# Top-20 Quickest Cars that cost under $40k



## MCSL (Jan 30, 2005)

Base Price: $40,000 or less

0-60mph Acceleration


Mitsubishi Evo9 MR _ 4.7 s

Chrysler/Dodge SRT-8 _ 4.9 s

Subaru WRX STI _ 5.1 s

Lexus IS350 _ 5.1 s

Pontiac GTO _ 5.2 s

Ford Mustang GT _ 5.3 s

Honda S2000 _ 5.4 s

Mercedes C350 _ 5.5 s

Subaru WRX TR _ 5.5 s

Nissan 350Z _ 5.6 s


Chrysler 300C/Dodge Charger RT _ 5.6 s

Subaru Legacy GT _ 5.6 s

Pontiac Grand Prix GXP _ 5.7 s

Chevy Impala SS _ 5.7 s

Mitsubishi Eclipse GT _ 5.8 s

Infiniti G35 Sedan/Coupe _ 5.9 s

Nissan Altima SE-R _ 5.9 s

VW Passat 3.6 _ 5.9 s

Acura TL _ 5.9 s

BMW 330i _ 6.0 s


----------



## hawk2100n (Sep 19, 2005)

At least there is a BMW product in there, if not dead last. The Subaru forester 2.5 GT was tested 0-60 in about 5.4 secs. That only runs about $23,000.


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

Uh, that list is missing the Mazdaspeed6 which is definitely a sub 6 second car.

Of that list only two of those cars are even decent and one is 20th on the list.


----------



## DougE46 (Dec 18, 2005)

blueguydotcom said:


> Uh, that list is missing the Mazdaspeed6 which is definitely a sub 6 second car.


No it's not.


----------



## chuck92103 (Oct 9, 2005)

It is not how fast the car is..

But rather how good it looks when it arrives. :thumbup: Joking of course overall handling is just as important.

Find it most interesting the top cars with speed are never the top 10 cars to buy. :dunno:


----------



## KrisL (Dec 22, 2001)

Isn't the Neon SRT-4 sub 6-second 0-60? ...and it's only $20k.


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

DougE46 said:


> No it's not.


If you're basing your statement off early reviews, I can say without a doubt the car is far faster than the 6.XX numbers autoweek and others delivered last year. The car's far faster than a 3 series...even my 330i performance package 6 speed (which is faster than the e90).


----------



## iateyourcheese (Sep 9, 2004)

blueguydotcom said:


> ...even my 330i performance package 6 speed (which is faster than the e90).


 :flame: : popcorn:


----------



## SmoothCruise (Jul 23, 2005)

Wow, I didn't know Mercedes made cars less than $40k.


----------



## James (Jun 30, 2004)

SmoothCruise said:


> Wow, I didn't know Mercedes made cars less than $40k.


 Depends, did you want a radio in your MB? 

I find the base price of MB are reasonable but EVERYTHING is an option.


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

iateyourcheese said:


> :flame: : popcorn:


What's that about? The zhp was listed by bmw as a 5.9 car. The e90 is listed as a 6.1 car (http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/3/2006330isedan/techdata.htm).


----------



## iateyourcheese (Sep 9, 2004)

blueguydotcom said:


> What's that about? The zhp was listed by bmw as a 5.9 car. The e90 is listed as a 6.1 car (http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/3/2006330isedan/techdata.htm).


There were some posts on the e90 forum that said an e90 325i could easily beat an e46 330i. I'm sure some believe the e90 330i will trounce all the e46 variants.

It's just reminiscent of the ZHP flame sesssions we had 1+ years ago. Good stuff. I miss AF.


----------



## Penforhire (Dec 17, 2005)

Shouldn't the Dodge SRT-4 (aka a blown Neon) also be on that list? IIRC, it is a match for the S2000 in acceleration.


----------



## KrisL (Dec 22, 2001)

Penforhire said:


> Shouldn't the Dodge SRT-4 (aka a blown Neon) also be on that list? IIRC, it is a match for the S2000 in acceleration.


That's what I said above .

A friend mentioned to me that it is no longer in production.


----------



## BMWenthusiast (Feb 27, 2005)

hawk2100n said:


> At least there is a BMW product in there, if not dead last. The Subaru forester 2.5 GT was tested 0-60 in about 5.4 secs. That only runs about $23,000.


ya, but i dont think the 3 series is built for speed, sure, it has great power, but i really dont think its built for the 0-60 like some of the other cars, but yes, its good to have a BMW in there


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

We have a WRX, and I can't imagine trying to hit 60 in 5.5 sec, the poor car would cough up its clutch in a big smelly lump. The WRX feels like a 7.0 sec 0-60 car.


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

Dawg90 said:


> We have a WRX, and I can't imagine trying to hit 60 in 5.5 sec, the poor car would cough up its clutch in a big smelly lump. The WRX feels like a 7.0 sec 0-60 car.


 The clutch is tough, it's the transmission that isn't.


----------



## Penforhire (Dec 17, 2005)

That's okay, you have to evil things to a S2000 (screaming clutch drop) to get < 6 second 0-60. Once upon a time, Honda advertised <6 sec 0-60. They stopped those ads after too many owners damaged their cars. I owned an early S2000 and it was fun. Never saw a dyno with as flat a torque curve (like a tabletop with just a small bump up at VTEC).


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

The z4 3.0 is not there. I know it officially starts at $41.xxx but it always has a few thousand dollars of trunk money.


----------



## SmoothCruise (Jul 23, 2005)

Dawg90 said:


> We have a WRX, and I can't imagine trying to hit 60 in 5.5 sec, the poor car would cough up its clutch in a big smelly lump. The WRX feels like a 7.0 sec 0-60 car.


No way! My friend has a WRX and the thing is really really fast. Well, it's faster than my 6er, that's for sure, which is advertised to do less than 6.0 seconds (don't remember the exact numbers). So I would think 5.5secs is well within the WRX reach, even if it means busting something.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

Nick325xiT 5spd said:


> The clutch is tough, it's the transmission that isn't.


Ooh, that doesn't make me feel any better. 

Actually my girlfriend is tougher than both, if I try to rev it past 3500.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

SmoothCruise said:


> So I would think 5.5secs is well within the WRX reach, even if it means *busting something*.


That was my point, yes. Car reviewers aren't dumping the clutch on their own cars.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

Dawg90 said:


> We have a WRX, and I can't imagine trying to hit 60 in 5.5 sec, the poor car would cough up its clutch in a big smelly lump. The WRX feels like a 7.0 sec 0-60 car.


the one in the original post is a WRX TR, which is a new for 06 model, so that has the new 2.5T instead of the 2.0T that is in your SO and my car. It should be easier to get better numbers with the new engine.


----------



## MCSL (Jan 30, 2005)

KrisL said:


> Isn't the Neon SRT-4 sub 6-second 0-60? ...and it's only $20k.


Dodge has stopped Neon production.


----------



## MCSL (Jan 30, 2005)

SmoothCruise said:


> Wow, I didn't know Mercedes made cars less than $40k.


Mercedes C350 Road Test

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=10116


----------



## MCSL (Jan 30, 2005)

Dawg90 said:


> We have a WRX, and I can't imagine trying to hit 60 in 5.5 sec, the poor car would cough up its clutch in a big smelly lump. The WRX feels like a 7.0 sec 0-60 car.


You'll find the '06 WRX road test in the Sep/Oct 05 R&T SPEED.

Subaru WRX TR

http://www.subdriven.com/news/publish/Subaru_News/article_412.shtml


----------



## MCSL (Jan 30, 2005)

Base Price: $40,000 or less

0-60mph Acceleration


Lotus Elise (190 hp I-4, 6MT) _ 4.6 s

Mitsubishi Evo9 MR (286 hp I-4 Turbo, 6MT) _ 4.7 s

Chrysler/Dodge SRT-8 (425 hp V-8, 5AT) _ 4.9 s

Subaru WRX STI (300 hp F-4 Turbo, 6MT) _ 5.1 s

Lexus IS350 (306 hp V-6, 6AT) _ 5.1 s

Pontiac GTO (400 hp V-8, 6MT) _ 5.2 s

Ford Mustang GT (300 hp V-8, 5MT) _ 5.3 s

Honda S2000 (240 hp I-4, 6MT) _ 5.4 s

Mercedes C350 (268 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 5.5 s

Subaru WRX TR (230 hp F-4 Turbo, 5MT) _ 5.5 s


Chrysler 300C/Dodge Charger RT (350 hp V-8, 5AT) _ 5.6 s

Nissan 350Z (300 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 5.6 s

Subaru Legacy GT (250 hp F-4 Turbo, 5MT) _ 5.6 s

Pontiac Grand Prix GXP/Chevy Impala SS (303 hp V-8, 4AT) _ 5.7 s

Mitsubishi Eclipse GT (263 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 5.8 s

Infiniti G35 Sedan/Coupe (298 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 5.9 s

Nissan Altima SE-R (260 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 5.9 s

VW Passat 3.6 (276 hp V-6, 6AT) _ 5.9 s

Acura TL (270 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 5.9 s

BMW 330i (255 hp I-6, 6MT) _ 6.0 s


----------



## MCSL (Jan 30, 2005)

Base Price: $40,000 or less

Standing ¼-mile Acceleration


Lotus Elise (190 hp I-4, 6MT) _ 13.2 s @ 104 mph

Chrysler/Dodge SRT-8 (425 hp V-8, 5AT) _ 13.3 s @ 108.2 mph

Pontiac GTO (400 hp V-8, 6MT) _ 13.3 s @ 107 mph

Mitsubishi Evo8 MR (276 hp I-4 Turbo, 6MT) _ 13.3 s @ 105.9 mph

Subaru WRX STi (300 hp F-4 Turbo, 6MT) _ 13.3 s @ 103.0 mph

Lexus IS350 (306 hp V-6, 6AT) _ 13.7 s @ 104 mph

Ford Mustang GT (300 hp V-8, 5MT) _ 13.8 s @ 103 mph

Honda S2000 (240 hp I-4, 6MT) _ 13.9 s @ 100.2 mph

Nissan 350Z (300 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.1 s @ 101.8 mph

Chrysler 300C/Dodge Charger RT (350 hp V-8, 5AT) _ 14.1 s @ 101.1 mph


Subaru WRX TR (230 hp F-4 Turbo, 5MT) _ 14.1 s @

Mercedes C350 (268 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.2 s @ 99 mph

Subaru Legacy GT (250 hp F-4 Turbo, 5MT) _ 14.2 s @ 96 mph

VW Passat 3.6 (276 hp V-6, 6AT) _ 14.3 s @ 101 mph

Pontiac Grand Prix GXP/Chevy Impala SS (303 hp V-8, 4AT) _ 14.3 s @ 98 mph

Mitsubishi Eclipse GT (263 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.4 s @ 101.0 mph

Infiniti G35 Coupe (280 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.4 s @ 100.6 mph

Volvo S60R (300 hp I-5 Turbo, 6MT) _ 14.4 s @ 97.7 mph

Toyota Avalon (280 hp V-6, 5AT) _ 14.6 s @ 99 mph

Infiniti G35 Sedan (298 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.6 s @ 98 mph


----------



## LoveTAH (Dec 25, 2005)

DougE46 said:


> No it's not.


The MS6 is indeed a sub-six seconder. It's making the rounds this month in the mags and two have it under 6, one has it 6 flat (along with a notation that it was running on 91 octane, and 93 is required for full hp).


----------



## DaKine (Aug 17, 2005)

I love Evo's. Even though most people don't like their styling, I do... and how can anyone argue with the numbers? The car flat out hauls ass, and has more potential than most other cars out there.


----------



## meyer21 (Oct 26, 2005)

The Lotus Elise has a base price of $42,990 - over the $40K cut-off.

Besides - you have to be a midget to fit in one anyway


----------



## meyer21 (Oct 26, 2005)

DaKine said:


> I love Evo's. Even though most people don't like their styling, I do... and how can anyone argue with the numbers? The car flat out hauls ass, and has more potential than most other cars out there.


True - but you can't dump the clutch when revving from a stop above 5K RPM - the computer/transmission won't let you. The Evo doesn't have enough tq to break all wheels loose on dry pavement.

With the Subbie, you can rev up to 6K RPM, dump the clutch, and do a 4 wheel smoking burn-out.  Ask me how I know :angel:


----------



## Penforhire (Dec 17, 2005)

And the Subbie has sort of a menu of allowed semi-racing-abuse fixes under warranty while Mitsubishi is almost infamous for warranty fights.


----------



## someguyzero (Oct 16, 2005)

chuck92103 said:


> It is not how fast the car is..
> 
> But rather how good it looks when it arrives. :thumbup: Joking of course overall handling is just as important.
> 
> Find it most interesting the top cars with speed are never the top 10 cars to buy. :dunno:


Err yea, Top Gear awarded the e90 as the ugliest car of the year.


----------



## LoveTAH (Dec 25, 2005)

someguyzero said:


> Err yea, Top Gear awarded the e90 as the ugliest car of the year.


Dumb bastards. :thumbdwn:


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

someguyzero said:


> Err yea, Top Gear awarded the e90 as the ugliest car of the year.


it is pretty ugly. Actually, it's really bland, like looking at melting vanilla ice cream. Shrug, I don't buy cars for how they look though...


----------



## MCSL (Jan 30, 2005)

Base Price: $40,000 or less

Standing ¼-mile Acceleration

Mitsubishi Evo IX (286 hp I-4 Turbo, 5MT) _ 12.9 s @ 106 mph *

Dodge Charger SRT-8 (425 hp V-8, 5AT) _ 13.3 s @ 108.2 mph

Pontiac GTO (400 hp V-8, 6MT) _ 13.3 s @ 107 mph

Subaru WRX STi (300 hp F-4 Turbo, 6MT) _ 13.3 s @ 103.0 mph

Lexus IS350 (306 hp V-6, 6AT) _ 13.7 s @ 104 mph

Ford Mustang GT (300 hp V-8, 5MT) _ 13.8 s @ 103 mph

Honda S2000 (240 hp I-4, 6MT) _ 13.9 s @ 100.2 mph

Mazdaspeed 6 (274 hp I-4 Turbo, 6MT) _ 14.0 s @ 99 mph

Nissan 350Z (300 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.1 s @ 101.8 mph

Chrysler 300C/Dodge Charger RT (350 hp V-8, 5AT) _ 14.1 s @ 101.1 mph

Subaru WRX TR (230 hp F-4 Turbo, 5MT) _ 14.1 s @

Mercedes C350 (268 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.2 s @ 99 mph

Subaru Legacy GT (250 hp F-4 Turbo, 5MT) _ 14.2 s @ 96 mph

VW Passat 3.6 (276 hp V-6, 6AT) _ 14.3 s @ 101 mph

Pontiac Grand Prix GXP/Chevy Impala SS (303 hp V-8, 4AT) _ 14.3 s @ 98 mph

Mitsubishi Eclipse GT (263 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.4 s @ 101.0 mph

Infiniti G35 Coupe (280 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.4 s @ 100.6 mph

Volvo S60R (300 hp I-5 Turbo, 6MT) _ 14.4 s @ 97.7 mph

Nissan Altima SE-R (260 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.5 s @ 99.4 mph

Honda Accord V6 Sedan (244 hp V-6, 6MT) _ 14.5 s @ 98 mph

* Note: The standard Evo is just as quick as the MR. The MR is overpriced.

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=172517&page=1&pp=15


----------



## Clarke (Oct 21, 2002)

You could pick up this safety car for less than 11,000 if you really like 1/4 mile or stoplight races.


----------



## Penforhire (Dec 17, 2005)

Not exactly a sleeper, is it? I love cars that have that much engine spilling over the hood!


----------



## Moderato (Nov 24, 2003)

Dawg90 said:


> We have a WRX, and I can't imagine trying to hit 60 in 5.5 sec, the poor car would cough up its clutch in a big smelly lump. The WRX feels like a 7.0 sec 0-60 car.


The WRX TR they mention is the 06 and it has the 2.5L. I agree though 0 - 60 times are the most misleading number a manufacturer publishes, I don't pay much attention. How many times are you going to rev the **** out of your engine and dump the clutch? My 06 STI feels like a 5 second car though, even without a clutch dump.


----------



## Moderato (Nov 24, 2003)

Clarke said:


> You could pick up this safety car for less than 11,000 if you really like 1/4 mile or stoplight races.


I LIKE IT! :thumbup:


----------

