Which Car Should Have Been More Expensive?

I think we can all agree that cars are too damn expensive these days. Sure, it's also a problem that they have too many screens, don't offer enough manuals, and aren't all Miatas, but mainly it's the money. I'd be willing to forgive a lot if cars were all 50% less expensive. I also wouldn't turn down a raise that made it possible for me to spend six figures on a car, but we both know cars magically getting less expensive is much more likely here. 

Allegedly there's an exception to every rule, which got me thinking about cars that would have been better or more desirable if they'd been more expensive. It may sound wrong, but I actually think the Alfa Romeo 4C is a perfect candidate. It's a gorgeous car, but the engine didn't really sound or feel that great, the transmission was jerky, the interior felt cheap, and it's still the least comfortable car I've ever driven. 

Alfa Romeo wanted the 4C to be more Lotus Elise than Mercedes-Benz SL, so it was probably never going to be plush and luxurious, but I can't help wondering how much more desirable the 4C would be if Alfa had targeted an MSRP of $70,000 or so, instead of the mid-$50s. If they'd made it a little less unpleasant at lower speeds, spent some more time refining the powertrain, really dialed in the steering, and offered a few more optional comfort features, that stuff would have probably driven up the MSRP, but I think it would have made the 4C more desirable.

That can't be the only car that should have been more expensive, though. Or if we want to put a more positive spin on it, which cars felt like they were held back by attempts to keep their prices lower? Maybe a few more features would have made them much more competitive. Maybe some pricier parts would have improved a few shortcomings. Whatever it is, let us know down in the comments.