You have to have awd?

Just get a v6 barge.

Used avalon

>>14793730
>you have to have AWD?

not really, but you don't have any new rwd sleeper cars anymore.
FWD is alright but when AWD is an option, it's the better choice.
FWD is superior to RWD in certain situation and AWD is superior to FWD in those situations, under ideal circumstances RWD would be best.
but ideal is a drag strip or a track day.
That's not the idea here.

>>14793712
Between the two, I'd choose the Fusion. Although the Taurus SHO is what you're looking for.

>>14793712
These are both shitty modern cars with tiny windows and too much safety bullshit. Go buy an e39 540 and call it a day.

>>14793815
>Taurus SHO
out of my price range with double the miles of the cars I look at.
Maybe if it had a better aftermarket, but if the Fusion Titanium has outpaced it then it's kind of a lost cause.

>>14793841
>540i

ew. i'd rather personally work on a CVT transmission for a living than ever touch one of those.

>>14793871
It's the perfect quick sedan under 10k.

>>14793960
>under 10k
because within 6 months I'll be out 10k fixing it.

>>14793966
Not true. You can get one that's been taken care of and had its problems sorted out.

>>14793998
You said under 10k.

>sleeper build
>all cars are automatic
Please move out of your parents house

>>14794010
Those aren't mutually exclusive.

>>14794019
>being this much of a manbaby
go back to wrenching on your Miata, it's respectable enough. Leave the actual building to the big boys.

>>14794021
You said under 10k, so that's what I went off of.
Yeah, a well kept and serviced 540I would be great.
Until I drove it about 5,000 miles.
I'm not looking for a DD, I'm looking for something that -looks- like a DD but isn't.
It needs to be able to take a beating. Fusions and Chryslers to a lesser extent can.

>>14794034
Kek Miata
Good try though.

Or you can just buy a Chevy SS.
>few people know what it is, nobody has ever seen one
>looks like an Impala
>goddamn huge V8
>RWD
>now comes with a manual and magnetic suspension
>can put a lot of bits from crashed Camaros on it
This car seems like it was designed to be the getaway vehicle for bank robbers.

>>14794034
Those cars are also boring as shit.

>fca
>ford turbo
>taking a beating
Pick one.

2015+1
>buying anything American
People still do this?

>>14794056
>under 25k
They start at 30 used m80, and I'm not trying to finance.
I'm holding out until I can get some time off work (I work 7 days a week at two jobs) to test drive all of the above plus some extras that catch my eye.
>>14794054
>sleeper build
anybody can build up a manual tranny, it's proven.
but take an auto tranny car from an auto-tranny only lineup, build it up, and you have a....
>sleeper build

So far the only problems have been
(A - Adjusting parameters to allow me to bounce the rev limiter in 5th gear on my fusion
(B - Finding the best shift points for the automatic without my input
It's really not that hard. It's just not that convenient.

>>14794064
>boring as shit
>sleeper build
you might be onto something, I know I am.

>>14794069
>free bumps
free replies! take your trip off next time.

>>14794117
Your reply to my comment has got to be the stupidest fucking thing I have read all day. What are you going to do? Some torque converter swap?
Manual with always be superior
My 2015 civic is even manual.
>that feel when 97% of 9th get civics had cvt
>part of the 3% that came in manual
People are literally shocked when they see my stick

>>14794117
Man, this is gonna cost a lot anyway. You're trying to build two shitboxes into something that can be called a sleeper and not just something to lull you to sleep. Might as well drop some more dosh on something Strayan. You'll end up with something that A: wont explode catastrophically, B: can actually handle worth a damn, C: can actually beat cars that cost 5-10k, and finally D: has a lot of upgrade room to beat those same cars after they've been modded.

look for a rav4 from 2006-2012 or something I believe. they had an optional V6 that made pretty damn good power for such a light car and those things flew. im sure it can be had in awd too.

>>14794117
>They start at 30 used m80
nah mate, if you lived in a first world cuntry you'd be able to get one for 6 and a slab of piss aye

>>14794132
>manual will always be superior
We've established that in my reply right here.
>anybody can build up a manual tranny, it's proven.
They are, hands down, the "better" tranny for a build.
But sleepers aren't about having the best of anything. It's about having what looks like nothing and ends up being fucking something. Seriously, not everyone wants a cheap little tuner or an expensive fast sports car.

>>14794139
I mean, I appreciate the input, but have you looked into either of the cars you're talking down on? Because I really have, and I currently wrench on one. It's not as cheap as my Integra was, but it's not as expensive as the 350Z's is.
You also have to realize that since these cars are automagic-only, their aftermarkets are built for automagic only.


And in reply to both of you, if you have any 5-6speed sleepers that are new to recommend, I'd love to hear them.
>>14794141
Thanks for the suggestion m8.

>>14794143
Y-Yeehaw?

>>14794141
same anon. it made a whopping 270 horsepower coupled with awd.>>14794143

>>14794166
same anon again, didnt mean to hit your post baka desu

>>14794165
Look up Saabs. They are pretty cheap used, have a decent AWD system, and they had a 2.8L turbo V6 with internals that I hear are good to 500hp. Most importantly, theres a weirdly active modding community, and despite being GM owned they're built pretty tough.

>>14794198
Dont forget that they literally made a disguised WRX at one point.

>>14793761
>fwd superior

top keke

>>14794302
It is if all you want to do is get good MPGs on your way to work.

>>14794302
Pulling is easier than pushing.
It's also important to read the entire post before your inner benchracer gets triggered.
thanks for the bump tho.

>>14794340
And in cars, pulling harder makes it harder to pull, while the opposite is true for pushing. Unless you're the kind of person people bring their cars to for you to build into a time attack monster, you really aughta stay away from FWD if going fast is your goal.

>>14794380
>so I'm just going to tell you to stay away from FWD despite the fact that the three cars you are considering are AWD (Fusion and 200) or RWD (possibly SS if I can get a good deal on one)

Read the entire post. And the OP. And the thread.

>>14793712
how does the fusion compare to the Taurus SHO?

>>14794398
Cheaper, less mileage for price, better aftermarket, easier to work on engine, lighter, smaller.

>>14794393
That post had no bearing on the OP

>>14794406
I am the OP you mong.
>>14793730
>>14793761

>>14794302
FWD superior
>Driving in snow
>Getting good mpg

>>14794407
Dont care. That "pulling is easier then pushing" thing made it sound like you were saying FWD was a better choice then RWD for a car built to be fast. Was correcting that.

>>14794414
and you were implying I was saying in that post that FWD was superior to RWD, when I clearly stated it wasn't.
Being superior in certain situations =/= superiority.
In general, on a road, if condition aren't ideal.
(read - Wind, rain, snow, sleet, ice, hail, rough roads) then FWD is the superior layout to RWD.
AWD is superior to FWD in those situations.
When it is not any of the above, odds are RWD will come out on top. It'll probably win with just rough roads too.

But since you want to be spoonfed instead of reading a fucking post, let me go ahead and spoonfeed you - They don't make sleeper-tier cars in RWD anymore. You have the SS, that's it.
Period, end of story.
As such, my options are, AWD or FWD.
You pick.

>>14794433
Christ, you made a serious reply to a shitpost that was saying FWD was useless, what do you think that looks like? Chill senpai.

>>14794439
that's the thing about this board, it's hard telling shitposters from people who actually believe those things.

>>14794433
>They don't make sleeper-tier cars in RWD
The Impala SS from the 90's, though that thing has a bit of a reputation. Strip the badges.
Panther platforms and GM B-bodies, both have V8's and look like something a geriatric would drive. Requires weight reduction. A lot of weight reduction.
Volvos, cause they can handle straight retarded power levels and Scandinavians have been tuning them for years
Older small trucks, despite what you'd think.
The GM G-Body cars. V8's that were shit from the factory packed into a boring-ass shell, but can be as fast as your wallet allows.

>>14794056
This. The SS is OP's best bet if he wants an used car.

>>14794529
The only problem is that they sold like shit, and will surely be hard to track down. They only sold those fuckers in dealerships that sold a lot of Camaros and C7s.

>>14794497
I was more thinking 2010 + but I'll look into those.

>>14794537
yep, once the plant in Australia shuts down they'll skyrocket in value

>>14794538
Buying old crap has the bonuses of getting a car that looks shittier and more unassuming, and of saving you a decent amount of dosh. If you buy a newer one, you might end up with a worse base just because the car hasn't had that long to depreciate. The SS is already putting out as much as the highest-spec 200 and Fusion for less then half the price. Plus these older bastards have decades of aftermarket and thousands of boomer forum posts to help you out.

A 90's Lexus GS would also be good. RWD and a 2JZ. The following model also had the 1UZ in it.

If the fact that its a Chrysler isn't too offputting, the last gen 300 might be good. Weighs a fuckton, but the C and SRT trims made pretty great power. And it looks like a shitty ghetto Bentley due for a donk.

>>14794573
>less than half the price
m8, the used SS starts at 30k for a base model with 60,000 miles.
I can get fully loaded used 200/Fusions with sub-10k miles for that price.

>Unassuming
you don't get as unassuming as the Fusion Titanium and the 200.
They are literally boring family vehicles with (in the fusion's case) proven, good aftermarket potential, or the 200's case, simply aftermarket potential.
The literal only thing I'd get an older car for is for a decent manual and an extremely expensive rebuild from the ground up, ie mazdaspeed protege.
As it sits m8 the fusion would actually be the cheapest for me to mod up out of my options, considering I have multiple parts that are cross-compatible with the fusion titanium, as I own a 1.6 of the same year with some basic upgrades (plug-n-play, intercooler, brembo pads, michelen tires)

>>14794643
You sure you're looking at the old RWD Impala SS with the LT1 and not the new FWD one? Im seeing those for like 4.5k Canadian monopoly monies, which is probably like three fiddy in murrkan dollars at this point.

>>14794661
Oh shit, I thought you were talking about the Chevy SS. Sorry bout that.

>>14794165
s t r a y a
c
u
n
t

A U D I A 4
U
D
I
A
4

>>14794983
Normies think all Audis are fast, and at the rate the brand is homogenizing I think Ill be hard pressed to tell an A4 from an RS5 in a few years. I think their heads of design are the human manifestations of the copy and paste tools.

>>14794993
That's pretty much Audi's intention. It does make their cars timeless, though.

>>14795003
And probably saves them a metric fuckton of Reichsmarks by only needing to make one grille.