I think thats the catch. They may technically offer a model for that price point but usually the lowest I see at a dealership is around 50k and the mean is closer to 58. I think even the value trucks are over 40k after the options you would want like the Tradesman

With shite build and materials quality. Either the margins must be enormous or those doors are really expensive to make.

I came to say the same thing. Just because it can be configured on the website doesn’t mean it’s being built and/or distributed.

“It’s only when you attach all the fluff packages, that you start getting into the insane $60k+ price ranges.”

It’s pretty hard to drive kids to school or take the guys at the office to lunch with the standard cab, and since most of these are used for commuting, you got to start at the 4-door. Also, no Real ‘Murican who drives a truck would buy 2WD because you’d have to be scared of losing traction in a little bit of rain or…

Seems that way, but strangely it’s really not.

a better question is what vehicles are actually affordable these days. The fact that dealers have the audacity to price entry level compact used models at brand new MSRP and brand new vehicles automatically having an extra 5-10k tacked on, are any vehicles not overpriced these days?

Fair enough - I’m mentally applying the performance figures of the higher-spec turbos (Shelby CSX and such) and applying that to all Mopar turbos (where, like you say, the V6 was marginally quicker than the lower pressure turbo it actually replaced).

Your life as a car enthusiast becomes much easier and more enjoyable once you stop giving a shit about bench racing. 

The CSX is a total outlier though, the turbo I that most Shadows would have had was 150/180 hp/torque and the V6 was 141/172. Barely a downgrade, plus reduced complexity, better drivability for most situations, and didn’t require premium gas. So I understand why they did it at least.

This is the correct answer.  Clearly a performance car, and clearly inferior to it's peers in that regard, and arguably inferior to the fox body.  And it took the whole decade and more for it to catch up.  The cobra's (especially R) we're cool but too rare and costly to change my vote.  I own one and love it, but it…

Super underappreciated maybe, but definitely not the worst!  The SVX was supposed to be a competitor, after all.

Well, um, I have two of them currently, ‘87 and ‘89 CSXes, both production number 321 in their respective years (see user name :) ). I’ve owned 5 Shadows/Sundances/CSXes at different times over the years.

“You could get the 3.1L V6 but had to link it to the 3-speed auto.”

Somehow they managed to introduce an entirely new OHC V8 engine that had LESS power than the ancient Windsor it replaced. That shit was an epic disappointment. 

‘87-92 there was a turbo option, either the 2.2 or the 2.5 depending on year. ‘93-94 the turbo went away in favor of the 3.0 v6. I don’t *think* the turbo and the dark green color had any overlap but I could be wrong here.

These are considered a ‘performance car’? Lol, might as well add the Toyota Paseo to the mix, too. 

Cars like this still exist in rural and low income areas, in addition to a ton of Cavaliers, old Taurus and GM FWD A-bodies. We all live in our own bubbles. Where I live now I don’t see many ‘91‘s of any make or model.

Exactly, so long as you are looking at the 99+ Prowler. Once the revised V6 appeared in 1999, the Prowler kept up with other V8 muscle cars of the day because Plymouth made a lot of use of aluminum and did a good job keeping the weight down; it just didn’t have the V8 rumble. Look at the performance numbers and…

BMW 318ti. It’s like a weird mullet; BMW in the front, only there’s no party in the back. Just every image in my head of soccer moms with no assess. Ugly, slow and unreliable.