile-per-hour time of 6.1 seconds and all-wheel traction, I can see this vehicle serving a tall, cold glass of emasculation to an unsuspecting Civic or Golf fanboy.
A friend once told a story of his childhood in a less-than-glamorous corner of Quebec. Undercover cops in the 1980s, he said, hit the streets in old Dodge Aspen and Plymouth Volares outfitted with older, easier-breathing 340 cubic-inch V8s sourced from wrecked Dusters and Swingers. Incognito to the extreme, the hopped-up F-bodies could keep up with anything (assuming advanced rust didn’t tear the body apart above 80 mph).
Let’s assume the story’s true. Both models could also be had with a police package and 360 c.i.d. V8, but we can’t call either variant an unadulterated civilian car. Still, there’s plenty of unassuming factory models with real power lurking under the hood — models seen most often with geriatric drivers behind the wheel, coasting along at 5 mph below the limit.
Which brings us to the question: what models count as go-fast sleepers? What overlooked vehicles harbor a Jekyll-and-Hyde personality?
[Image: Subaru]
“Boxy. Tall. Big greenhouse.”
I’ll take that, you guys keep the fast.
“a tall, cold glass of emasculation”
This meme is so common that I can only assume there really *are* some males who need an assemblage of metal, plastic & a skosh of glass to make them feel male.
I’d feel emasculated just for driving the Forester.
For stealth, I’d go with a 2012 Impala LS with the 3.6 V6 or the SS version. The Pontiac G8 would be a good stealth car as well.
Driving a Forester causing you to be emasculated could be sign for something that runs a little deeper.
Deeper only if I felt the need to emasculate other fanboys.
Just never liked the Forester. I think it’s a tall Outback in much the same way as a AMC Pacer looked like a tall Hornet.
But why do you feel like your male organ falls off if you drive one? I feel like there’s some Freudian material here.
Notapreppie, I highly doubt he will comprehend your thoughts. For some, stating stupid things shows shows a sense of strength. And you are correct many people think particular autos makes them feel weak. Which in turn makes them weak. Hilarious stuff.
MWebbRambler,
Wondering if you meant the AMC Eagle? other possibilities might be the Concord or the Spirit. The Pacer was tall (and wide), but certainly did not resemble any other car on the road.
It’s all Freud unless you’re a Jungian. And if I were to follow either’s line of reasoning, I would argue that that both believed that the unconscious self or id acts out in the same ways it felt threatened. Therefore, if one feels the need to “a tall, cold glass of emasculation” to another driver, then that person must have in some way felt emasculated.
@SilverCoupe: You’re right, the Concord/Eagle is a more apt comparison.
It’s all Freud unless you’re a Jungian. And if I were to follow either’s line of reasoning, I would argue that that both believed that the unconscious self or id acts out in the same ways it felt threatened. Therefore, if one feels the need to “a tall, cold glass of emasculation” to another driver, then that person must have in some way, at some point, felt emasculated in a similar manner.
@SilverCoupe: You’re right, the Concord/Eagle is a more apt comparison.
Believe it or not, totally different than an Outback. Different chassis and driving dynamics. Taller yes.
“I’d feel emasculated just for driving the Forester.”
I’ve heard that some fairly masculine women drive these things… :-)
Most emasculating car? A yellow New Beetle with flower inserts in the taillights? A Dodge Omni that isn’t a Shelbyized version? A Toyota RAV4 (highest percentage of female owners the last time I checked?
I’m fine with driving 3-row crossovers or minivans – the latter just shows I’m practical and probably needed the extra space (vs. a 3-row CUV) for 4×8′ drywall panels for my next home-improvement project. In all, I am secure enough in my masculinity not to need to prove anything with the car I drive.
Well I can tell you that the Honda Odyssey is definitely a man’s car around these parts, especially among the Taiwanese crowd. My divorced grandfather has one, my friend’s father has one, and my AP Statistics teacher also has one. Not sure why they all DD minivans given that they all work in engineering/tech fields, but I guess having too much practicality is never a bad thing. Heck, my dad’s DD is a V70 estate since my mom needs our Odyssey to be the kid shuttle.
“there really *are* some males who need an assemblage of metal, plastic & a skosh of glass to make them feel male.”
Heh… yea… good thing I don’t know anyone like that…
:-/
My cousin recently picked up a 2017 Forester Premium (with the XT motor). He just sold his bought-new 2003 Acura RSX Type-S with something like 176k miles.
The reason he bought it? He fell in love with a woman who has an 8-year old daughter. Now he’s basically that girl’s father. Nothing emasculating about buying a practical vehicle for your family.
2GR-FE Camry LE. Preferably baby blue with a few missing wheel covers and a Camry dent.
I’d lump the previous gen Rav4 V6s into that category as well. Put some family stickers and soccer team stickers on the back for maximum effect.
3.5L Altima, same concept as the Camry. I think you can still get it in a shade of beige.
For awhile the V6 RAV4 was the fastest Toyota you could buy.
Yeah, for one model year, 2006, the RAV4 was the fastest Toyota. That’s pretty funny.
My manager bought a V6 RAV4 in baby blue to replace his aging Caravan. It’s perfect for him, he likes to drive fast and it’s completely unassuming.
Except that the larger engine made an already inherently nose-heavy design even worse. So it was clumsy.
Practically no one knew that off the line to 40mph the peer Suzuki Grand Vitara V6, due to lower gearing, was faster. Been there done that. Much to the Rav4 driver’s surprise.
Well the Grand Vitara must feel like it hits a brick wall at 40mph because the 0-60 time is about 8.5 seconds to the Rav4’s 6.3. I somehow have a hard time believing the Vitara is still ahead at 40mph given how big the difference is by 60mph.
The noseheavy comment is definitely valid, and I personally would prefer the Suzuki simply for its better offroad chops, but as far as sleepers go, the Rav4 V6 is one, the Grand Vitara, not so much.
My BIL wanted a family car/small SUV so I pointed him at the RAV4 noting that the 4-cyl had serious oiling issues, told him to get the V6. I never knew that it was quite the sleeper until I had to borrow it. I was genuinely surprised at how well it’d storm off the line and keep chugging.
The only other surprise was my Mom’s Santa Fe with a V6; while not quite as snappy as the RAV4, it certainly would scoot if you got on it hard.
I wonder if the normal buyers of these things ever really know just how well they can nip through traffic.
It’s hilarious that a rapid-escalation horsepower war was being waged in the midsize sedan sector, and that for a while the clear victor was a baby blue beluga-snouted no-frills Camry LE.
SS!
It doesn’t sound stealthy. The exhaust is as loud as any sedan on the market save maybe the E63 AMG (I haven’t heard the new one yet).
I vote for an AMG Benz that has been debadged.
I still like Derek’s choice. Mine with Trifecta was quite quick in 4th gear from 80-155+ mph.
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/06/my-candidate-for-murilees-ultimate-sleeper-buick-verano-turbo/
Definitely – Chevy SS. Looks like Malibu when not accelerating. I guess, BMW M was the car that did that. Taurus SHO. Civic Si?
SS is the first one that came to my mind.
I want one, I’ve test driven several, I’ve nearly bought a couple. But it still takes me a second to be sure it’s an SS when I see one driving down the road.
Normal people have no idea it exists, much less what it is.
When people see (hear) my SS they say “it’s a what? from where? with a WHAT?” :)
I suppose some people might mistake it for a Caprice PPV and move out of your way, too!
Definitely the SS.
I don’t know how people on here say its not stealthy.
99.9% of the population will think its a Malibu. that to me is definitely sleeper. 99.8% of the population will assume its slower than a V6 Camaro or a 4 cylinder mustang.
That is definition of a sleeper in my book…
Although if your talking about the “tuning scene”, a sleeper would be a car where the owner tried to make it look base and its really highly modified, but there’s nothing closer than the SS as a factory sleeper.
Even the NAME is a sleeper. Can you even google “SS” without getting 98% of your returns as Camaros and Cobalts and everything else?
The car is such a sleeper it doesn’t even have a name. The SS is a trim level on every other car, but its just the “SS Sedan”.
It runs 12s in the quartermile. It looks like a Malibu. Even a car buff wouldn’t notice one driving through a parking lot. Even a car buff wouldn’t notice one sitting next to them at a light. Yes, if you STARE at an SS you can “tell” its an SS, but most people don’t even know the SS exists.
I personally would die for an SS that wasn’t a sleeper. I couldn’t bring myself to spend 50 grand for a malibu. If I’m going to drive a fun and fast car, I want everyone to know it.
So if I’d be embarassed to drive a super fast, awesome car- it MUST be a sleeper.
That was one of the best things about my old Forester XT, which left us mostly because the EJ255 in it was only slightly better emissions-wise than one of those de-smogged Volares; since suffering a poisoning incident a couple of years ago, my wife experiences a severe physical reaction to unburned hydrocarbons.
Styling is so extroverted in today’s market that it’s hard to think of many examples. But here are a few more that come to mind:
– Acura RDX
– Honda Accord V6 Sedan
– Infiniti QX50
– Lincoln MKC 2.3T
– Lincoln MKZ 3.0T
– Nissan Altima 3.5
– Toyota Camry V6
Another good candidate, the Benz E400 sedan, was recently disappeared and replaced with the far more aggressive-looking E43 AMG.
Yeah, I drove a new RDX just the other day and I was very surprised how quick it was when I mashed the go pedal to the floor. I don’t know the stats, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it has a 0-60 time of less than 6 seconds.
Multiple magazines are in the low 6s, but limited by traction (the AWD system is cheap junk). Once away from the line, they’re quicker than that number would suggest.
Yup, my wife’s RDX is deceptively quick and, especially in Everyone’s Got One Charcoal, completely invisible.
6.1s
Touareg (supercharged) Hybrid with 380hp combined and 425 torques which gets you to 60 in about 6s. It’s a 5000 lb. jacked up wagon that also gets us 20-26mpg. Too bad it keeps nickel and dimeing us which may cause the love to run out.
Every time I visit my parents, I get reminded of how fantastic the Accord V6 is given it’s price and mission.
While my mom putters along for 15 minutes to and from work, there lies a fantastic engine sitting there, doing the equivalent of a sled dog being kept in an apartment. I’m always sure to give it exercise when I’m back.
And now that even non-V6 models get dual exhausts, making a sleeper is as easy as taking off the badge and pressing the pedal.
+100 on the Accord V6!
Reminds me of a guy that ran around my AO with the vanity plate “2L8V8”, it was on the back of a V6 Accord.
I was told he had a reasonably quick Accord and the plates weren’t without merit.
They put duals on the non-V6? Haha, that’s great. But that doesn’t make the V6 a sleeper, it makes the 4-cylinder a paper tiger.
Yes, all sport trims have big wheels and dual exhausts. You might be right though, it’s more damning of the 4 banger than anything great for the V6.
Came here to mention the MKZ 3.0T as well. No one is going to expect 400hp from that car.
I’m not so sure: the MKZ’s exterior is pretty outré.
Prior gen Avalon ~2007. Tubby, slab-sided and geriatric in appearance, but that 2GR-FE was a revelation when it debuted.
Now, just about any generic sedan with the uplevel engine is surprisingly quick. We’re spoiled for horsepower.
Ford F150 Ecoboost and Silverado with 6.2L V8–I’m not accustomed to something that big moving that rapidly.
Chevy SS probably takes the cake though. It’s handsome, but very conservative and represents the biggest delta between innocuous styling and underhood rampaging.
Dal, nice list.
I think the Camry wins because it’s the only vehicle on your list that was available with plastic wheel covers. It’s by far the cheapest looking car on your list.
In fact, I would bet the 2GR-FE LE Camry is the fastest car ever made with plastic wheel covers.
Yeah, good call on the trucks. The acceleration numbers turned in by 3.5T F-150s and 6.2-liter GM half-tons are ridiculous.
Also the 3.5EB Flex. Who knew a fridge box could move so fast.
It’s cousin the SHO is no slacker either.
But with those donkulicious 20s it wears, the SHO is hardly a sleeper.
+1 on the Avalon. That thing screams “Gramps” as loud as a Mercury Marquis but it gets out of its own way.
Chevy SS by far is the stealth performer, it has low quality rental Malibu looks and a great engine.
Doesn’t the SS have the fake hood scoops and obnoxious exhaust note. Not to stealthy.
No fake hood scoops (that was the G8) but yes on the loud exhaust. And it has shiny 19s and big Brembos.
The 2016 added hood “vents” which I can’t stand. However they are low profile and nearly invisible on a black hood.
However I don’t think the stock exhaust note is obnoxious. It’s no worse than anything else with a V8 anymore.
Real or fake hood plastic bits. The SS is not on the stealthy side. It looks fast just parked.
“It looks fast just parked.”
It’s got that “Neow thet’s a NOIFE!” look to it.
It looks faster than an Accord V6 sure but its a real performance sedan yet it has the looks of a Malibu or anything else you’d get at the Hertz counter.
If you want some completely pedestrian that happens to be quick off the line then anything with the 3.5l Ecoboost will do.
The 16 SS also added the dual mode exhaust from the Corvette/Camaro, so it’s not as aggressive at idle but it is the opposite of stealthy when accelerating hard. As others have said, it undoubtedly elicits more “what the f is that??” reactions than anything else for sale today, so maybe surprising is a better word than stealthy
That’s the definition of a sleeper though. Nobody knows ’til you hit the loud pedal and you’re off like a bandit.
I suppose it isn’t stealth when you’re trumpeting past the radar, but at that point your goose is already cooked.
I’ll second the Avalon vote, except mine is a beige 2015. I love this 2GR-FE, hate to see Toyota retiring it soon.
Those V6 Rav4s were quick, too.
2006
– Rav4 4wd 6.2s
– Avalon Touring 6.4s
1. Ford Edge with EB 2.7
2. Forester XT
3. Camry v6
4. Accord v6
5. Any EB F150
The Taurus SHO/EcoBoost MKS are very quick. The Interceptor version is the quickest accelerating police car (among actual purpose-built police cruisers, not a seized Corvette lol).
The MKS is more stealthy. The SHO has specific wheels and other differences that try to help it not blend in with, say, my mom’s SEL (which is fine from a marketing standpoint, but not for a “sleeper” look, at least not to anyone somewhat into cars). The EcoBoost MKS looks the same as the 3.7L model I believe, except for badging of course.
BMW E38 740Li = old man’s car that is classy but quick
Buick Enclave (1st gen) makes you rethink old GM.
03 Highlander V6: boring grocery hauler dying for you to floor it. Gunning it becomes addicting and car coaxes you to go faster.
100 series Land Cruiser: looks ordinary but its V8 packs a great exaust note and extrordinary pickup
Bmw E65 760Li: another luxary saloon that(when not in shop being serviced)is slow off line but shines in its higher gears. once passed a E46 M3 driver on highway scratching head about its higher speed gearing.
“100 series Land Cruiser: looks ordinary but its V8 packs a great exaust note and extrordinary pickup”
100 Series with the 4.7L definitely has decent get-up-and-go, but the 200 series that followed it with the 5.7L is a real brute. 0-60 in about 6.5 seconds as I recall.
The 100 series only felt quick if you were trading in your 3FE powered 80 series. I could see the 200 having a little more punch but those rigs are heavy.
“having a little more punch”
They dropped the 0-60 time from about 9 seconds in the 100 series to an instrumented 6.5s. Heavy or not, the 3UR motor out of the Tundra is a beast.
To bad Toyota never found a home for that V8 in something pony car sized. I’ve always wondered how Import fans would react to a Mustang and Camaro fighter?
My gut instinct tells me that they have their heads way to far up their collective turbocharged inline six asses to ever fully appreciate a large displacement V8 in a modestly sized car.
That is impressive. I am guessing that the fuel economy is still closer to my 1FZ-FE which is to say 11ish, but if you are buying a Land Cruiser you likely don’t care.
raph just looking around at the raft of older UZ-motor swaps I see across the globe, into everything from old 4Runners like mine to Soviet Volgas, I think people definitely can see beyond the ubiquitous 2JZ and RB series turbo I6s.
Volga 24 1UZ swap:
youtu.be/h3ZARNKcLk0?t=29
youtu.be/2nVoxl-uoYo?t=22
UAZ Hunter UZ swap:
youtu.be/E5Ha8UR7k74?t=405
A ton of GAZ Gazelle delivery trucks with UZ swaps done by guys for pretty practical utilitarian purposes (some do lower powered 1JZ and 5VZ swaps too)
A Gazelle with a 2JZ swap for flavor:
youtu.be/vxEs3hHm_Lo?t=434
I saw a 1UZ-swapped MX83 Cressida at a car show a while back. The I6s are more popular since they were easier to come by as surplus JDM clips in the previous decade, and the turbo setups have a much higher horsepower ceiling for tuning.
2006 Highlander hybrid was the quickest Highlander @ 6.9s
2008 Land Cruiser was the quickest Land Cruiser @ 6.4s
both not as fast as v6 RAV4
We had 2008 Saturn Aura with the 3.6. I loved to romp on that thing. Sadly, GM just can’t make things that last.
Pentastar Avenger
V6 Impala (previous gen)
“V6 Impala (previous gen)”
The crazy TALL gearing on those totally kills the potential of the 3.6L IMO. The Epsilon Impala that followed feels (and is) sprightlier in spite of a curb weight increase, all thanks to shorter gearing in the first few gears.
The W-Impalas are slower than they should be given power-to-weight. Tall gearing is part of it but weird ratio spacing is too. It’s like you have a four-speed automatic with a couple of extra gears clustered at the top end.
It’s very possible that they were limited to (unsuccessfully) prevent damage to the 4T60/65.
I knew a few people with SC’ed Grand Prixes and one fellow with a V8-equipped GXP. All of them, to a fault, have had to replace their transaxles.
Any Volvo with the old 6-cylinder T6 and a Polestar tune.
The standard V60 with the T6 somehow musters a 4.9 0-60 time. Meanwhile, the truly sleeper beast that is the (now defunct) XC70 could get its brute mass from 0-60 in an impressive 6.6 seconds.
The XC70 hasn’t got a sporting bone in its body, but at that pace (ideally in brown), it would be a quality sleeper.
You could even say any current Volvo with the Polestar tune. Even the base T5 V60 will do a 6 second 0-60 and 15 second quarter mile. Nobody expects that from a safe, sensible family car.
The old R models are very fast, too. Unless painted in gold, turquoise or yellow, they remain unassuming.
The 6.1s 0-60 of the Forester above were a time achieved by sports cars when I grew up…
Hell, even my old 740 Turbo is no slouch, although I will admit it has a boost controller hooked up to it and a cone intake, but I’ve had it running low 15s in the quarter quite consistently, and for a car that’s 99% stock from 1990, that’s pretty respectable IMO.
I’ll go a little retro:
1. Saab 93 Viggen (151 MPH top speed)
2. Buick Regal T-type (Edmunds tested a well-maintained ’87 Grand National in 2012 and it turned in acceleration times comparable to today’s Accord V6, so in the late 80s it was mental)
3. Pre 2009 Jaguar XJ with V12 or supercharger. (I think they are faster than their stately appearance leads on.)
The last V12 was 1997 and they were not super fast off the line. Around 6.5 seconds or so 0-60. Where they excelled was was the 50-80 sprint for passing.
The 2004-09 XJ’s were aluminium bodied and in supercharged form were quite fast. I think the XJR was right around 5 seconds.
In 1987 you could even order a Buick Regal Limited with the turbo package so you could have a landau vinyl roof, your choice of color, bench seat, with the SFI intercooled turbo V6. The only clues to it’s potential would be the turbo bulge hood, aluminum wheels and 215/65 15 Eagle GTs.
I remember noticing the unbundling of the intercooled turbo V6 in 1987 and strongly considered buying a Regal Limited with the intercooled turbo V6. Burgundy red inside and out with landau vinyl roof, opera lights, red velour loose-cushion velour bench seat, column shifter, and nearly all the available options. Basically a car that looked like my grandmother’s ride but could blow the doors off of Corvettes and Porsches. I decided against it – too impractical compared even to a Mustang 5.0 hatchback, and no manual transmission. Also a bit out of my easily affordable price range. I never would have dreamed that that car would sharply escalate in value almost immediately. Over 1,000 Turbo Regal Limiteds were sold in 1987 – I’m guessing most or all were special orders – so evidently many others had the same idea as me.
The Skyhawk Limited J-car could be ordered similarly with the rare optional turbo mill and a 5-speed stick in any body style – also very fast for its era and equally stealthy, albeit loaded with torque steer. As with the Regal, the turbo required the T package with tire and suspension upgrades, which in the Skyhawk also included red dash lighting.
1987 was the last year General Motors offered a la carte options. 50+ item factory option lists were not unusual, and you could mix and match to your heart’s content. Buying a new car has never been as enjoyable since.
For me right now that is my 2011 Taurus SHO. Boring grey, boring wheels, big. semi-ugly in a “i like ugly cars” kind of way. And with 600$ in a SCT tuner, 3bar and .028 gapped plugs does a confirmed dataloged 0-60 in 4.4 seconds, and a 1/4 mile 13.0 flat on Cheveron 92 octane in a 4500 pound slab ‘not-quite-ford-mobile’.
I can’t tell you how many times the “right lane ends” crowd at the stop light look stupefied when I quietly spool to 2000 rpm and flip the brake and gas and launch hard enough to rip one wheel lose before traction pushes power back and chirp second gear in their faces.
this seems ESPECIALLY true for MOPAR owners. Every R/T owning nub always jets up to the right lane at the stop light to floor it and get back over. Those are my favorite trollings. :)
Ah, the “right lane ends” crowd.
I love those guys, you must have a lot of fun with that SHO.
I’ve only done it a few times, but my favorite was an RX8 that I stomped on in my Camry. He had his girlfriend with him too.
My favorite “lane ends” story has to be in my 1994 Aerostar Sport vs. some little ricer Honda. Yeah, a minivan just put your eBay fart can and AutoZone custom intake in the “will someone let me in?” status. I can’t remember what was behind me, but they kept the gap closed so he had to damn near stop to get in.
I want to say it was a later 90s Regal GS, which is another great sleeper. Looks like a Century, goes like a Trans AM.
No, the Aerostar wasn’t a sleeper, but the low end torque and cat-less exhaust (Canadian model, maybe that’s why?) made it quick off the line for a minivan. 3800 TranSport was too, too bad it was goofy looking and far more fragile.
It is the TQ :) in the Astrovan.. If it was the vortec 4300 that thing made V8 FTLBs almost off idle. :)
Man I STILL want a good manual RX8 for drifting… But with a 4yr old that’s a tough sell for a family car. :P
“the ‘right lane ends’ crowd”
FWIW, I only do this to have fun with the other driver.
I had a 2015 300C Hemi that was pretty stealthy. It was a weirdly optioned car in that it was plain looking Granite, with the 18″ wheels, no panoramic roof, non-luxury interior but had the glorious Hemi/8spd, upgraded Harmon Cardon sound (also glorious), and safety tech II with the lane keep assist and auto cruise with full stop. Totally rental spec looking car, but would run 8s in the 1/8th mile and upset a lot of old hot rodders who insisted that it was the “electronics” that made the car able to hook and go fast (even though I pulled the ABS module logic fuse).
Agreed, many of the Dodge/Chrysler sedans have a HEMI under the hood yet they look Plain Jane.
Especially the 300 where there are few if any visual cues to let you know what engine it has from the outside, and the take rate of the V8 is so low with the advent of the 3.6L. On the 300S, the V8 cars get a spoiler where the V6 cars don’t, but on the C it’s hard to tell at all. They even have a quiet exhaust.
I’d like to find that granite one I had and supercharge it.
I don’t think there are any visual cues that distinguish V8-powered 300Cs from their 3.6L stablemates. Inside, the shift paddles and sport mode button are the only giveaways.
My current Golf R, black with standard Golf 17’s, no big stupid wings or scoops. A dealership non detectable piggy back JB1 tune and consistent 12.2 time slips over and over with 0-60 in the high 3’s thanks to a perfect launch control system.
Just a boring looking hatchback.
A buddy of mine has a Golf R in white. Not being a VW guy, it’s hard for me to pick it out from a normal GTI. With a tune, it’s legit fast.
One of my buddies said: “the exhaust makes just enough noise that you know something’s different about this Golf if you’re listening.” I’m totally OK with that assessment. Most cars look faster than they are. Mine is decidedly the opposite. To everyone else it’s “just a gray Golf”.
The Golf R was my first thought too, especially in a more muted color.
I also would change the wheels from 18″/19″ to 17″ which is the smallest that will fit on the Golf R or performance-package GTIs.
Turbo Is Black Magic, do you find the ride is any smoother with the 17s? Was that your prime reason using them, or was it stealthier looks or less chance of wheel damage? (or maybe you wanted to use the same wheels for summer and winter tires). And did the car originally come with 18″ or 19″ wheels?
Car came with 19’s, cut two tires bad in the first month on Philly and NY pot holes. Went with lightweight 17’s with 245’s for the summer/ track set up and 225’s on Golf 17’s with winter tires for the miserable period. Ride is noticeably smoother on all but the worst roads… also I like sleepers. If I could get this drivetrain in a plain Golf sport wagon I would be in heaven.
Nice setup for bracket racing.
The old Regal GS with the supercharged 3800. So much torque right off idle. Kind of the polar opposite of the 3.6 Impala, which is fast from a rolling start but sluggish off the line.
better yet the na 3800 with supercharger from the sc3800 you’d make 5-10% more hp mod for mod
I’ll give the aforementioned 300C and Golf R, as well as the GTI. It’s decently subtle these days. The MKS EB is pretty stealthy. Something like the SQ5 only has badging to tell you it’s got 354HP.
+1 on the MKS, if only because such a huge percentage of MKS’s are airport limos with the base engine. Not that the naturally aspirated 3.7 V6 cars are slow in my world view.
As 30-mile fetch notes above, practically every sedan with an upgraded engine, be it a 3.5ish V6 or a 2.0ish turbo I4 is fast these days.
While it’s not as fast as its V6 RAV4 relative (RIP), I’m surprised by how quickly the NX 200t can go from “loafing off-boost in pseudo-Atkinson cycle” mode to “accelerating on-boost in Otto cycle” mode. I’d like to sample the 8AR-FTS in the IS platform.
It’s such a pity that you can’t get a stick-shift in the turbocharged Forester. That was one of the draws of the original WRX-powered XT.
One could argue that the CVT is actually an excellent partner for a turbocharged engine: it keeps it on boost at all times. But I agree, in terms of driving fun a manual would be just the ticket.
What’s odd is that you can get a five-speed with the base Forester, but not with the turbocharged one.
I’d imagine the base engine’s narrower powerband would benefit more from being CVT-only.
x10!
When I was serious about winning, I would often deploy my “no lift to shift” strategy. Change gears as quickly as possible while leaving the throttle mashed; it would help keep the turbo spooled – the down side was gearbox abuse.
From this stand point, CVT & turbo are ideal partners.
With regard to stealth; I never underestimate anything, today even your wife’s minivan can haul & is a threat.
I am seeing a few references to the newer SHO but the original Ford Taurus SHO from 1995 could out accelerate the Mustang V8 of the time from a roll:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/1st_Ford_Taurus_SHO_–_10-03-2009.jpg/280px-1st_Ford_Taurus_SHO_–_10-03-2009.jpg
Yes they could. Mustang from a dig but SHO from a roll! Its a shame Ford never invested in a Mustang SHO. That would have been a pretty cool car.
FX50 / QX70 5.0
Sure, both are out of production and neither looks particularly slow but both are much faster than a compact SUV has any business being…
Exact numbers are hard to come by but the nearly 400 horse v8 should be in the low 5’s 0-60 and high 13s in the quarter.
Handling is surprisingly lithe for a 4500 pound hunk of steel with a high-ish center of gravity. Unfortunately a glacially slow automatic sucks a lot of the fun out of the overall experience.
Still, I keep threatening to run the wife’s car at the next test and tune night to firm up those numbers ;)
The original Infiniti FX looked SO GOOD. That design could be released exactly the same today, and still look futuristic. But even beyond that, every line worked. I get that it was probably a hard design to evolve from, but the second gen seemed to lose something.
The FX is midsize!
In my fantasy world that 5.0L V8 was offered in the Q50.
I have a 16 Forester XT. It’s fast and feels like a tank, the steering is nice and heavy which I prefer, and the CVT is not whiny at all. It’s also noisy. It seems they’ve fixed this for ’17, and I wish I had waited.
But… the front seats on these things are miserable. It’s such a bummer, and inexcusable for a $30k+ car. The cushion is about as short as a bar stool, and there’s no side bolstering. Just about any car out there right now has a better seat than this I’d imagine.
My wife has the ultimate sleeper – a Ford Flex EcoBoost. Mommymobile on the outside, 355hp twin turbo 3.5 V6 with AWD on the inside. We call it the SHO-wagon, because under the boxy exterior it’s essentially a Taurus SHO.
I would love to pick up a used Flex, but it’s so big. As a single guy, there’s just no point. And the size would make city parking miserable.
Yep, I agree. Since she uses it as a mommymobile it makes perfect sense, plus it can tow. That leaves me free to drive the more fun cars. :)
The Altima with the 3.5 VQ motor is deceptive. I think it’s faster than the Maxima, or at least feels that way.
It should. Its smaller and lighter.
Base Mustang GT. :D
Not doing this for DW bait, I swear, but my V-6 Tempo was very quick. I surprised many “faster” cars with it. I beat the holy hell out of it. I went through front tires like my hooligan buddy did rear tires on his 5.0L 5spd 87 Mustang LX.
They had sport bikes, and so we tested the Tempo, and it topped out at 127 mph (far beyond its 85 MPH spedo, although later I upgraded to the one-year-only 120 MPH unit, which I still have). That was 5500 RPM red line in third (top) gear.
I was told the manual version was governed, but the only thing holding the automatic back is the red line. I wanted SO bad to swap a 5 speed SHO transaxle in it, but never got around to it.
Its how quick it got there which was amazing. If you started off normal and just as it upshifts to 2nd, floor it. It will drop into first and it would spin the front tires and blast off like a rocket when it catches. Hold on, torque steer is a B¡tch.
I scared the sh¡t out of a female co-worker once. She wanted to walk back from the store unless I promised not to do it again, lol.
The car had the weakest cam of any Ford 3.0L Vulcan powered vehicle. If you put one in out of, say, a 2004-2007 Taurus, and a manual from a 88-95 SHO, oh man. Total sleeper.
If I had disposable $$$$, I’d buy a basic automatic V-6 Tempo/Topaz and build it (5spd and cam swap, etc) for a competitive track day or something. I’ve never “tracked” but I bet it would be fun in that car.
Or a 3800 swapped Oldsmobile Achieva. Maybe a supercharged one in an S/C coupe? If it would fit, it would be insanely fast.
A 130hp Vulcan Tempo with a 3spd automatic…. “quick”?
I think a GM A-body with the 3300 would stomp you out off the line.
But yes you could probably pull ahead of an automatic Civic of the time, but probably not a manual one. A basic automatic 4cyl Camry might be a driver’s race, as would an Accord (a manual one would be quicker). Now with the 5spd to squeeze all the juices out of the poor Vulcan 3.0, yes I think a Tempo could probably be ‘sprightly.’
The A-body with the 3300 was a sleeper. The LG7 had all kinds of grunt and could blister tires when properly motivated. Unfortunately the transmission didn’t hold up to abuse.
I had a 92 Century with the 3300 and the 4 speed auto. It was quick and torquey for what it was. Wallowed something fierce around corners though.
The car is very light, and the Vulcan has great low end torque. Is basically a stretched early FWD Escort platform with upgraded rear suspension and 150 lb/ft of torque at a pretty low RPM. Hondas of the era make nothing that low. A lot more than some automatic Civic DXs being driven by seniors to the early bird special fell victim to it.
Car and Driver did call it a “mini-SHO” and it couldn’t possibly look any more sedate/slow in GL or LX trim, but yeah, I guess you’re right, I must be mistaken.
From what I see, the 1990s A body 3300 had a 0-60 time of arounf 9.25-9.5 sec and what I could find on the V-6 Tempo (was on a Curbside Classic article): “..it yielded an entirely respectable 0-60 mph time of 7.8 seconds, and a quarter-mile run of 16.1 seconds at 85 mph.”
It wasnt the standing start that impressed me, it was the rolling start, it was quick.
I wish you could drive it before you passed judgement. Its quicker than the numbers suggest.
But, oh that poor terrible 3.0L, even in this application making 30-35 hp more than the Mitsubishi/Chrysler 3.0L of the era, with none of the reliability and oil burning issues. Yep, so underpowered like when it debuted and had more hp than a V-8 Cadillac Touring Sedan that debuted the same year (a “sporty” Cadillac to compete with BMW lol). So awfully slow that it was still powering far heavier vehicles (Ranger, Gen 4 Taurus) 15 years after my Tempo was built. What a sorry slow overworked miserable engine that gets better MPG in my Taurus than a 4cyl Camry of the same year.
Note I’m referring specifically to the 3spd auto variant of yours. The fact that your street racing escapades focused on hapless old folks in automatic Civics trying to get to dinner is telling.
I don’t doubt that with better gearing and less parasitic loss with a manual transmission, there is the potential there to break the sub-8 sec 0-60 barrier. A 3spd auto Tempo V6? I doubt it would even do a 10 sec 0-60, closer to 11 seconds if I had to posit a wild guess.
They don’t call it the three-point-slow for nothing. The performance of a four, the economy of an eight. But nearly indestructible. I’ve put 177K on my Ranger so far and it barely dirties the oil between changes. 300K is pretty normal if you are lucky in the head gasket roulette.
Tom Morana (in the GTA) is about the only source of go-fast products for this engine.
Did I miss it or has the Police Caprice been mentioned. All the SS goodness with none of the flash. My buddy has a work truck spec regular cab F150 with the 3.5 TT and a locker that will get off the line pretty good and has surprised a few takers.
I have been playing on Ford’s web site building my own stealth vehicle
F150 black XL regular cab 4×2
5.0 engine, 6 speed, 101A, trailer tow package and locking rear axle
then
add some better wheels, do a mild drop, custom exhaust and cold air filter and a Roush Supercharger
BAM a +650 hp sleeper work truck for $40k and cheap insurance!
Surprised no one has mentioned the dual motor Teslas. Enthusiasts and even some knowledgable non car people might know they are “fast” but the average person’s conception of a fast car at a stop light is probably an older mustang, camaro, or BMW sedan. A sub 3 second 0-60 is so far removed from those cars that it’s the equivalent of some other sleepers vs the average CUV or pickup. Add the eerily quiet acceleration and I’d call that pretty stealthy
There you go.
My Leaf was pretty quick 0-30, which Nissan even took pains to advertise. It could leap across an intersection more quickly than most cars. Most people thought it was a Versa.
A BMW i3 is even quicker.
@SCE If you get the mod from Japan that allows the full 80kW right from 0, it’s a little quicker. Normally, there’s a limiter that only allows 60 kW when the car initially launches.
Any LS4 GM W-body.
Yeah, I know, 3800 SC.
But, LS motor.
Most of these cars came with tame pushrod V6s and they all look pretty much the same, with the Impala SS looking especially rental car.
Just be aware that transmissions in those things are a time bomb.
Yeah, I know, I was intrigued by those and looked at them a few years back.
I saw a real clean silver Impala SS at a stoplight this summer, it had an exhaust and it sounded really nice.
It was strange hearing that sound come from a generic looking Impala.
Back when I was shopping two years ago, the Lacrosse Super and S80 V8 (another decent one for this list) were my original top choices until I read about all the various pricey driveline maladies that effect them.
So I bought a new car. Which has had tons of electrical issues.
Guess I should have held out for a GS460.
Oh man!
Lacrosse Super. F-yeah! I forgot about those!
THAT is a top 3 sleeper in this whole thread for sure.
It’s really too bad about that transmission.
MB C450. Doesn’t have the tell-tale AMG quads and red brakes so it looks pretty much like a standard C-Class. But it really moves.
Stealth is one of the things I really liked about the Forester XT, but I wasn’t too nuts about the CVT, especially after driving the Honda Crosstour with the new V6 and new 6 speed auto. 0 to 60 on each car was pretty similar, so I ended up with the Crosstour. It looks just as ugly, doesn’t handle as well as the XT, but the V6 and auto combo is butter smooth and the car is much quieter as well.
For full-on fast driving under stealth conditions, you need near silence so your right foot’s action doesn’t give away what you are doing.
Electric cars, please queue up here….
Older, but worth a mention are ur-S4’s. They look just like the normal, stodgy 100’s of the period, but are awd rockets with nothing but a tune. And if you keep self control and don’t uncork the 5 banger wail, it’s quiet to boot!
Well I’ve got two. My recently purchased 2017 Accord EX-L V6 is surprisingly fast in sport mode. It has plenty of power to embarrass many supposed “fast” cars. Plus it looks like your average family sedan so cops don’t bother you.
Second is my 88 Thunderbird LX 5.0 (last of the Fox-body Thunderbirds). It’s got a warmed over 5.0/AOD combo making around 350hp at the crank. People get surprised looks when a big, almost 30 year old Thunderbird barks the tires on a downshift at 45 MPH. Plus the thing hits 60 in a little over 5 seconds while looking like an old man’s car. Fun times.
I really liked those fox body Thunderbirds.
I had an LX 5.0L Mustang coupe, but always wanted to get a fox body Thunderbird with a built 5.0L and a manual transmission.
Those turbo coupes were really good looking, especially compared to my boxy-as-hell LX Mustang coupe.
Agreed on the Turbo coupe, especially the last of the breed. Very handsome cars.
Anyways speaking of fox car, the fox based LTD in either sedan or wagon form could be a serious damn sleeper.
Would love to have the sedan with the drivetrain out of a wrecked Terminator coupled to that 5.2 crate engine Ford keeps teasing (based on GT350 V8 sans flat-plane crank and rated for 575 horsepower I believe).
The Terminator IRS would bolt in but I believe to get it looking right would require a custom offset wheel.
The manual trans would be a super easy conversion to do as well and the T56 would be plenty stout or just get the IRS and a Tremec TKO M5
In Sport Mode on bone-dry pavement, I’ve chirped ’em in 2nd, 3rd AND 4th. (Car starts out in 2nd.) Can do a 10-50mph pull on the roll without an upshift to 3rd!
That T-Bird sounds like an excellent Q-Ship!
Chevy SS with the chrome delete option (actually it is a black out trim option but whatever) in white.
Looks like a Malibu.
If we go out of production. A 2008 Chevy Impala SS with the LS4. Slightly beaten? Even better. That is if the transmission doesn’t handgrenade when you stand on it.
The SS was also one of the first cars I thought of. Other modern stealthy fast cars include the Accord coupe with the V6 and manual, and to a lesser extent the Accord V6 sedan which is only available with an automatic. Although sporty and distinctive, a Tesla Model S or X 100D with the Ludicrous Speed package is stealhy as sub-3-second 0-60 vehicles go.
I love sleepers. Quick vehicles that don’t draw unwanted attention. My favorite was a 2000 Tacoma 4×4 I had with a v6, TRD Eaton supercharger and manual transmission.
While it was likely only capable of a low to mid 14 second quarter mile, a full throttle launch in first gear/four high would pull a length or two on almost anything.
Had a lot of fun with that truck.
My car has to be among the fastest, stealthiest – 2012 Impala LTZ, 3.6, 6 speed tranny – fastest, most powerful car I have ever owned.
Zackman they’re definitely highway monsters, but the tall 1st gear really kills the potential of that 300hp LFX from a dig. Mind you it still gets to 60 in the low 6s so it is for sure a quick car.
I thought the w-body cars were under 6 seconds to 60 with the LFX?
No, and that’s the disappointing thing. Given the numbers (power to weight) it definitely should be able to, but the gearing just kills it. I guess we need to remember that these Impalas are more about comfortable relaxed cruising rather than street-light monsters, the installation of the LFX into the old body was more of a cost savings measure to unify their V6s into the 3.6L lineup and drop the OHV 3500/3900, which only the Impala used by that time.
I wish Toyota had gone mass-market with the 2GR-FE in the Corolla. I think they may have done some limited-production offerings, tragically.
http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/862D9E1EFD475B6DCA2572E4000AB87E
I’d say the ultimate sleeper car is a Chevy SS. It looks mundane but is anything but under its skin.
I’d also nominate the Silverado 6.2L and F150 3.5L. Both do 0-60 in under 6 seconds. And with 4×4 they both launch like a bat out of hell.
2008 Lexus LS460. Non-descript enough to be invisible, yet its 380 hp V8 means you will usually see my taillights. You’ll also get to watch me flip it over when I try to make it corner.
I have one too, and it actually sticks pretty well (and gives up in a balanced way) if you put decent tires on it. You just have to have faith through the initial nautical-feeling body roll and lack of steering feel.
I was being semi-facetious. One of the biggest surprises for me with the car is I actually don’t think the body roll is all that bad. However, the lack of steering feel precludes this from being anything but a cruiser. But…it’s not nearly the marshmallow people think it is.
That being said…what a cruiser! It’s nice to drive something that has an actual suspension.
R63 AMG. Minivan with 507 horsepower. 0-60 in 4.4 seconds. That gives me an idea….
Buick Regal GS from the late 90s with the 3800 Supercharged engine.
2017 Ford Fusion Sport. Wife approved, corporate lease approved, rental car anonymity, and a $400 tune away from a mid- to high-four-second 0-60. Also, magic suspension.
2007 CTS-V. Mine is black on tan and, with four doors and a trunk, elicits zero interest from fart can A4s and Mustangs – until I stand on it. The odd guy knows what it is but he’s a rare one.
Before the latest horsepower war really took off, my ol’ 1994 Buick Roadmaster Limited with the tow package (3.08 gears instead of the stock 2.73) was one heck of a sleeper.
Brown too!
That LT1 made lots of power down low. 0-60 was supposed to be 6.9ish, which isn’t all that fast these days :(
My old ’86 Monte Carlo SS was a bit of a “surprise” car. Of course there was nothing subtle about the looks. Since the SSs came with weedy 305s, no one expected a roller-cammed 355 with a beefed up transmission.
Last generation V-6 RAV-4’s. 14-second 1/4 miles…soccer mom styling. You would never know the same engine lurking in a Lotus Evora was sitting under the hood.