I haven't checked this thread in a couple of days, so I missed the previous argument, but I'll answer some of the questions brought up.
First off, the cost of technology. New technology is always expensive, but the price drops over time. When the 240 came out, it had just as much new technology, we just think of it as old tech now. Remember when cars in the 80's had EFI badges on them? It was new and exciting for a car to be fuel injected, now it's old hat. Not only that, but the technology required for new cars applies to all new cars, so the cost of development is carried by the entire product line. It would be different if new emission requirements only applied to 2-door RWD cars.
Second, why would a car company spend just as much money developing a cheap car instead of an expensive one? Gee, why are there
any cars under $30k. Someone should tell all the car makers they are wasting their time and money.
Lower priced cars sell in higher quantities. And car makers make money on them. Another factor is brand loyalty. Do you know why Toyota came out with the Scion brand? They noticed that the average age of it's buyers was quickly rising. Young buyers were not interested in Toyota, and if went out and bought another brand that they end up liking, they are more likely to buy from that brand again, losing Toyota future sales as well. They didn't want to go the way of Lincoln.
As for the cage comment, yes, I see lots of cages in 20 year old cars, I don't see too many in brand new cars.
Back to today: That test mule has me excited. Fingers crossed that it's a successor to the s-chassis and looks nothing like the Urge.