Ollie's Gadgets said:
It was quite clear that the irrational reference was towards you preferring a solid feeling car that was less reliable, not the simple fact that Jap cars don't feel solid but infact are.
I hardly think its irrational, is it? It's my personal preference. One of the reasons I chose a 5 Series (as it seems that some poeple just can't wait to drag it into this thread so I may as well let them) over an Impreza Turbo was the quality of the interior and exterior. I know full well an Impreza would be more reliable, but preffering the car that felt of higher quality inside and out is hardly an irrational choice, is it?
People do it all the time. Take Alfa, for example. Comically unreliable, poor quality cars. But people buy this, knowing them. They KNOW it'll break, they KNOW it was built with the care of a drunk monkey but they love the heart and soul of an Alfa and are prepared to put up with the issues to attain this.
Do people buy Ferraris becuase they are reliable?
Many German car owners KNOW it might need a few more trips to the dealer than a Honda, but they are prepared to tolerate this becuase the interior and exterior quality is, or was until recently, leagues ahead.
I really don't understand why this point is lost on you?
Right because a Kia Pride is the only Japanese car.
It's actually Korean.
Your tend to use exagerations or extremes to make your points,
Points which, it would seem, you always miss. My point was that if mechanical reliability was all that mattered when buying a car, everyone would drive something like a Kia Pride (Which on reflection probably isn't that reliable, so I will instead say Suzuki Liana).
which personally I don't think is particularly clever.
No comment.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
