# Favorite Q-ships?



## RyanA (May 5, 2009)

I was up in Warwick today and I saw my most favorite sleeper car ever, the Mercury Marauder (I know, not the fastest, I still think it's darn cool). It was stopped at a light so I pulled up next to it and gave the driver a double thumbs up:twothumbs, tongue out, rock on:rock:, all that,:bow:, etc. There was a little old lady driving it, she looked at me like I was crazy.:sick2:. I'm still wondering if she wasn't aware why the car is special or if she was trying extra hard to keep up the act. Maybe it was actually an old hot rodder dressed up like a little old lady just to sell the act.

Anyways, lets hear about your favorite street sleepers.


----------



## TooManyGizmos (May 5, 2009)

What on earth are you talking about ?

Please explain in more detail - what you are asking for. 


or maybe I'm just too old

.


----------



## RyanA (May 5, 2009)

Sorry, a q-ship or sleeper is a car/truck/etc. that most people would not expect to have above average performance. The term actually dates back to WWI and has a very interesting history involving U-boats believe it or not. Today it is used in it's original spirit, but admittedly a bit out of context in some cases (this case).
The Mercury Marauder (newer) it is a car (essentially a Crown Victoria with a little extra oomph) and brand that most people associate with the elderly, but it uses a power plant most often seen in performance packaged mustangs (the quad cam Mach1).
Think Transformers: "more than meets the eye"


----------



## gswitter (May 5, 2009)

LT1-powered Buick Roadmaster

And I can't help but chuckle every time I see the current Cobalt SS sedan specs.


----------



## RyanA (May 5, 2009)

gswitter said:


> LT1-powered Buick Roadmaster



LOL, wood panels and positraction for the win! The Roadmaster is a gem.

I've heard the Cobalt SS transmission is designed to be flat shifted. Don't take my word for it though, that information came from a very disreputable source, my brother, a lowly Chevy mechanic.:nana:


----------



## StarHalo (May 5, 2009)

The king of the sleepers, the BMW M3 sedan:







Comfortably seats five, spacious trunk, lots of luxury and safety features, and doesn't really draw that much attention..

..and the same performance numbers as a Ferrari F430 oo:


----------



## TooManyGizmos (May 5, 2009)

Oh ..... thank you for explaining ..............


At first I thought you were talking about railroad sleeper cars .............

but didn't understand the *Q-ships*.
.


----------



## binky (May 5, 2009)

StarHalo said:


> The king of the sleepers, the BMW M3 sedan



Does the M3 still count? I mean, doesn't everybody on the road see a Bimmer and think its driver bought it to floor it? On the other hand, it does have 2+ seats and there isn't a huge world of difference between that and the lowest of the 3-series, so I guess I could see where you're coming from. 

I should probably recuse myself though. My favorite Q-ship is my own 2004 Volvo V70 R AWD wagon. 300 hp, huge Brembo's with 4-pots to grab them. Good thing it's still not too good though. If I had bought the Audi RS 6 I was looking at I'd be writing this from a jail cell. That thing was too good.


----------



## Black Rose (May 5, 2009)

Probably my fathers 66 Impala.

It looked plain as day, except for that 427 Rat engine under the hood :devil:


----------



## chmsam (May 6, 2009)

Sleepers?

Earlier generations of Subaru WRX wagons.
Cobalt SS (if you remove the badges).
Mazda rotary engine RX-2/3/4's and pickup trucks from the 70's.
VW R32.
Neon ACR 4-door.
Mazda 323GTX from the 80's.
BMW 1600-2 (you could shoe horn in a 2002 motor).
Dodge Omni GLH.
Dodge Dart GT with a 273.
1970 Dodge GTX with an air grabber hood (426 or 440 6 pack).
a rally prepped Volvo 244 Turbo.


----------



## alaskawolf (May 6, 2009)

ive always liked the infiniti Q45


----------



## Big_Ed (May 6, 2009)

1990-91 Oldsmobile Cutlass Calais Quad 442
1992-93 Oldsmobile Achieva SCX W41
Almost any GM car with the Quad 4 engine. Makes for a quick little car no one suspects can outrun many V8's from the same era.


----------



## LukeA (May 6, 2009)

chmsam said:


> Cobalt SS (if you remove the badges).



Nobody's gonna confuse the Cobalt with another car, even without the badges.


----------



## chmsam (May 6, 2009)

Just because it's so new I know a lot of people staring at every Cobalt to check it out. If figure that's not limited to gear heads since other people know how to read too, but they are already pretty darned subtle. Ditto for the Infinity or something like an AMG.

Nothing is more low key than that Dart or the rotary Mazdas (especially the truck). Well, maybe an old V8 Mercury Comet but those were pretty rare in when they were new.

The GTX is a brute and not real noticeable until the scoop creeps up (if you can find one that still has a switch or mechanism that still works).


----------



## RyanA (May 6, 2009)

chmsam said:


> Just because it's so new I know a lot of people staring at every Cobalt to check it out. If figure that's not limited to gear heads since other people know how to read too, but they are already pretty darned subtle. Ditto for the Infinity or something like an AMG.
> 
> Nothing is more low key than that Dart or the rotary Mazdas (especially the truck). Well, maybe an old V8 Mercury Comet but those were pretty rare in when they were new.
> 
> The GTX is a brute and not real noticeable until the scoop creeps up (if you can find one that still has a switch or mechanism that still works).



I believe most cars around that time used vacuum to open headlight covers and things of that nature. Assuming (I couldn't tell you for sure, maybe see if the library has a Chiltion's guide lying around for domestic models from this year) this is true for the GTX then even if you found one with a bad mechanism the most likely culprit would be a rotted rubber hose.

Those rotary trucks are something I'll have to check out, that sounds cool.


----------



## chmsam (May 6, 2009)

The Plymouth didn't have headlight covers like that but the air grabber hood scoop did use a vacuum system. The switch, seals for the hood, and the tubing are all areas that need attention but then again the things are about 40 years old. Very neat to see the hood scoop rise up and the darned things actually had good airflow so they weren't just a gimmick. The sharks teeth stickers on the side of the scoop were just low key enough so they weren't stupid looking. When the scoop was down the hood on that model was almost flat so it was a real sleeper if you had the right paint and wheels on it. Elephant motors didn't have to sound noisy all the time either.

Now if they only had modern brakes, steering, and suspensions in them...

Shoot, when the first Plymouth muscle cars came out carpeting (I don't mean floor mats) was an option at additional cost but they were very inexpensive cars. Of course not too many years before that you could buy an XKE for between $6,000-7,000 or a Cobra (and not just the Mustang) for not much more than that (average prices of everything were a wee bit less back then).


----------



## gswitter (May 6, 2009)

Should probably add the early turbo Plymouth Voyager to the list.

I remember seeing a pretty hilarious write-up (and videos) by a guy who drags one and talks about showing up at the track, having all the kids pile out of the van and run up into the stands and cheer on Dad while he embarrasses the other cars with his sleeper.


----------



## StefanFS (May 6, 2009)

Fiat Uno Turbo. Weighs nothing, looks like nothing. Goes like a demon on sp**d.


----------



## buickid (May 7, 2009)

Love the Buick Grand National, or any Regal with the turbo motor. Looks like a grocery getter until you hit boost.


----------



## FrogmanM (May 7, 2009)

I love my .:32 

Mayo


----------



## Monocrom (May 7, 2009)

buickid said:


> Love the Buick Grand National, or any Regal with the turbo motor. Looks like a grocery getter until you hit boost.


 
The last gen. Buick Regal, but only the ones with the two-tone paint job. Those were the ones that got GM's sweet supercharged 3.8 liter V6. Plenty of torque and horsepower. And the only thing the cops would see is a mid-size sedan that barely had enough power to get out of its own way. (It helped that the Regal was often confused for the slower Century model in Buick's line-up).


----------



## Patriot (May 7, 2009)

The M3 DEFINATELY doen't qualify! 



Monocrom, the GN is a perfect sleeper.



My mom used to drive a 1971 Buick Centurion with a 455 cid. During that same time my dad was driving a 71 or 72 Cadillac Eldorado with 500 cid. They used to race each other all the time but I remember the Buick was a bit faster and the throttle had to be feathered from a stop if you wanted to get any traction. Those were pretty fast sedans back then and I remember mom embarrassing many a smaller sports car including the newer mid 70's vetts at the time.


----------



## Alaric Darconville (May 7, 2009)

chmsam said:


> Sleepers?
> Dodge Dart GT with a 273.



I can vouch for that! I had a '65 Dart 270 (four-door) with a 273 in it... While the 225 was a stump puller and fun in its own right, the 273 was just incredibly fun. Being a four-door car, it was more a sleeper than the GT, since it had all the look of a normal family car compared to the racy trim of the two-door GT.


----------



## StarHalo (May 7, 2009)

Patriot said:


> The M3 DEFINATELY doen't qualify!



Hm, I didn't think the M3 would be all that controversial, I guess BMWs are a lot more common in California.. I'll try again:

The current bone-stock Subaru WRX:







Comfortably seats five, four-cylinder frugality, all wheel drive safety and no frills with an "I'm a sensible car" exterior..

..and it can outrun a Mustang GT on the track or drag strip


----------



## oronocova (May 7, 2009)

I'm impressed with our Camry. Looks like a family car, quiet on the inside, 0-60 in under 6 seconds. Probably would fool a lot of people.


----------



## StarHalo (May 7, 2009)

oronocova said:


> I'm impressed with our Camry.



That's a good one, the Avalon and V6 RAV4 have the same performance numbers with that same engine, too.


----------



## addictedmatt (May 7, 2009)

Mine! Subaru legacy gt. 0-60 in just over 5 seconds. Makes me . The hood scoop kinda gives it away though.


----------



## RyanA (May 8, 2009)

addictedmatt said:


> Mine! Subaru legacy gt. 0-60 in just over 5 seconds. Makes me . The hood scoop kinda gives it away though.


Let's not forget the Forester XT! "Holy howling soccer moms batman!"

As far as M3's go I'd say that the e36 m3 4 door is much more subtle.


----------



## StarHalo (May 8, 2009)

RyanA said:


> As far as M3's go I'd say that the e36 m3 4 door is much more subtle.



That's true, though it was only a sleeper in its day; either of the pictured-above Subarus would easily overtake the older BMW.

It's amazing how much more performance modern cars have over similar models from only a decade ago..


----------



## Fallingwater (May 8, 2009)

Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII FQ400.
It looks like a heavily riced family saloon, of the sort that you'd expect to belong to a teen with too much money burning a hole in its pocket. You know, the silly looking cars that make a lot of noise and look flashy while being utterly unable to outperform... well, pretty much anything.

But it isn't a rice ride - it's a road-legal, 400hp, 4WD rally car, able to mix it up with most non-extreme supercars (read: lamborghini gallardo yes, pagani zonda no).








StarHalo said:


> That's true, though it was only a sleeper in its day; either of the pictured-above Subarus would easily overtake the older BMW.
> It's amazing how much more performance modern cars have over similar models from only a decade ago..


People have been doing engine swaps on old e36 beamers for a while. Someone somewhere had a webpage of a 318i modded with a smallblock V8 in place of the original inline-six... it was pushing some 500 horsepower.
How those 500 horses are going to be applied to the road without melting the tires, that's another matter... e36s don't have traction control, IIRC.

My dad had a red 320i e36 that I was in love with. Many times I suggested that he buy a new car for himself and give me his old beamer, but alas, it wouldn't happen. Irony had it that when my dad died and I inherited the beloved 320i, the head gasket was shot... that, along with badly ruined interiors and a multitude of other problems, raised the price for a decent restoration way above €5000. At that point I was forced to come to terms with the fact that I couldn't afford to have the car fixed, and that I had to get rid of it. When I had it towed and saw it for the last time I almost cried. 



StefanFS said:


> Fiat Uno Turbo. Weighs nothing, looks like nothing. Goes like a demon on sp**d.


Around here the Uno Turbo is known as "coffin on wheels". Many Uno Turbo drivers became suddenly and brutally aware that 118 horses on a car weighing less than a ton, with the aerodynamics of a brick and the chassis of an economy box was a frighteningly effective recipe for meeting your deity of choice ahead of time.


----------



## LightCannon (May 9, 2009)

I think the Mazdaspeed3 should count too. After all, to the untrained eye, it looks pretty much the same as the regular Mazda3.

Until you look under the hood. Then it whips out 263 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque.


----------



## Monocrom (May 9, 2009)

Fallingwater said:


> Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII FQ400.
> It looks like a heavily riced family saloon, of the sort that you'd expect to belong to a teen with too much money burning a hole in its pocket. You know, the silly looking cars that make a lot of noise and look flashy while being utterly unable to outperform... well, pretty much anything.
> 
> But it isn't a rice ride - it's a road-legal, 400hp, 4WD rally car, able to mix it up with most non-extreme supercars (read: lamborghini gallardo yes, pagani zonda no).


 
Not sure if the Evo would qualify. A Honda Civic with a body-kit, and a coffee can exhaust that makes it sound like a giant angry bee; that's one thing. But folks see an Evo, and they just seem to know that it's not your typical ricer.


----------



## Benson (May 9, 2009)

Monocrom said:


> Not sure if the Evo would qualify. A Honda Civic with a body-kit, and a coffee can exhaust that makes it sound like a giant angry bee; that's one thing. But folks see an Evo, and they just seem to know that it's not your typical ricer.


Maybe you could stealthify it by slapping on some of those cheap flame decals.


----------



## LightCannon (May 9, 2009)

Benson said:


> Maybe you could stealthify it by slapping on some of those cheap flame decals.


Hey, hey, hey! Don't be putting down the flame decals man! They make EVERYTHING go faster.

EVERYTHING.:devil:


----------



## Fallingwater (May 9, 2009)

Monocrom said:


> Not sure if the Evo would qualify. A Honda Civic with a body-kit, and a coffee can exhaust that makes it sound like a giant angry bee; that's one thing. But folks see an Evo, and they just seem to know that it's not your typical ricer.


You have a point.
Ok then...
Seat Ibiza Cupra TDI.






It's basically a prettied up VW Polo, but it has a 160hp turbodiesel engine under the hood. With its low weight it makes for a surprisingly zippy ride, especially when you consider that simply reprogramming the ECU can raise power to 180hp with no problems, and 200hp isn't out of the question.

It's no match for serious fast cars, but it'll beat the pants off most stock cars on the road. Its only real problem is that it's FWD...


----------



## Monocrom (May 10, 2009)

Fallingwater said:


> Its only real problem is that it's FWD...


 
Is the torque steer really that bad on it? 

My FWD '09 Mazda 6 (V6 trim) has barely any torque steer, despite 272 horses and 269 pound feet of torque. The only time torque steer becomes an issue is when driving over horribly uneven roads. Some wheel spin if I floor it on a standing start, but the passive traction / stability control kicks in with a gentle assist.

It won't outperform a current V8 Mustang in a drag race at the track. But on a twisting, back country, road; the Mustang would have a hard time keeping up with it.

Not sure if my Mazda 6 qualifies as a "Q." The dual chrome exhaust tips kinda give it away. On the other hand, my 6 is the only V6 version I've ever seen on the road. Of the handful of 6s I've seen, literally all were the 4-cylinder version. (Those get side-by-side exhaust pipes on the right side only).

Maybe it is a "Q." Most folks might mistake it for just a sporty _looking_ family sedan, without the power to keep up with the appearence... Actually, my car insurance company classified it as a mid-size family sedan. Family sedan my sweet @$$! 

But I'm not going to tell them how much fun it is.


----------



## UnderTheWeepingMoon (May 10, 2009)

My favourite would have to be my mate's plain white VN Commie Executive fitted with a supercharged 5L V8. Absolutely ridiculous car. Apart from the rims, the car is a complete sleeper, except that you hear it long before you see it and it spits the odd flame out the exhaust when flogged. Wiped the floor with Skylines at the lights. Unfortunately, it's been defected for numerous reasons and needs compliancing before it can get back on the road.


----------



## Fallingwater (May 10, 2009)

Monocrom said:


> Is the torque steer really that bad on it?


Dunno, haven't ever driven one. I'm unlikely to ever do that, either - I got into bikes two years ago, and since then performance numbers of hot hatches that would have once impressed me are met with contempt. 

It's just that anything with that power-to-weight ratio must be stupid fun to powerslide, and in a FWD you can't do that. Well, you can by using the handbrake, but it ain't the same thing...

Sad thing is, the only car of compact size with RWD is the BMW 1-series, and it's stupidly expensive for what it is...
The "compact size" thing is important around here, trust me.



UnderTheWeepingMoon said:


> My favourite would have to be my mate's plain white VN Commie Executive fitted with a supercharged 5L V8


Whoa... how many gallons does it do to the mile?


----------



## StarHalo (May 10, 2009)

Fallingwater said:


> Sad thing is, the only car of compact size with RWD is the BMW 1-series, and it's stupidly expensive for what it is...



No Mazda Miata, Porsche Boxster, BMW Z4, Honda S2000, Hyundai Genesis Coupe, Toyota MR2?


----------



## TKC (May 10, 2009)

*Grand National. Was is a Buick or Oldsmobile?THAT is my favorite sleeper.*


----------



## UnderTheWeepingMoon (May 11, 2009)

Fallingwater said:


> Whoa... how many gallons does it do to the mile?



Haha. He used to drive it all the way from Cleveland to uni and back every day (about an 80km round trip) and had to fill it up every day on the way home. It didn't help that he has a lead foot.


----------



## griffo (May 11, 2009)

StarHalo said:


> No Mazda Miata, Porsche Boxster, BMW Z4, Honda S2000, Hyundai Genesis Coupe, Toyota MR2?



They are all sports cars, and the old MX5 (miata) was P!ss Poor.

This thread is definitely very american, lol, Evo's and impreza's subtle? I think not.

What about this?





Doesn't look that dissimilar to a standard carlton and lot of younger people dont know what they are


FACTFI LE

ENGINE: In-line six, 36 5cc,twin turbos
POWER: 377bhp - 5200rpm, 41 9lb ft @4200rpm
TRANSMISSION: six-speed êbox
SUSPENSION 
Front: independent by MacPherson struts incorporating twin-tube dampers, anti-roll bar 
Rear: independent, multi-link with self-levelling,coil springs,twin-tube dampers
BRAKES: ventilated discs all round
LENGTH: 87.7in
WIDTH: 76in
HEIGHT: 56.5in
WEIGHT: 3641 lb
TOP SPEED: 175mph
0-60mph: 5.1 secs

Source: http://www.lotusespritworld.com/


----------



## Monocrom (May 11, 2009)

griffo said:


> They are all sports cars, and the old MX5 (miata) was P!ss Poor.


 
Main issues were being able to fit inside one of those things, and a horrible lack of power. But they are very tossable. Think of it as a Go-Kart with a few extra features, and that's pretty much what you're getting if you buy one.


----------



## Onuris (May 11, 2009)

IMHO the ultimate sleeper is the Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG wagon.

Looks like an ordinary wagon...











Until you open the hood...507 horsepower, 465 ft-lbs torque, 0-60 in 4 sec., excellent brakes and handling. And has great cargo capacity.






Only the fender badges hint that it is something special...






My girlfriend's parents have one- an 08, her dad says that the cops barely even pay any attention to them, even when speeding. In fast moving traffic the cops have gone after older v6 Firebirds and Mustangs and ignored the wagon.

I have driven it a few times, and am impressed with its performance, esp considering its size. I have a 98 Porsche Carrera4 which has a few performance mods to it, and to me the E63 feels quicker, but that may be due to the fact that it is an auto, and I'm not shifting gears like in my 911.


----------



## StarHalo (May 11, 2009)

griffo said:


> They are all sports cars



They're all rear-wheel drive and compact, per Fallingwater's note. Very tossable.


----------



## Patriot (May 11, 2009)

Fallingwater both of the cars you posted would be considered very sporty looking with an appearance of performance, at least here in the US. 


I think the Camry is the best fit yet with a 6 second 0-60 times. That would be known as a true "sleeper" or Q-ship.


----------



## Diesel_Bomber (May 11, 2009)

Q-ship from the factory? Or is tinkering allowed?

I once drove a Toyota Cressida that looked dead bang stock, other than someone putting rather outrageous tires on it. Then you pop the hood and there's a heavily modified twin turbo straight six out of a Supra looking up at you! The owner used to take it to the drag strip and regularly embarrass 800hp muscle cars.

There's at least one 500+ hp turbo-5VZE(that's a 3.4l V6) powered Mk1 Mr2 running around here.

:buddies:


----------



## Coop (May 11, 2009)

If you're talking sleepers, Mitsubishi evo, Subaru wrx, BMW M-models, Audi S-models, Volvo T5 & R models, Seat Cupra, Volkswagen GTI & R32 models and the like sure as hell don't count...

A sleeper is a car that doesn't give anything away until you see it in action... Badges, bodykits, spoilers and all that kind of stuff hints at the not everyday performance, so make it impossible for a car to be a sleeper.


----------



## tradderran (May 11, 2009)

Sunbeam Alpine Tiger. 271HP
260 CI V8 Ford.
Giant Killer


----------



## dudemar (May 12, 2009)

My favorites are the Audi S8 and Infiniti M45.


----------



## Radiophile (May 12, 2009)

Ultimate Q-ship from the 80s and early 90s - the Ford Taurus SHO. That all aluminum V6 was basically a V6 version of the ZR1 Corvette engine and made that car a serious sleeper. If I recall, Road and Track had an article about Q-ships back then, and specifically featured the SHO.

The '85-'87 Buick Regal T-types with the dual turbo 3.8 litre V6 were definitely Q-ships. Not as obvious as the Grand Nationals with the spoilers and badging, but nearly as powerful in stock form and easily upgradable to the same performance levels as the Grand Nationals. And of course there was the GNX which looked like a Grand National, but was blessed by Buick with even more performance. I tried to talk my brother in law into buying one back in the day, but he wouldn't budge and bought a Saab 900s instead.


----------



## Monocrom (May 12, 2009)

Radiophile said:


> The '85-'87 Buick Regal T-types with the dual turbo 3.8 litre V6 were definitely Q-ships. Not as obvious as the Grand Nationals with the spoilers and badging, but nearly as powerful in stock form and easily upgradable to the same performance levels as the Grand Nationals. And of course there was the GNX which looked like a Grand National, but was blessed by Buick with even more performance. I tried to talk my brother in law into buying one back in the day, but he wouldn't budge and bought a Saab 900s instead.


 
It's amazing what GM _could _produce, just over 20 years ago. 

To think... There was a time when performance addicts considered getting a Buick. Seems so long ago. (I guess it kinda was).


----------



## Fallingwater (May 12, 2009)

StarHalo said:


> No Mazda Miata, Porsche Boxster, BMW Z4, Honda S2000, Hyundai Genesis Coupe, Toyota MR2?


We have all of them but the Genesis, but they aren't the same type. Compact cars are like the VW Golf: small, but the space gets put to good use. The ones you mention are a lot more sporty, and impractical for everyday use. Owning a car is stupidly expensive around here, so most people can't afford to have a fast car for fun and something slow and cheap to run for everyday use; as a consequence, there is a strong desire to have cars that are both fun and relatively cheap to run. So, compact hot hatches with turbodiesel engines - but most are FWD, hence my original complaint. 



Patriot said:


> Fallingwater both of the cars you posted would be considered very sporty looking with an appearance of performance, at least here in the US.


Yeah, the Evo was a mistake. I'm still convinced the Ibiza qualifies as a sleeper though. I don't know what the situation is in the States, but people rarely pay any attention to small cars around here (probably because there are so darn many, and most are pathetically slow), and if they see large rims and spoilers the first thought isn't "whoa, that must be fast" but "heh heh, the owner is a silly ricer". Which is actually true most of the time... there are plenty of riced Puntos that would be put to shame by that Ibiza.
Besides, you could always buy a Ibiza Cupra and put the spoilers and tires from the standard version on it 

There is, by the way, a big problem for wannabe owners of sleepers around here: our law does not allow engine swaps. Some people export the car to Germany, swap the engine there and reimport it, but it's a bureaucratic nightmare and very expensive. Most just prefer to spend the same money on a car that is fast from the factory, but those rarely have ordinary looks.


----------



## StarHalo (May 12, 2009)

Radiophile said:


> Ultimate Q-ship from the 80s and early 90s - the Ford Taurus SHO.



I remember the SHO being all the rage in those days, Car and Driver even had a wagon version made just for kicks.

But Ford isn't done with the SHO idea..








Monocrom said:


> It's amazing what GM _could _produce, just over 20 years ago.



Don't forget that GM still makes Corvettes and Cadillac V-types..






(we're just waiting for that level of quality and performance to trickle down to the other, less expensive badges..)


----------



## Monocrom (May 12, 2009)

StarHalo said:


> Don't forget that GM still makes Corvettes and Cadillac V-types..


 
True... But they're not exactly Sleepers.


----------



## griffo (May 12, 2009)

6.0 W12 Phaeton





4.9 secs 0-60 Audi S8






0-60 in 4.8 Secs XJR


These have all got to count, sepecially the jag. Their all have mightily impressive 0-60 times considering their weight (by UK standards)


----------



## ABTOMAT (May 12, 2009)

gswitter said:


> LT1-powered Buick Roadmaster
> 
> And I can't help but chuckle every time I see the current Cobalt SS sedan specs.



That was the first thing I was going to mention. In a related note, I'd really like to pick up a clean 1994-96 Caprice 9C1. More rugged than the Buick.


----------



## gswitter (May 12, 2009)

ABTOMAT said:


> That [Roadmaster] was the first thing I was going to mention. In a related note, I'd really like to pick up a clean 1994-96 Caprice 9C1. More rugged than the Buick.


Yeah, but nothing screams "I'm gonna whup your ***!" like a wagon with faux wood siding.


----------



## seaside (May 12, 2009)

gswitter said:


> Yeah, but nothing screams "I'm gonna whup your ***!" like a wagon with faux wood siding.


 
I am not much of a car guy, but this was the car the dealer rent me while my honda was waiting to be fixed. 
It was like... I can sleep in it while I am driving it... to compare with my old honda back then.
Is it Buick LeSabor arrounds late 80s to early 90s?


----------



## StarHalo (May 13, 2009)

seaside said:


> YUP! I am not much of a car guy, so I am not sure the name of this car. But this is the car I was thinking about. Is it Buick LeSabor arrounds late 80s to early 90s?



That's the Buick Roadmaster, the last of the great "estate" station wagons made here in the US.

Buick's slogan at the time was "The great American road belongs to Buick", and when the Roadmaster came out, the joke was "The great American road belongs to Buick, because there isn't room for anything else.."


----------



## seaside (May 13, 2009)

Thanks for the info. 
I still am not able to tell buick century, Lesabor from roadmaster, and other bigger cars, I can tell that was not my old Ford Torus wagon though. I feel like I want to drive it again to see if I can sleep while I am driving it. 
Thanks again.


----------



## qip (May 13, 2009)

cyclones and typhoons :naughty:

anyone ever try a 92 Mx6-GT Turbo , this little thing is fast bone stock


----------



## MarNav1 (May 13, 2009)

61 Starliner with a 427 Medium or High riser, check the headlights for the forced air ducts....... Saw a picture of one in Hot Rod with an SOHC in it, ah the old Detroit iron.


----------



## RyanA (May 13, 2009)

Diesel_Bomber said:


> Q-ship from the factory? Or is tinkering allowed?



Within reason. I'd say let's try to avoid removing the engine from the car or removing the heads from the block.


----------



## ABTOMAT (May 13, 2009)

gswitter said:


> Yeah, but nothing screams "I'm gonna whup your ***!" like a wagon with faux wood siding.



A guy from Car & Driver had a Caprice wagon built up by Lingenfelter. I forget the specifics, but it was absurdly quick. I was thinking it should have been a Roadmaster with the fake wood.



seaside said:


> Thanks for the info.
> I still am not able to tell buick century, Lesabor from roadmaster, and other bigger cars, I can tell that was not my old Ford Torus wagon though. I feel like I want to drive it again to see if I can sleep while I am driving it.
> Thanks again.



The Century and LeSabre are midsize front-wheel-drive cars. The Roadmaster was built on the Caprice platform. Really big rear-wheel-drive model. Discontinued after 1996.


----------



## ABTOMAT (May 13, 2009)

Oh, I have another sleeper suggestion. Late '80s turbo Dodge Caravan. With a little tuning they can be faster than any minivan has a right to be. There used to be a guy who drag raced one and did pretty well.


----------



## StarHalo (May 13, 2009)

ABTOMAT said:


> Oh, I have another sleeper suggestion. Late '80s turbo Dodge Caravan. With a little tuning they can be faster than any minivan has a right to be.



The current Toyota Sienna minivan hits sixty in right around 7 seconds, making it competitive against a V6 Mustang or Honda Civic Si. It's also quicker than the aforementioned Taurus SHO.


----------



## ABTOMAT (May 13, 2009)

The turbo Caravan drag guy got his to do quarters in the 12.5-second range. On the 4-cylinder engine with some mods.


----------



## gswitter (May 13, 2009)

Yeah, the videos of the guy dragging the Caravan (assuming I'm thinking of the same guy - I thought it was a Plymouth Voyager?) with the kids screaming "Go, Dad!" in the background are great.


----------



## chmsam (May 13, 2009)

I used to know a girl who'd out drag mustangs with a 383 Polara station wagon in the 60's.


----------



## binky (May 13, 2009)

That and the Roadmaster were real wagons. I think you could fit a 4x8 sheet of whatever into the back of those. No way I can do that with my Volvo V70 R. Still, I sure do think a wagon makes for the best Q-ship platform because, well, who expects anything at all from a freakin' wagon? :thumbsup:


----------



## PCC (May 13, 2009)

StarHalo said:


> The king of the sleepers, the BMW M3 sedan:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would go with a 335i or 135i four-door sedan. With a chip and a few other mods it will have more HP than a modified M3. No need to pull the head on it, neither, to get over 400 HP in that car.

When we bought the 2000 Toyota Sienna minivan for my wife I had entertained thoughts about dropping a TRD supercharger kit into it but I could not find any brake upgrade kits for it so I didn't go for it.

B&B in Germany reskinned a Porsche 928 with bodywork that looks like a VW Rabbit. It's obviously larger than a real Rabbit but when this oversized bunny hugs your rear bumper then disappears into the horizon after you let him pass you've got to wonder what the owner did to the engine in that thing.

There are a few VW Microbusses and Vanagons out there with Porsche flat sixes in them. Those things pop wheelies if you're not careful. Okay, this is an engine swap, but, think about the possibilities.


----------



## griffo (May 14, 2009)

PCC said:


> I would go with a 335i or 135i four-door sedan. With a chip and a few other mods it will have more HP than a modified M3. No need to pull the head on it, neither, to get over 400 HP in that car.




What about the 335D??? that has to be a seriously under estimated machine!!! very good mpg too when you take it easy


----------



## Coop (May 14, 2009)

griffo said:


> ... very good mpg too when you take it easy



By US or non-US standards? :thinking:


----------



## gollum (May 14, 2009)

this is a great thread and I like to say most of these cars are what we call sleepers.
I always enjoyed my MazdaRX-3 coupe ,in the 80's they were still unknown as a fast car,and in a world of V8's the noisy little rotor was a delight to wipe the smile off just about anyones face...I think half the trouble with V8's in Oz at that time was points ignition was the norm.
my little rotor was quick in its day at 14sec flat 1/4mile and it got quicker as it got older.






recently I was going to shoe horn a 13B(rotary engine)into this





a 1967 Honda S800 
would have been great but I didn't have the time or knowledge to do everything,so I sold it off :sigh:


----------



## griffo (May 14, 2009)

Coop said:


> By US or non-US standards? :thinking:



5.7 secs to 60 and 428lb ft of torque....42mpg combined

Thats good by any countrys standards isnt it?


----------



## Fallingwater (May 14, 2009)

griffo said:


> What about the 335D??? that has to be a seriously under estimated machine!!! very good mpg too when you take it easy


Does it have the same 268hp engine as the 535d (the one with the dual-stage turbo)? If so then yeah, it's plenty fast... though I really hate how BMWs look after Chris Bangle got his hands on the designs.
If I had a LOT of disposable money I'd get an old 3-series e36, or possibly a Z3, and stick that same dual-turbo engine in it.


----------



## StarHalo (May 14, 2009)

Fallingwater said:


> I really hate how BMWs look after Chris Bangle got his hands on the designs.



The "Bangle Era" is over, BMW is updating all their designs, including the Z4..


----------



## griffo (May 15, 2009)

Fallingwater said:


> Does it have the same 268hp engine as the 535d (the one with the dual-stage turbo)? If so then yeah, it's plenty fast... though I really hate how BMWs look after Chris Bangle got his hands on the designs.
> If I had a LOT of disposable money I'd get an old 3-series e36, or possibly a Z3, and stick that same dual-turbo engine in it.



It certainly does!!! I've found that the designs have grown on me. I actually think the previous 5 series looks really dated now.

For meif I was going to get an old BMW though....it would have to be an 850i shame about the running costs as they are awesome cars


----------



## Fallingwater (May 15, 2009)

StarHalo said:


> The "Bangle Era" is over, BMW is updating all their designs, including the Z4..
> http://members.dslextreme.com/users/starhalo/2010Z4.jpg


Still looks ugly. Not very different from Bangle's designs.
I hope they eventually go back to the simple, elegant looks they had before, but I don't have my hopes high.



griffo said:


> I've found that the designs have grown on me. I actually think the previous 5 series looks really dated now.


It's the opposite for me. The more time passes, the uglier I find the "new" BMWs and the more I appreciate the old ones. I'd say it's because I'm getting old, if it wasn't that I'm just 26. 



> For meif I was going to get an old BMW though....it would have to be an 850i shame about the running costs as they are awesome cars


Oh yeah, that's the first car I'd buy if I won the lottery... specifically the 850csi


----------



## Monocrom (May 15, 2009)

griffo said:


> For meif I was going to get an old BMW though....it would have to be an 850i shame about the running costs as they are awesome cars


 
The new BMWs seem to be a weird combo of sculpted & slightly melted designs. Older BMWs had a more quiet elegence about them. Plenty of power, even if it wasn't an "M." With a design that didn't scream, "Look at me! I'm a German Sports car! Yo!"

Operating costs are definitely an issue. Edmunds.com got themselves a long-term 2002 M3... And it just re-enforced the old saying, "You _lease _a BMW, you don't buy one." They were trying to see if a used M3 would be a good bargain for folks who prefer to own, rather than lease, their ride. (Nothing like building equity with your monthly payments). Just didn't work out.

For those interested...

http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/Vehicles/2002BMWM3/


----------



## StarHalo (May 15, 2009)

Fallingwater said:


> Still looks ugly. Not very different from Bangle's designs.



Really? I think it's a huge improvement, with the 6-series-esque back end, and the new folding hardtop even makes it look a little like a mini-Mclaren..


----------



## binky (May 15, 2009)

StarHalo said:


> The "Bangle Era" is over



I didn't know that. Woohoo! 

I always wondered what he was doing aside from that job in order to keep the job of designing such terribly unattractive cars.


----------



## kz1000s1 (May 17, 2009)

RyanA said:


> The Mercury Marauder (newer) it is a car (essentially a Crown Victoria with a little extra oomph) and brand that most people associate with the elderly, but it uses a power plant most often seen in performance packaged mustangs (the quad cam Mach1).
> Think Transformers: "more than meets the eye"



If you're in Florida don't be in too much of hurry to race a Mercury Marauder. The highway patrol has some as unmarked cars. And they're not stock either. 
http://www.fordforums.com/f102/florida-highway-patrol-taps-reinhart-automotive-high-performance-modifications-102186/
The FHP always liked to have something faster than the average police car. They still have at least one '93 Mustang 5.0 in my area. There used to be some unmarked Mustangs too, painted dark gray with black wheels and dark tint. Those were sleepers! 

My best sleeper was a '69 Ford Fairlane Cobra. It had a 428 Cobra Jet motor with ram-air and a 4-speed. It looked innocent with black steel wheels and a vinyl top and quiet with the stock dual exhaust. The only clues were the small hoodscoop with 428 Cobra Jet emblems on them and the little chrome cobra emblems on the fenders, but back then people stuck those cobra emblems on their fords. 

One weekend I was driving at the local cruising spot and two guys in a '67 GTO come up next to me like they want to race. We were just going around 10 MPH in first gear when when the guy yells to me "were'd you get the hood!", in reference to the 428 emblems. I just smiled and floored it and lit up the tires from a roll for a good distance down the street. Mr. GTO seemed to loose interest in a race after that.

In that car I only lost one race to a car that was an even better sleeper in a way. At the time the black "smokey and the bandit" style Firebird Trans-Ams were popular and their owners seemed to think they were pretty fast. I however, was off a different opinion. My favorite game was to stay even with them at first, then drop back a little, floor it, and pull away from them. 
Then one time I came across a perfectly stock looking and sounding Trans-Am on a highway that wanted to run me, so I did. We started at 40 MPH and he beat me so bad it wasn't funny to 100+ MPH. At the time nitrous wasn't really being used yet, so it most likely had a custom made turbocharger system. It would have been hard to keep a normal, healthy big-block Pontiac or Chevy engine that quiet.

The car I had before that was a '70 Ford Torino GT with a 351 engine. That was until the transmission went, which gave me an excuse to buy a 429 Cobra Jet engine with a C6 trans that I knew a local junkyard had. Of course with my sense of humor, I had to leave the 351 emblems on the fenders!


----------



## kz1000s1 (May 18, 2009)

Radiophile said:


> Ultimate Q-ship from the 80s and early 90s - the Ford Taurus SHO. That all aluminum V6 was basically a V6 version of the ZR1 Corvette engine and made that car a serious sleeper. If I recall, Road and Track had an article about Q-ships back then, and specifically featured the SHO.
> 
> The '85-'87 Buick Regal T-types with the dual turbo 3.8 litre V6 were definitely Q-ships. Not as obvious as the Grand Nationals with the spoilers and badging, but nearly as powerful in stock form and easily upgradable to the same performance levels as the Grand Nationals. And of course there was the GNX which looked like a Grand National, but was blessed by Buick with even more performance. I tried to talk my brother in law into buying one back in the day, but he wouldn't budge and bought a Saab 900s instead.



The SHO was a good sleeper. That was a nice motor that was restricted to a 7,000 RPM redline only because the accessories and drive belts couldn't go higher. It was similar in concept to the old ZR-1 motor, DOHC with 4 valves/cylinder, but the SHO motor was made by Yamaha and the ZR-1 was designed by Lotus and built by Mercury Marine.

Some of the T-type Buicks were even sneakier and didn't have the regular fender emblems. I think they just had a little square emblem with a T on it.


----------



## StarHalo (May 18, 2009)

kz1000s1 said:


> At the time the black "smokey and the bandit" style Firebird Trans-Ams were popular and their owners seemed to think they were pretty fast.



I had to look it up, here it is:






1978 Pontiac Trans Am SE 6.6

400ci/6.6L V8, 220hp
4 speed manual transmission

0-60: 7.2 sec
1/4 mi: [email protected] (must exceed redline)

 
And for comparison:






2009 Toyota RAV4 V6

211ci/3.5L V6, 269hp
5 speed automatic transmission

0-60: 6.3 sec
1/4 mi: 14.8 [email protected]


Turns out Soccer Mom would blow Bandit's doors off..


----------



## kz1000s1 (May 18, 2009)

StarHalo said:


> Turns out Soccer Mom would blow Bandit's doors off..



And that TA was the fastest version with the Pontiac 400. Most seem to have a 403 Oldsmobile motor and auto trans that was slower.

Soccor Mom would also beat most of the average '60s muscle cars. 
A '68 Plymouth Roadrunner with a 383 Magnum engine would do 14.9 at best.


----------



## RyanA (May 25, 2009)

Did someone mention the turbo diesel 3 series?


----------



## rodfran (May 25, 2009)

I drove a 1968 Plymouth Fury I ex-highway patrol car with a 440. It was my first car. I removed the super-commando badges and put the 318 emblem on the hood. It had factory rubber floor mats and the 140 mph certified speedometer. It was a fun car. I still remember the look(pinkish color) and smell of premium leaded gas. When you hit pedal, hard acceleration with no flat spots. I must admit though, once you heard the induction noise coming from under the hood you knew it wasn't a 318.
A buddy of mine had a BB chevy impala. It was jet black and really evil looking.
We drove those cars back then on a daily basis and did not think of them as anything special. I mean, basically we considered them as grocery getters. The problem is that once you got used to driving those cars all the time , nothing else is ever the same. Good memories.
The hemis and the BB cameros were the really fast cars.

My wife and I raced 440's for about 25 years.

My next door neighbor's grandson had a GN Buick.
He went out to the track with us a few times. We put slicks on it and messed with a bit(K&N filter ignition etc.) It ran 13's which was ok, but it just didn't have the brutal low end torque of big blocks that my wife and I loved sooo much!


----------



## 1wrx7 (May 25, 2009)

chmsam said:


> Sleepers?
> 
> Mazda 323GTX from the 80's.


 
Since you mentioned this one.... When I was doing reseach for the basic bolt-ons for my 2003 wrx I came across an article talking about the 323. This particular magazine pulled the drivetrain out of a 323GTX and transplanted it. I know it was mentioned that the cars for this thread should be fairly factory but.... Imagine a Ford Festiva Anybody remember the rollerskate:nana: With the 323GTX AWD turbo 4cyl drivetrain this Festiva put down a 13.1 in the 1/4:devil: That's the ultimate sleeper in my book. If I beat the hell out of my tranny I might be able to get 13.5-13.7 in the 1/4 with my wrx.

Can you imagine the look on the guys face who gets beat by a Festiva


----------



## orbital (May 25, 2009)

+

A friend of mine is an airline mechanic, 
a number of years ago he put a small block Chevy into a old Volvo (light & rear wheel drive)

He'd pull up to stop lights and blow the doors off just about anything..

For me, I really don't have a favorite 'sleeper' 
but I absolutely hate cars that are *all show & no go!!!*


----------

