With all the advances in carmaking, cars are still inherent compromises, which is sort of stupid...

With all the advances in carmaking, cars are still inherent compromises, which is sort of stupid. If you want a family car, it's going to have four doors and two rows of seats and cargo space so it's likely some sort of slow sedan or crossover with high fuel economy but bad performance. Performance gets even worse if you have to get a van with three rows and six doors. If it's a sports car it'll only have one row of seats so you can't fit more than two people in the car and it can't carry anything. If you're doing work that requires a lot of cargo space like carpentry or plumbing you need a truck, so you get something that has really bad performance and can't seat more than three or four people comfortably. Larger and heavier cars handle more poorly than smaller cars, which means there's always a performance compromise.

Why hasn't anyone solved the compromise? Have an inexpensive $15k lightweight car with high performance that has two doors but is also a crossover that has three rows of seats and four doors so you can fit six people, a cargo bed and lots of low end torque work for trucking and cargo purposes, with high fuel economy? A cheap car that can work as both a sports car, family sedan/crossover, and truck at the same time should absolutely dominate the car industry.

tldr

It'd be shit.

Modern crash and safety standards = heavy. Getting around these requires lightweight advanced parts= expensive. You can't have it all

>has two doors but also four doors

...

RX8. Rolls Royces. Sort of. Ish. Not really.

Can I smoke weed with you, OP?

They do make family suited sedans with badass performance, though. Like the Chevy SS, BMWs, Hellcats (even tho Chrysler is trash), and if you're not that loaded and can deal with a plain old automatics, there's the V6 Accord and Camry sedans.

So what, you want an affordable sedan with good cargo space, good performance, and plenty of room?

Used turbo Optima.