If you're looking for fast and cheap -

The sts-v is extremely heavy.

It has 469 horsepower, but weighs 4,200+ pounds.

Speed has to do with a lot of factors, such as WHP, torque, weight, and many other factors.

If you're looking for fast and cheap for under 20k, there are better options. Personally, I'm a BMW guy. For $20k you can find a good condition supercharged/turbo M3 (have to look nationwide) that will get you about 420HP, but provide much better handling, be an actual race car, and be faster in every sense.

Just keep those factors in mind - I'd encourage you to keep looking. That is not a good car, and not a good deal.

prepare to be nickeled and dimed to your grave

>>14702143
M3s are expensive to maintain. Cadi you can find parts just about anywhere and diy the repairs.

M3s are everywhere. That sts v is a rare find

>>14702122
>Anything I should be aware of?
its a GM product, so everything that can go wrong WILL go wrong

>>14702158
I wasn't specifically saying M3 is the answer.

My point - focus more on power-weight ratio than horsepower.

A lot also depends on what you want to do with the car. Why do you want it to be fast? Are you racing it? Are you racing from a dig? 0-60? Are you tracking it? Bendy tracks? Ovals? If you just looking for a fun grand touring car that's cheap to maintain, you're going to run into issues.

As far as BMW's go (just what I know) an M5 is cheap, you could pick one up for 20k. You're still buying parts (even used) for a $100k car. If the STS-V is a rare find, expect parts to be expensive, and labor equally expensive.

>>14702122
Rly comfortable and fast. Not great at corners. My dad had one. He loved it. Ended up getting a srt8 jeep cuz he needed bigger space

Massive amount of recalls

the northstar is based

>>14702122
Worst of both worlds

Caddy chassis (old caddy too not le edgy fighter jet modern caddy)
It's a v with an engine that's caddy too. So you have caddy problems with caddy engine problems too. At least a real v has a Chevy engine. There's a reason no one gave a fuck about this car when the first gen cts v was out

>>14702122
The STS-V didn't really make any sense... STS was the luxobarge thing in contrast with the sport sedan that is CTS. It's not a nimble car. Fast yes, not nimble by any stretch.