the s2000 is not sub $16K. all i was implying is that one should judge a car based on how much the car cost. obviously, no car manufacturer has come up with a profitable strategy to put out an "affordable", sporty, fun-to-drive, RWD vehicle for under $16K. thus it's unfair and unrealistic to compare a car in that price range, such as the projected CRX, to cars with RWD that costs more than that. similarly, it's unfair and unrealistic to compare the performance and overall thrill of driving of an s2000 to, let's say, that of a 360 modena, mainly because they differ significantly in price, and thus are under different categories. with that said, if i was looking for an "inexpensive" new sporty coupe as a daily driver, would i be content with one that is FWD, such as the projected CRX?? sure. cuz i know and understand, that given the amount of money i am willing to spend on this new car, FWD is probably all that is available. also, i think it is naive to automatically assume that any car that is FWD is automatically a dud to drive and inferior in thrill and performance to other RWD vehicles. after all, ever heard of the integra type R?? that car is FWD, yet, that car is more thrilling to drive and can outperform many of the RWD vehicles on the market. and this car is capable of providing all this performance with a measely 1.8L motor, and a set of 195/55/16 tires (if i am not mistaken). of course the ITR is $25K, but the point is that FWD can be thrilling to drive if put together the right way.

 

*pics fixed*

 

On several sources, including Car and Driver, Honda will release a car that is FWD and under 15k. It'll either be a s1000 (a fwd convertible, 1 liter, 100 hp, 2000lbs), or a new CRX. But, it'll be FWD for sure, you really dont' see any new RWD vehicles coming cheaper than the Miata.