Comment by AlexandrB

> Why would anyone buy such a product when they can get an SUV instead?

Isn't this just a circular way of admitting that people actually wanted SUVs?

This doesn't explain why the used car market is full of very cheap cars like the Honda Fit for much less than a new SUV.

> [1] Some examples: turbochargers,

Have to disagree. These are a great way to downsize the engine and maintain the same torque output. Yes it's more parts, but modern OEM turbochargers are very reliable. If you can reduce the number of cylinders from 6 to 4 or 3, that's a net win in moving parts, consumables, and repair costs.

> both shittier and more expensive

> Some examples: turbochargers

I disagree that turbochargers are shittier. For most people, hell even for a large subset of people that only want to race their cars on a track, turbochargers provide huge benefits. Yes, they add complexity and cost; they also vastly improve fuel efficiency, create the best torque curve possible on an ICE vehicle, and substantially improve power output. Sometimes you actually need more complexity to build a better system. I think turbochargers are a marvel of modern engineering.

And while it's subjective and admittedly more enthusiasts prefer naturally aspirated to turbocharged, I personally prefer the character of a turbocharged engine. I'd rather hear turbo whistles than a whining V10.

The Honda Fit had none of these. It was just a tiny car with a tiny engine.

It's just that Americans do not buy tiny cars or tiny engines.