Fastest Stock Car Under 40K
Jun 8, 2012, 07:20 AM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Denton, MD
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fastest Stock Car Under 40K
Anybody have a link to a sit with the top ten fastest and best handling cars under 40K? I just wanna see where the Evo ranks, I know it's gotta be up there.
Jun 8, 2012, 07:45 AM
#2
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try this.
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=top+10+fast...r+under+%2440k
There's a blog listed that I can't click on while at work. It looks like he starts talking about it.
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=top+10+fast...r+under+%2440k
There's a blog listed that I can't click on while at work. It looks like he starts talking about it.
Jun 8, 2012, 08:55 AM
#3
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Denton, MD
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ha I'm at work too doing this all on my phone, guess it shows how much we love these cars if we can't even get away at work lol. I'll check it out, I found a Car And Driver test on the 6 best handling cars under 40k and I believe the order from last to first was, GTI, Mini KWC, Mustang GT, 370Z, Miata, Evo:-)
Jun 8, 2012, 09:02 AM
#4
I had a friend that was hating his 335i because of electronics problems and since he was in a faster-ish 4dr sedan I suggested he look into the Evo, since with Sun and Leather it dresses up nicely to bridge the gap between the two.
A friend of my friend went off on me on FB about how the Mustang 5.0 is just "soooooo" much better. Meh, I think I kicked the dead horse enough pointing out a couple 10ths in the quarter can be traded for better handling.
Anyhow, even though I fought the good fight for the Evo in that debate, I can agree, that if you just want to go fast and be under 40k. The '13 Mustang 5.0 is nice now that they finally joined the 21st century by having an independent rear suspension.
I would think the Z probably rates up well, but what about the V6 Genesis? I heard impressive propaganda numbers that it puts down?
A friend of my friend went off on me on FB about how the Mustang 5.0 is just "soooooo" much better. Meh, I think I kicked the dead horse enough pointing out a couple 10ths in the quarter can be traded for better handling.
Anyhow, even though I fought the good fight for the Evo in that debate, I can agree, that if you just want to go fast and be under 40k. The '13 Mustang 5.0 is nice now that they finally joined the 21st century by having an independent rear suspension.
I would think the Z probably rates up well, but what about the V6 Genesis? I heard impressive propaganda numbers that it puts down?
Jun 8, 2012, 09:21 AM
#6
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Denton, MD
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah the new Genesis is nice and Mustang is fast but I also like the handling. I just wanted to see like an actual documented list on it. And I didn't know they finally switched the rear in the Mustnag. They actually were saying that the 2012 Mustang had pretty good handling with the solid rear and was rated one of the top handling cars under 40k. Should be even better with the new rear then. I think I'd still rather have the Evo since it has more room and isn't too expensive to mod.
Jun 8, 2012, 09:23 AM
#7
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Denton, MD
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the 370 is a little faster now too, can't remember, but I'd rather be able to carry more than one person and have a car that's way cheaper to mod then get a car that's a couple tenths faster stock.
Trending Topics
Jun 8, 2012, 09:32 AM
#8
yeah the link someone else posted takes you to google, because they are saying you should google your question before posting here.
I only responded because sometimes I'm less of a jerk. Yeah the new mustang 5.0 has an independent rear. For what it is, it's fast.
I do own an Evo though, so you can tell how I feel about being fastest on paper.
I only responded because sometimes I'm less of a jerk. Yeah the new mustang 5.0 has an independent rear. For what it is, it's fast.
I do own an Evo though, so you can tell how I feel about being fastest on paper.
Jun 8, 2012, 09:39 AM
#9
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's like the 3rd link down to the blog. I couldn't even copy and paste the link because it kept flagging me as doing something I'm not supposed to. But I can still get on EvoM...
The Genesis V6 is a nice looking car with impressive numbers. Performance wise... they suck. At the track they were putting down 16's and 17's (I'm at over 6000ft ASL) with just an intake.
I'm not, and never will be a Mustang fan. The 2012 Mustang at the track was running a 16.98 in stock form. It sounded nice off the line, but had zero go after that. There was a Shelby GT500 that was modified running a 14.2.... I hear the 2013 is supposed to be a beast, though.
The Genesis V6 is a nice looking car with impressive numbers. Performance wise... they suck. At the track they were putting down 16's and 17's (I'm at over 6000ft ASL) with just an intake.
I'm not, and never will be a Mustang fan. The 2012 Mustang at the track was running a 16.98 in stock form. It sounded nice off the line, but had zero go after that. There was a Shelby GT500 that was modified running a 14.2.... I hear the 2013 is supposed to be a beast, though.
Jun 8, 2012, 10:08 AM
#11
It's like the 3rd link down to the blog. I couldn't even copy and paste the link because it kept flagging me as doing something I'm not supposed to. But I can still get on EvoM...
The Genesis V6 is a nice looking car with impressive numbers. Performance wise... they suck. At the track they were putting down 16's and 17's (I'm at over 6000ft ASL) with just an intake.
I'm not, and never will be a Mustang fan. The 2012 Mustang at the track was running a 16.98 in stock form. It sounded nice off the line, but had zero go after that. There was a Shelby GT500 that was modified running a 14.2.... I hear the 2013 is supposed to be a beast, though.
The Genesis V6 is a nice looking car with impressive numbers. Performance wise... they suck. At the track they were putting down 16's and 17's (I'm at over 6000ft ASL) with just an intake.
I'm not, and never will be a Mustang fan. The 2012 Mustang at the track was running a 16.98 in stock form. It sounded nice off the line, but had zero go after that. There was a Shelby GT500 that was modified running a 14.2.... I hear the 2013 is supposed to be a beast, though.
I lost to one my last trip to track one did 13.4. Guy said he bought it 5 days before the track night and it was completely stock '12 GT 5.0, but I don't remember if it was auto or standard trans. His slowest run of the night was 14.4
Jun 8, 2012, 10:10 AM
#12
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Denton, MD
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I thought he posted the Google thing cuz there was somethin specific on there cuz he said somethin about a blog. And that's terrible numbers for those cars... I want somethin that's gonna run at least in the 13's stock and then I can go from there, and the Evo seems to be a good and easy car to upgrade.
Jun 8, 2012, 10:12 AM
#13
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Denton, MD
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And yeah I didn't think the Mustang changed the rear yet, but I dont know enough to say yes or no. I do know though that the one at the track above had to be a bad driver or the V6 lol it still has over 300 horses so maybe that's what happened there lol.
