Sweet Dreams, Sweetheart... Sleeper Cars!

[MrktMkr1986]

I'll kick all your arses in my (hypothetical) grampa-style Regal GS. 240 hp.

The Regal weighs about 250-300 pounds more than both the Saab and the Volvo. Then again it does have 280lb./ft. of torque... it's anyone's guess.

 

[1X83Z]

I'll kick all your arses in my (hypothetical) grampa-style Regal GS. 240 hp.

My car has the same power and weighs 250lb less! I have the Regal down for 0-60 in 6.9; 6.6 for the 850R from the same source. You would beat the Saabs though.

Wait... is your car a 5-speed?

Unfortunately they only sold manual turbocharged 850s in Canada, so no, I've got a 4-speed automatic.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

My car has the same power and weighs 250lb less! I have the Regal down for 0-60 in 6.9; 6.6 for the 850R from the same source. You would beat the Saabs though.

A stock Saab, yes. A Saab 9000 CSE with a boost controller -- not a chance in hell.

Unfortunately they only sold manual turbocharged 850s in Canada, so no, I've got a 4-speed automatic.

That increases my chances! Especially with the boost controller.

Boost controller = The Great Equalizer

 

[skip0110]

The Regal weighs about 250-300 pounds more than both the Saab and the Volvo. Then again it does have 280lb./ft. of torque... it's anyone's guess.

0-60 times
'96 850R -- 6.7 sec
'97 Regal GS -- 6.6 sec
(cant find info on the Saab)

EDIT: Hmmm....M5 beat me to it. The fact that our numbers have the two cars swapped is testimony to how closely matched they really are.

So it's really quite close.

If you want to bring the aftermarket into it, I'm pretty sure the Regal has the other two securely wrapped up with the stuff from Thrasher Perfromance (http://www.thrashercharged.com/showcase_htm/gsx.shtm) . How does 370 hp sound? Equates to about mid-13s in the 1/4.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

0-60 times
'96 850R -- 6.7 sec
'97 Regal GS -- 6.6 sec
(cant find info on the Saab)

So it's really quite close.

If you want to bring the aftermarket into it, I'm pretty sure the Regal has the other two securely wrapped up with the stuff from Thrasher Perfromance (http://www.thrashercharged.com/showcase_htm/gsx.shtm) . How does 370 hp sound?

Modifications shouldn't cost more than $100 USD. Otherwise you'd have an unfair advantage -- the boost controller cost me $45.

 

[skip0110]

Modifications shouldn't cost more than $100 USD. Otherwise you'd have an unfair advantage -- the boost controller cost me $45.

A $70 pulley swap on the supercharger upps boost from 8 psi to 11 psi and a (claimed) 40% hp boost--probably an optimistic figure.

 

[1X83Z]

Modifications shouldn't cost more than $100 USD.

Says who!?

I don't know about that 6.6 figure for the Regal GS - I've got 6.9 for it and the Grand Prix GTP it shares everything with. It's a pretty minimal difference obviously, and indeed the on-paper times are truly a testament to how close the race would be. (though I don't want to race a Regal GS - they've recently become my favorite $15000 used car! And I don't like racing cars I like. Or honking at them)

 

[MrktMkr1986]

Says who!?

Just to keep things fair!

I don't know about that 6.6 figure for the Regal GS - I've got 6.9 for it and the Grand Prix GTP it shares everything with. It's a pretty minimal difference obviously, and indeed the on-paper times are truly a testament to how close the race would be. (though I don't want to race a Regal GS - they've recently become my favorite $15000 used car! And I don't like racing cars I like. Or honking at them)

I prefer turbochargers to superchargers...

 

[Roo]

I knew we had a sleeper thread - I didn't realise it was this old.

However, I've just come across this on PistonHeads, and after a brief search couldn't find it posted here:

That's a 700hp Saab 99 that runs 9 second quarter miles.



Build thread, translated through Google.

 

[Leonidae]

Did you see that SAAB GO?! I wonder if KoenigSAABss will be like that one..

 

[High-Test]

Mother of god.

I think I saw it, was the car that bluish blur going across the screen?

 

[Leonidae]

I think so. I'd say that he needs to do some suspension work..

 

[aStRoRdInArY]

1993 chevrolet 2500 standard cab with the 5.7 liter v8 and posi. i have one a few races against my friends in this cause they think its just some old pick up truck.

 

[mPWRD]

I think so. I'd say that he needs to do some suspension work..

I was just about to comment on the terrible body roll I saw on that first shift... scary.

My contribution: The Brabus Viano V8.

0-60 in 6 seconds, top speed 152 mph. Not nearly as quick as that Saab, but a sleeper car nevertheless.

 

[EA11R]

^Want. Badly.

 

[turboash78]

Didn't read the whole thread, but my favorite sleeper is a 2000ish Buick Regal GS... looks like a grampy sedan, only it has a 3.8 V6 supercharged to 240 hp with 280 ft/lbs of torque.

 

[TheCracker]

My contribution: The Brabus Viano V8.

0-60 in 6 seconds, top speed 152 mph. Not nearly as quick as that Saab, but a sleeper car nevertheless.

That's not a sleeper car/van. This is a sleeper van:



Yes, those are XJ220 wheels - to go with the XJ220 engine and running gear.

 

[Leonidae]

this > ford XJ220. No-one expects Spanish Inquisition.. er, Citroen van to be fast.

 

[Jetboy.]

The sound emenating from that is all kinds of massive win.


Nominating my car into sleeper status:
1991 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais Quad 442: 200 horsepower, 5 speed manual 4 cylinder Oldsmobile. No one sees it coming.


Cheers,
Jetboy

 

[mPWRD]

this > ford XJ220. No-one expects Spanish Inquisition.. er, Citroen van to be fast.

Wow. Tell me that is honest-to-god Ferrari running gear. I guess it isn't a true 2CV, but cool nonetheless.

 

[Leonidae]

Wow. Tell me that is honest-to-god Ferrari running gear. I guess it isn't a true 2CV, but cool nonetheless.

yeah, it's 355 underneath, just like that Ford van is XJ220. they just chopped the rear to make room for the engine and drivetrain etc.. I'd tap that for halloween.

 

[mPWRD]

The van body on that XJ220 just throws off the whole thing... the Brabus Viano is a van that's been modified with a sports car engine (OK, not really sports-car). The XJ220 van, on the other hand, is a fiasco from a physics perspective. That body screws with the center of mass, aerodynamics, etc. But I have to admit, it does have that craziness factor.

 

[High-Test]

The XJ220 powered van is a complete mindbender, but I've a softspot for the 2CV van.

On the 2CV van:

I dropped my french professor an email with a link to a video of that insane 2CV over the summer. I had a class that he taught about french film from 1950-present last semester, and we talked about the 2CV a bit in that class. (I had been commenting about the uncharacteristically placed cadillacs and pontiacs in Godard's new wave films.. I guess he picked me out as the car guy, so he asked me to tell the entire class why the 2CV was important, and later the traction avant )

He's the department chair of French and Italian at KU, and his response to my email delved into the mechanics of the car's handling. That was yet another tick in this guy's column of awesomeness.

....and earlier today in 20th century lit he was naming off firearms that René Char was NOT talking about in his poem «Le Martinet»

 

[TsLeng]

ford xj220 van > 2CV F355

Because the 2CV does not look like a sleeper at all. Incredible car it is... sleeper, nope.
The ford.. on the other hand, with its white paint, tools on roof, who would guess? :-D