As we saw from both the concepts of fail fast and mvp, there are gaps in how product teams apply these concepts to their context. In both cases, we seem to miss the part about "what do we want to learn?". We also seem to be missing the part about the unique business context that drives product goals. Applying fail fast and mvp as broad strokes, without underlying context, Key Business Outcomes, and market maturity isn't very smart. Both mvp and fail fast, I feel, are at the intersection of the 'what' and the 'how.' This can be useful for certain business scenarios, especially when in the problem/solution fit stage. However, once technology viability and market needs are established, we cannot focus purely on viability and speed.
Looking again at the car makers history, having four wheels was always an integral part of the product that was competing to replace the horse-driven carriages. The earliest versions of the automobile had to offer something...