What practical but fun car with an insanely weird set of specific requirements?

How about the following:
420 hp in either rwd or awd sedan
EPA of:
16/19/25 for rwd
16/18/23 for awd

1/4 mile 13.4 rwd 4.7 seconds 0-60
1/4 mile 13.5 awd 4.9 seconds 0-60

http://m.caranddriver.com/reviews/2011-infiniti-m56x-short-take-road-test

Others recommend the Infiniti G37 but this is the larger, full sized Infiniti M56 with 5.6 liters of engine (later renamed Q70 for 2014)

Super depreciation puts real versions of this $60k car into the $20s just 5 years later.
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=48034&endYear=2017&modelCode1=M56&showcaseOwnerId=0&makeCode1=INFIN&startYear=1981&firstRecord=0&searchRadius=300&showcaseListingId=0&mmt=%5BINFIN%5BM56%5B%5D%5D%5B%5D%5D&listingId=417565659&Log=0

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=48034&endYear=2017&modelCode1=M56&showcaseOwnerId=0&makeCode1=INFIN&startYear=1981&firstRecord=0&searchRadius=300&showcaseListingId=0&mmt=%5BINFIN%5BM56%5B%5D%5D%5B%5D%5D&listingId=417277100&Log=0.

92dxman wrote: What about the Lincoln MKS (that's the Lincoln version of the sho right?)

Yeah, it's basically the same car but a bit softer and (IMO) better looking. It's on the list.

I know they would be super slow compared to that list you compiled but what about a newer Mazda 6? You can get them with flappy paddles and they are really roomy w/huge trunk to boot. I don't like sedans that much but I would drive a newer 6..

Yeah, I just wish it was faster. It's SO pretty and the mileage is great.

JohnRW1621 wrote: How about the following: 420 hp in either rwd or awd sedan EPA of: 16/19/25 for rwd 16/18/23 for awd 1/4 mile 13.4 rwd 4.7 seconds 0-60 1/4 mile 13.5 awd 4.9 seconds 0-60 http://m.caranddriver.com/reviews/2011-infiniti-m56x-short-take-road-test Others recommend the Infiniti G37 but this is the larger, full sized Infiniti M56 with 5.6 liters of engine (later renamed Q70 for 2014) Super depreciation puts real versions of this $60k car into the $20s just 5 years later. http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=48034&endYear=2017&modelCode1=M56&showcaseOwnerId=0&makeCode1=INFIN&startYear=1981&firstRecord=0&searchRadius=300&showcaseListingId=0&mmt=%5BINFIN%5BM56%5B%5D%5D%5B%5D%5D&listingId=417565659&Log=0 http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=48034&endYear=2017&modelCode1=M56&showcaseOwnerId=0&makeCode1=INFIN&startYear=1981&firstRecord=0&searchRadius=300&showcaseListingId=0&mmt=%5BINFIN%5BM56%5B%5D%5D%5B%5D%5D&listingId=417277100&Log=0.

Hmmm... that's interesting. It looks like a giant Altima, but the numbers are good.

Over the years it could be had with a 3.7L V6 or a 4.5L V8 but the 5.6L was the daddy of them all.
The smaller engine versions are more popular and more common. With the 5.4L, this is the Infiniti flagship!

Look at the carfax of that first one. Dealer serviced! I would try to contact that servicing dealership and see if you can get complete service records.

Here is C&Ds a experience with 40k miles on a rwd S-model which seems to conclude that the Sport package and Technology package should be avoided. http://m.caranddriver.com/reviews/2011-infiniti-m56s-long-term-road-test-review

Here's an interesting tidbit. C&D recorded the exhaust note. http://blog.caranddriver.com/name-that-exhaust-note-episode-50/

The interior on the M is absolutely gorgeous.

It looks to me like the current Mazda 6 meets or exceeds everyone of your criteria except a 14 second 1/4 mile. I think it is closer to 15.5.

G35/37 M56/QBazillion (WTF is up with Infiniti's naming system these days) Hyundai Genesis

You have a few options.

Is it just me or has the G35/350z just went stupid cheap? Like $5k cheap

The Volvo v60 R design fits your list quite well. C&D documented 0-60 under 5 seconds, 13.5 seconds at 105 mph in the .25 with a sweet 6 pot making 350 ftlbs early along with 18/28 EPA numbers. The s60-v60 are smaller in the flesh than the photograph- Recent Ford and Volvo products have a similar design language which I find appealing. The seats are Volvo awsome and interior is clean in a world of clutter. Somebody flogged a s60 to great result in a very high visibility autocross a couple years ago so they can go around cones well enough. They are at heart low strung comfortable mile eating touring cars.

Shaun wrote: The Volvo v60 R design fits your list quite well. C&D documented 0-60 under 5 seconds, 13.5 seconds at 105 mph in the .25 with a sweet 6 pot making 350 ftlbs early along with 18/28 EPA numbers. The s60-v60 are smaller in the flesh than the photograph- Recent Ford and Volvo products have a similar design language which I find appealing. The seats are Volvo awsome and interior is clean in a world of clutter. Somebody flogged a s60 to great result in a very high visibility autocross a couple years ago so they can go around cones well enough. They are at heart low strung comfortable mile eating touring cars.

I really like those, but unfortunately they are ~$50k.

In reply to Flight Service:

The early G35 is now old enough that there are rough examples floating around very sketchy parts of town. I think that's bringing that whole generation of car down as it's lost all status.

Tom_Spangler wrote:

Huckleberry wrote: Easily under $20k, and with SMG easily ticks all your boxes. Better looking than any BMW made since too.

As a former E46 ZHP owner, I will always have a spot for the E46 M3 in my heart. But alas, it's a 2-door, it's getting pretty old, and I've always heard that those early SMGs were bad news?

Most people who perpetuated that crock of E36 M3 either diliberately abused their cars, ran them in "auto" mode 24/7(which is awful, or never took them to bmw to have the SMG ecu reprogrammed to the later CSL programming..... Sure, the pump can fail, and sure, it's costly to replace.....but they're not the devil people make them out to be. They can't be all bad if you can initiate "burnout mode" accidentally while trying to activate launch mode...BMW tossed us a MURICA bone I guess.

Also, I'm amazed no one has said it yet, Porsche Cayenne Turbo S?

Edit: pg2 noted the regular turbo, but used turbo s should be in the ballpark money wise by now.

Dark horse throw in would be an s6 v10, it's entirely possible to live with the 5mpg hit if you take the mufflers off.....glorious noises those things make.

WOW Really Paul? wrote: Also, I'm amazed no one has said it yet, Porsche Cayenne Turbo S? Edit: pg2 noted the regular turbo, but used turbo s should be in the ballpark money wise by now.

Fuel mileage is the killer with those.

Dark horse throw in would be an s6 v10, it's entirely possible to live with the 5mpg hit if you take the mufflers off.....glorious noises those things make.

I have thought about it off and on, but here's the thing. For roughly the same money, you can get a generation newer A6 with the 3.0T that's just as fast, gets much better mileage, and has more of the luxury stuff I want. Plus it has a blower so it's more tunable.

Test of the 2007 S6 V10: http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2007-audi-s6-vs-bmw-m5-m-b-e63-amg-comparison-test
Test of the 2012 A6 3.0T: http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2012-audi-a6-30t-quattro-vs-2013-lexus-gs350-comparison-test

What are the gotchas with the mid-2000s AMG E55 and E63 Mercs?

The only reason to go with the earlier V10 Audi is if you are going to open up the exhaust. That engine sounds amazing in the Lambo and the R8.

Tom_Spangler wrote:

Shaun wrote: The Volvo v60 R design...

I really like those, but unfortunately they are ~$50k.

A little spendy true. Volvo's plummet $$ off the lot. There might be one somewhere with some miles as there is one here in Oregon for 41.5.

Tom_Spangler wrote:

Shaun wrote: The Volvo v60 R design fits your list quite well.

I really like those, but unfortunately they are ~$50k.

It's an S60, not a V60. But it's $35k with 4-digit mileage on it.

Tom_Spangler wrote: What are the gotchas with the mid-2000s AMG E55 and E63 Mercs?

Electronics typically.....

Okay Tom, i know you like Ford and Ecoboost.. humor me with some kind of response about the 2.7 Turbo AWD Fusion, would ya? Are you thinking it'll cost too much? Or are you just looking for something more luxurious?

Vigo wrote: Okay Tom, i know you like Ford and Ecoboost.. humor me with some kind of response about the 2.7 Turbo AWD Fusion, would ya? Are you thinking it'll cost too much? Or are you just looking for something more luxurious?

Well, the main thing is that it doesn't exist yet.

Seriously, that's the 2017 model, it'll probably be $40k with the options I want, and I'd really rather avoid a brand-new car if I can. Plus, it's going to be an ST, which means that Ford will probably put those berkeleying Recaro torture thrones in it.

Right up until I saw the budget I was about to say Flying Spur.

In reply to Tom_Spangler:

The 2017 2.7T AWD Fusion is not an ST, but rather, a "Sport" model, so it doesn't get the recaro seats. It's also just under $38k with all the options you'll need (10 way driver's seat, cooled front seats, sunroof, etc.), so it's about where you expected price wise. What about a used MKS with the Ecoboost V6? It runs the quarter in 13.9, and has a zero to 60 of 5.5 seconds when stock. Here's a CPO 2014 model near you.

G_Body_Man wrote: In reply to Tom_Spangler: The 2017 2.7T AWD Fusion is not an ST, but rather, a "Sport" model, so it doesn't get the recaro seats. It's also just under $38k with all the options you'll need (10 way driver's seat, cooled front seats, sunroof, etc.), so it's about where you expected price wise. What about a used MKS with the Ecoboost V6? It runs the quarter in 13.9, and has a zero to 60 of 5.5 seconds when stock. Here's a CPO 2014 model near you.

Yeah, I did a bit of research after I posted and saw that it won't be an ST, so probably no Recaros. Still more than I want to spend and I don't want a new car. With my ADD, it's best to let someone else take that depreciation hit.

MKS: Yeppers, it's on my list for sure. Need to drive one.

Also, you mentioned that a wagon would be cool. What about an Ecoboost Ford Flex? It does the quarter in 14.2 with at least four screaming kids and an unamused SWMBO in tow

G_Body_Man wrote: Also, you mentioned that a wagon would be cool. What about an Ecoboost Ford Flex? It does the quarter in 14.2 with at least four screaming kids and an unamused SWMBO in tow

I'd like a proper wagon, but crossovers don't appeal to me. We already have a big 8-passenger Ford with an Ecoboost motor, don't forget. Besides, Flexes are mom-mobiles around here. As in, my 75-year-old mom has one.