This answer is a bit dated, so I don’t know if it still applies.
I was in San Diego back in ’68 for some Navy schools. I had a hankering for Mexican food, so I set out with a few guys to find a good place.
Back then in Houston, a large Mexican plate cost about $2. For that you got guacamole, chili con queso, taco and tostada on the salad plate, and an enchilada, tamale, rice and beans on the hot plate.
The first restaurant we hit offered rice and beans plus a taco and enchilada for $2. I thought that was outrageous, so I insisted we leave (we were in my car). The second place was the same price for the same items, so we left there, too.
The guys told me we were eating at the next place no matter what. The third place was the same story, but we stayed, and I ordered the standard plate for the standard $2. On one plate was an enchilada along with the rice and beans, and on the other plate was the taco.
The taco covered the entire plate. The enchilada was about 2” thick and as long as the place was wide. The entire meal was almost too much to eat, and for me, that’s saying a lot! The taste of the CalMex and TexMex of the time were comparable. The proportions were not.
Is it still that way?