Sleeper Thread

stevanford1 said:
Nist7 is right. Any M or AMG car is NOT a sleeper. When i see either i know what its capabilities are. You wouldn't know the capabilities of a sleeper until you look under the bonnet or see it in action.
Click to expand...

Yes, but does your mother recognise an M5 from a bunch of regular diesel 5-series ? Of course we recognise M, RS or AMG cars, but that's not the point.

You have to be a monumental car nut to be able to spot an RS4 at first glance. The point is that a sleeper car is an ordinary looking car with huge power reserves. I don't care how much you want to try to twist and turn it but an E39 M5 does look very tame and even boring to some people.

For example we can tell the difference between a Civic Type R and a regular 1.6 base model, but does the majority of people ? No !

95% of people are stupid enough to challenge an XJR off the line. That makes it a sleeper, plain and simple.
 
stevanford1 said:
Nist7 is right. Any M or AMG car is NOT a sleeper. When i see either i know what its capabilities are. You wouldn't know the capabilities of a sleeper until you look under the bonnet or see it in action.
Click to expand...

exactly... i would classify the M5/AMG/RS cars as Q-Cars they are fast and everyone knows it but they still look understated. A sleeper is a car that shouldn't be fast but is... ie. Dodge Caravan Turbo, Festiva + B6T (or apparently V8). There is definitely a certain amount of grey area and overlap between Q-Cars and Sleepers... Take my GTX it's factory fast but who has ever heard of an AWD Turbo 323 so no one ever expects it to be as fast as it is
 
Brother Michael said:
What the hell are you talking about ? "M5 is not a sleeper"....M5 is THE sleeper in my books. Based on your argument those Dodge vans are not sleepers, because

Sleeper is any ordinary looking car that happens to go like stink and the M5 is one, especially E34 and E39. Same goes for pretty much any AMG and RS car ever made. This thread just happened to go into the direction of beater looking sleepers.

M5 is not sleeper....some people...
Click to expand...

What I'm trying to say is that sleepers are those cars that even car knowledgeable guys don't expect to be any fast...aka a Civic with a V8/RWD hidden under-neath, a friggin minivan fer chrissake, or a Twin Turbo LS1 Volvo 740 station wagon, etc. I fail to see how the Dodge Caravan is NOT a sleeper because very few car guys know about its existence and thus is probably one of the top sleepers out there today.

Now I do have to admit that the E39 M5 is quite understated in its looks compared to the regular 5 series but the front fascia, the wheels and obviously the backside will give its true identity away.

Now the problem comes when we bring in the regular public that knows very little about cars and unless they are presented with a wild/recognizeable/etc. design (aka Ferrari-ish supercar styling, Corvette, etc.) they think pretty much ALL cars look alike. And so to them, pretty much any "ordinary looking car" is a "sleeper."

But of course everyone has their own definition of different car terms (see: supercar) and if that's how you define it then that's fine with me. Although I think most car people won't classify M/RS/AMG/etc. cars as sleepers.
 
Yeah, I see where you're coming from and I agree on most part with you. I wasn't in the best of moods when I wrote that, so it might have come out a bit harsh. I guess I never gave it further thought, this category thing...for me there always have been sleepers and none-sleepers.

I have always used the general public as a measuring stick, not the car community, because majority of people who see the car you drive are "regular" people.

Oh well, no biggie. To stay in the spirit of the thread, my favorite sleeper of all time:

The Volvette

volvette_lg.jpg

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CI1PzhJ2fY[/YOUTUBE]
 
This car:
frontside.jpg


Now most people will say that foxbody mustangs cannot be sleepers, but when a car looks like a 13 second car...but can do this:
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ru6ogzmwuHo&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

...then I think it deserves the title.

(by the way the car has gone as low as 8.90 at 161 on the same 17'' drag radials)
 
That's pretty impressive.

It's borderline, but I think I would still consider it a sleeper.
 
Sorry, not a very good picture ...

https://pic.armedcats.net/e/ep/epp_b/2009/05/20/superfly.jpg

This is a Pontiac Firefly (aka Geo Metro) with a V8 from last year's local drags event. It was hysterical :lol:

Can't remember how fast it went, but it was quick.


One of my favorite sleepers is the Turbo Minivan: (aka older Dodge Grand Caravans with the turbo 4 cylinders)

The van on the left lane is running mid 12s!
Click to expand...
That's awesome :lol:

Someone I know is working on dropping a big-block V8 into their old Mazda MPV :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Hmmm...Firefly, Sunfire, Firebird, Fiero, Firehawk, Sunbird...I never realized Pontiac HQ were such pyromaniacs...
 
I want to make my car a sleeper >:
 
I don't know if this can still be considert as a sleeper ... but since you can hide the turbine inside I'll post it.
I present you: The Dodge Minivan with a helicopter engine.
[YOUTUBE]E0GYkcmOy2c[/YOUTUBE]
and anothe vid for good measure
[YOUTUBE]Kw0SyjRk-8w[/YOUTUBE]
 
I've always considered that a sleeper needs to look stock or at least be very unassuming. Fox body Mustangs should not technically be sleepers but there are so many clapped out 4 banger mustangs around that I tend to be taken my suprise when a decent running 5.0 shows up.
 
To me a sleeper is a car that doesn't looks fast that people don't expect to be fast. Any Mustang is NOT a sleeper as people expect them to be fast, even the V6s. Yet average people don't really expect a luxury sports car to be fast. Perfect example would be one of my friend's old girl friends. She was driving a V6 Mustang and came up to a light against an S4. She wanted to race and my friend did everything he could to hold back the laughter until the S4 blew her doors off. :lol:

Now, that Chrysler those old Chrysler mini vans were great sleepers. A lot of them came with turbos and could be made faster for not a lot of money. On fact this was true with a lot of those 80s FWD Mopars. Here's a great example, Gary Donovan's 10 second K car.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQJiYx7qP1Y[/YOUTUBE]

Also, I have one of them that makes a great sleeper. An '89 Chrysler LeBaron GTC. It came with a the Turbo II which was a 2.2L I4 with an intercooled Garrett T3 pushing 12PSI, upgraded suspension, upgraded brakes, and the Getrag 5 speed. This car was pretty much a Daytona with more luxury. Now the Daytona isn't a sleeper and they put this setup in a lot of those, but not many LeBarons. It was rated @ 174HP and 210 ft/lbs of torque. My first one made a 1/4 pass at 14.8 @ 96 MPH dead stock save for a K&N filter. this think has surprised a lot of people.

Engine.jpg


Angle%201.jpg


This is what they look like stock.

Image1.jpg


Here's a full interior one running 12s. He got it into the 11s at one point.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9LudKHp2oM[/YOUTUBE]
 
Last edited:
Polygon said:
Now, that Chrysler those old Chrysler mini vans were great sleepers. A lot of them came with turbos and could be made faster for not a lot of money. On fact this was true with a lot of those 80s FWD Mopars. Here's a great example, Gary Donovan's 10 second K car.
Click to expand...

IIRC he spent the mighty sum of $1500 to make it that fast.
I knew a person who owned a Dodge Omni GLH that was a consistent 13 second car, and was painted flat black to boot, and had the stock steel wheels from a regular Omni widened to keep up appearances.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top