In terms of cars with manufacturer options (not talking about a hot rodder modifying a special one-off quick car) - is there any vehicle less expensive than a stock AWD Model 3 with acceleration boost added that can do 0-60 in under 4 seconds?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Is the Model 3 AWD+ the least expensive sub 4 second 0-60 car?
- Thread starter birdsquared
- Start date
-
- Tags
- acceleration boost
Since I was curious, I scanned that entire list you posted, and not a single one of those cars meets the OPs question of "under 4 second 0-60".
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Yup.
AFAIK the 5 quickest cars under 4 0-60, sorted by price lowest are:
1. Tesla Model 3 LR AWD without boost- $48,990, 3.9 seconds (only thing on the list below 50k)
2. Tesla Model 3 LR AWD with boost- $50,990, 3.5 seconds
3. Audi RS3- $56,200, 0-60 in 3.7 seconds.
4. Tesla Model 3 Performance- $56,990, 0-60 in ~3 flat
5. C8 base corvette- $59,995, 0-60 in ~3 flat
Sorting those by performance is almost exactly the reverse (I'd put the vette at #1 since it's .2 quicker in the 1/4 as a tie breaker- and the Audi slips one notch to sit between the AWD and AWD+
Even if you raised your spend cap to $99,000 there's only 2 other cars that'd get on the sub-4 list to my knowledge-
The Camaro ZL-1 which is 3.5 or 3.6 depending on who tested it and runs around 62k for the base with no added options
The Challenge Hellcat Redeye which is a little over 71k and lists a 3.4 0-60 but I've yet to find any car mag test that got better than 3.7 without slicks and a prepped track.
(Special mention I guess to the Mustang GT500 which I've only seen preliminary 0-60s on in the 3.6-3.7 range and is like 74k base and can get north of I think 95k loaded and apparently is a nightmare to launch well but don't think you can actually get one yet... outside of the ritual blood sacrifices the Vette engineers do it's just not super effective to have much north of 500 hp (let alone the 700+ HP of these american cars) and not be AWD)
If you go over 99k of course you immediately hit the P100D that beats everything else to 60.
...why would you reply to a thread about sub-4 second cars with a list of cars that run slower than 4 seconds?
Last edited:
Thanks Knightshade for the research.
Not as knowledgeable but if you look back to include used cars that retailed new for under $100K does that increase the pool or no?
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
well... depends if you count different versions of car as different... like the last-gen GT500 was also in the mid-3s (and inflation adjusted to 2020 cost around 61k without any options)- ditto previous gen ZL1, etc...
Likewise there's been several versions of the vette who were under 4 seconds and under 100k originally (and a few over 100k).
I did find a few more cars I missed in the "under 100k but over 60k" group though- (all over 75k without options though)
The Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio at ~76k does it in about 3.8
The current gen Caddy CTS-V is about 90k base price (though it can easily get well over 100k with options) and does 0-60 in about 3.8.
The current gen Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk- around 87k and 3.3 0-60
The current gen M550i xDrive which does 3.6 and starts at 77k (though, BMW, so it's likely gonna be a good bit more with anything you actually want)
Oh, and it's well over 100k now, but I'm sure there's previous-gen GT-Rs that were (inflation adjusted) at least a little under 100k in 2020 dollars and ran sub-3 0-60.... The GT-R really was insane value for the performance for a long time...
AWD sedans with similar capabilities, with very few exceptions (like the Audi RS3 and Model 3 mentioned), are usually well over 60k.
11.8@119 for a LR AWD is damn impressive. And that Mustang GT's time (assuming >= 2018 because of the quad tips) is about what they normally do stock, so it's not like it was a 'fast' track.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Fair- though they don't appear to have em for sale right now for me to check the MSRP- guess everyone is waiting on details for the new-gen M3.... (I did find one 2017 review mentioning with the DCT and COMP pack it was north of 80k though, and loaded ran like 113k)
I think the MSRP on a M3 Competition is (was) somewhere around 72/74k, but they pretty much didnt exist for less than 80k ish MSRP and you could option them up above 100k if you wanted to.
I never really thought about it in this way, but very interesting to see how few cars can even come close.
and to top it off, just about anyone can run these acceleration times. Some of the cars mentioned require a special launch and a good driver to achieve them. On the street, It’s hard to complete
A few cars I didn’t see mentioned. BMW X3M and 340xi. The new ones are no joke. Not sure if they are “rated” below 4s, but stock ones on dragy are able to do it
and to top it off, just about anyone can run these acceleration times. Some of the cars mentioned require a special launch and a good driver to achieve them. On the street, It’s hard to complete
A few cars I didn’t see mentioned. BMW X3M and 340xi. The new ones are no joke. Not sure if they are “rated” below 4s, but stock ones on dragy are able to do it
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
BMW lists the X3M and M340xi at 4.1...they don't include rollout though so yeah rollout (car mag) numbers would be sub-4, prob 3.8-3.9.... Looks like 56k before options on the M340xi and ~70k before options on the X3M...being BMWs you can pretty easily add 10-15 in options if you want but still keeps em under 99k
There's also a competition version of the X3M that gets you down to around 3.3 with rollout, but now BASE price is near 80k before any more options.
I suppose technically the M340xi at 56k stripped would bump the C8 out of the top 5 for cheapest sub-4 second cars sorted by price too if you can live with a stripped BMW
BMW lists the X3M and M340xi at 4.1...they don't include rollout though so yeah rollout (car mag) numbers would be sub-4, prob 3.8-3.9.... Looks like 56k before options on the M340xi and ~70k before options on the X3M...being BMWs you can pretty easily add 10-15 in options if you want but still keeps em under 99k
There's also a competition version of the X3M that gets you down to around 3.3 with rollout, but now BASE price is near 80k before any more options.
I suppose technically the M340xi at 56k stripped would bump the C8 out of the top 5 for cheapest sub-4 second cars sorted by price too if you can live with a stripped BMW
You would have to order it that way. the M340 is likely are on dealer lots at low 60s MSRP. I just took a look at one of the BMW dealers out here (I believe its the largest one in the US... Crevier BMW), and they have 3-4 M340s on their lot at 61-64k MSRP, but of course you could probably get one fairly easily for 5-6% off before any incentives. Of note, they have 79 3 series in stock.. and only 4 of them are M340i's. In general, someone typically would order that model vs taking it off the lot, to get it like they wanted it.
BMWs package / option pricing is not quite as bad as porsche's but its fairly easy to pile options onto them. For example, my wifes X3 had a starting price around 54-55k, but the one we ordered for her with almost every option except for a trailer hitch had an MSRP of 69.5k. I didnt pay anything near that for it, but that was the MSRP.
afty
Member
M340i is a good one. Car and Driver tested one at 3.8s: 2020 BMW M340i Is a Rocket of an Everyday 3-Series
The Audi S4 is close at 4.2s: 2020 Audi S4 Flies (Quickly) Under the Radar
The Audi S4 is close at 4.2s: 2020 Audi S4 Flies (Quickly) Under the Radar
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Huh... that's a surprising amount of sandbagging from BMW... C&D is showing 0-60 with rollout as 0.6 seconds quicker than BMWs listed 4.4 on that car... (which means the real BMW listed time should be 4.1 since rollout was 0.3 as measured)
That's actually .1 more sandbagging than Tesla themselves is doing on the LR AWD which they've put a lot of work into making seem slower than it is compared to the P.
4.1 0-60 would be stepping on the toes of the real M series line. The 340 is built on the new G chassis. The M line is still using the F chassis and is currently in transition.
I bet once the G chassis M series gets introduced they’ll revise the time down.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Well, that's true of nearly all RWD cars in this power range (MAYBE not the C8 where as I mention they're doing some serious voodoo)
(and the AWD+ should handle these guys easily.... maybe less so the X3M at 3.3 though
)I think it has more to do with getting turbo’s spooled and ensuring the vehicle is in 1st gear. If you look at the gap between 0-60 and 5-60 on boosted cars, it is much larger than naturally aspirated. When you compare that to electric, it really highlights the response benefits.
Similar threads
