I think that it depends on the number and the severity of the problems. One problem, or perhaps two problems, might not "kill it" for me with a brand if the car was otherwise reliable and fun to drive. However, when multiple systems fail or when problems arise in multiple areas of the car over a period of time--despite excellent care and maintenance, then--yes--it does kill it for me.

Case in point:
1974 Volvo, purchased new in 1974--
*First night--heater inoperative. After 2 or 3 attempts to fix it, the dealership finally found that the heat control knob on the dashboard had never been connected to the cable running to the coolant flow valve in the heater.

*Second week--dash lights remain on after ignition is turned off, thus draining battery. Dealer fixes electrical connection.

*Second month--Two bolts holding A/C compressor to support bracket shear off while driving. After first repair, the same situation occurs again, about a month later.

*Upon advent of first very cold weather, all gauges are inoperative until the engine has fully warmed up--approximately 20 minutes. Headlights operate on approximately 1/2 normal brightness until engine is fully warmed up. Despite multiple attempts, dealer was never able to locate source of the problem, which was undoubtedly a bad ground. Car continues to exhibit this electrical glitch until I dumped it.

*Car fails emissions test. In order to be able to pass emissions test, my mechanic has to really tweak the hell out of the engine. However, in this condition, the engine idles very poorly and has very little power. The result is that I have to make two special trips to my mechanic each year--one prior to state inspection so that the car will pass the emissions test, and another visit several days later so that the car actually runs properly. These visits to the mechanic were in addition to regular maintenance visits and visits to have repairs made to the car.

*Within days of the expiration of the warranty, electric fuel pump quits.

*Several days later, transmission starts leaking.

*Approximately every 13 months, electric fuel pump has to be replaced.

*Despite changing motor oil and oil filter every 3 months/3,000 miles, engine begins burning oil when odometer reaches ~40k. By 60k, the engine consumes a qt. of oil ~every 600 miles.

*Paint became severely chalked after approximately 3 years, despite regular washing and annual waxing with Classic Car Wax.

And, I should add that Volvo refused to stand behind their crappy product. Modern Volvos bear no mechanical resemblance to the 1974 model, but since the car cost me incredible $$ to keep that lemon running, the experience was like aversion therapy. Whether it is logical or not, I could not bring myself to buy another Volvo.

I tend to agree. I spent 7 years w/ a Saturn SL that caused me a number of problems. I'd think long and hard before buying another Saturn, even if it were inexpensive and had good ratings. IMHO (and the opinion of others), this is one reason why American car companies are in such bad shape: all of the improved ratings in the world can't overcome the visceral bad experiences of yesteryear.

Scrabbler

Cars change and car companies change. The absolute worst car I ever owned was a 1957 Plymouth 6, durin my college years. Everything about it was bad. However several years later I did buy another Chrysler prooduct after they introduced the 5 year 50,000 mile warranty. It was a very good car for its time and was reliable until it rusted out after 14 years of driving.

This is one strong case for getting outside information from such sources as Consumer Reports and J D Power Long Term Reliability reports. I also subscribe to TrueDelta, an online service on car repairs and reliability. These sources keep you objective.

Many of my friends ask me for recommendations for new or used cars. They often ask why I don't drive that car myself, but I explain that my car is not necessarily a good car for them! You have to be objective if you are going to dispense advice.

It's only human to "swear you will never buy that make again". If you have friends who got divorced and remarried, note the new spouse is usually the diametric opposite of the old one, at least in personal qualities. This is not necesarily a good thing, but we all over-react.

I'm sorry to hear of the problems that VDCdriver had with his or her Volvo.

I also had a 1974 Volvo, a 145 wagon. It was almost bullet proof. During the warranty period there was some sort of engine problem that arose that was detected and repaired by the dealer (I'd be more specific but I was in the Navy, at sea at the time, and my wife took care of it).

The car made 6 cross country moves including one to the Philippines and back and kept on going.

The car paint was yellow and as it got bumped and scratched I would treat it with some of that dark red primer. My younger daughter started calling the car the banana-mobile.

As the car rolled over 200k it did develop some leaks. It did require that I check and refill the oil in the manual transmission every 3000 miles and it did seem to use more engine oil. The next problem was that the doors did not seem to remain latched. Even though you had closed the door, when you went around a corner the door would sometimes swing open. I was sad to see it go.

Would I buy another Volvo? They've priced me out of their market.

I disagree. All Volvos are created equal = crap. I had a 1994 850 Turbo Station Wagon. It was the most comfortable car I ever sat in - which is all I could do. By the time the car was 6 yrs old, it was at the mechanic on average every 5 weeks. It was so often at the mechanic, I resorted to having it towed. I hate that car. I hate Volvo. I will never ever buy another Volvo or European car ever again. I have a 2002 Toyota Highlander with nearly 100K on it and it runs like I just bought it. I am looking forward to a long and happy life with my Toyota.

I also have a 2002 Highlander and it has had not ONE SINGLE mechanical problem with it, I have a 2WD V-6 with 95K on it and since I maintain it meticulously I get 22MPG in city and on highway up to 27MPG at 70mph...the best auto I have ever owned.It is outfitted with an auto tranny and the tow package (all heavy duty parts for cooling, suspension, amperage, air, etc.....a real deal).

I had a '98 V70XC Cross Country Wagon. Great car when running good, super comfy seats and safe. I got 210,000 miles and it was in good shape when I sold it. From 162K miles when I bought it to 210K miles over 4 years I spent about $2,200 per year keeping it on the road. Volvo's are simply expensive to repair and they do break down more than average. The bodies look good forever, they don't rust, but the electicals and mechanicals require big $$$ over time. No more Volvo's for me!

I think Honda's marketing practices in the late 80's/early 90's with regards to a MSRP or nothing policy left me cold. This was later followed up by a waiting list/take it or leave it attitude (no price negotiation, no color choice) when the Odyssey came out, causing me to purchase the Mazda MPV I still am driving.

I doubt if Honda will ever make my short list of brands for my next purchase, based on those two experiences.

I think Honda's marketing practices in the late 80's/early 90's with regards to a MSRP or nothing policy left me cold. This was later followed up by a waiting list/take it or leave it attitude (no price negotiation, no color choice) when the Odyssey came out, causing me to purchase the Mazda MPV I still am driving.
 

When we bought our 87 Accord and our 96 Accord we were able to buy them at 2-4k LESS then MSRP. There are ways to buy vehicles under MSRP.

I can vouch for jayhawlroy in that Honda won't deal on an Odyssey. I have known of 3 people (not me) that purchased this van and Honda said they can sell these all day long at sticker, so they do. BUT, that does not mean all Honda dealerships sell this way.
Please remember that Accord's are a different breed from the Oddysey and can be marketed differently.

Re-read Jay's post...He mentioned ALL Honda's of the 80's and 90's....That was BEFORE the Odyssey was ever introduced.

Yes, the experience was with the Accord in the 80's and Odyssey when the "newer" version came out. I priced the Odyssey in the Kansas City area in 2001, and got the "no price negotiation, no color choice" statement from every KC metro area Honda dealer. Checking on the internet indicated I would have to go 300+ miles to a dealer who would deal, and I rejected that approach.

I don't believe in spending a lot of time in buying vehicles, and the investment in time to get a deal on the Odyssey was too great; hence my MPV choice....and I am happy with that choice.

I understand that today, I probably could get an Odyssey for less than MSRP, but my choices, if I were to buy today, would lean to Toyota Sienna (for reasons of convenience and where I intend to live when I retire). As I stated, Honda will simply lose out, and it started with their attitudes in the late 1980's.

This was later followed up by a waiting list/take it or leave it attitude (no price negotiation, no color choice) when the Odyssey came out,

Re-read Jay's post...He also mentioned the above.

We all get our "beater" cars every now and then. I swore up and down for several years that I'd never buy a Ford product after my last car(95 Contour) unless it was an old Mustang. Now, my outlook is quite different as a few of their vehicles were in my lineup for a new vehicle purchase. Hell, I'd almost try out the new Fiesta when it comes over in 2010/11. I also had good luck with my Chevy Corsica, but I'm not really sure anything besides the Vibe interests me from GM's market.
I love my current car, 99 civic, and wanted to give Honda a try. However, there's only a couple vehicles that have leg room for me, and they're not something I'd wanna replace the Civic over. Accord has legroom, but I don't like falling in and climbing out of my Civic, and that's what I'd be doing in the Accord too. The Pilot is just too big for my tastes. The s2k is NOT an Ohio car, and I don't have a garage to store it in. I don't have kids, so that rules out their minivan.
Toyota isn't that much different.

In my case it depends on the severity of the problems and on the car overall.
I had a brand new '72 Vega once. The problems were many, major, included the rear axle coming right out of the housing, and the car didn't last long at all. I actually liked the car, and had the quality not been so inexcusably pathetic I would have probably become a GM fan.

After the Vega wheel fell off I no longer felt safe driving it and I traded it in for a '76 Corolla. It ran and ran and ran....flawlessly...until I eventually had my son and needed something 4-door. That car and the '79 Toyota pickup I bought (while I stilll had the Corolla) made me a Toyota fan for life. The pickup ran flawlessly too.

Years later I tried GM again with a '95 Saturn. The Saturn was a disappointment. I'll never get another GM.

Yeah, bad experiences can "kill it" for me. Conversely, good experiences can make me loyal to a brand. And for me it's all about reliability, reliability, and reliability. Oddly, my ex took the Saturn and after the second headgasket blew she traded it for another Saturn! Her primary "decision driver" is not reliability. She likes Saturn despite the major problems.

I have had a fair number of cars in the 45 years I have been driving and I loved ever one of them. I took good care of them and had very few problems.

That said, I believe we all tend to measure lots or few based on how we feel about the car or make. The same 3 problems in a car you like might be overlooked, but in a car you just did not like, they would have been major repairs.

I have only owned three brands, and I guess I sort of avoid many of the other brands when I look for a car. Nothing really wrong about that. It's your money, you should allow yourself to be influenced by your feelings.

After reading these messages, I am reminded of two adages that seem to be in play here……

“You only have one chance to make a first impression”
“The evil that men do lives after them. The good is oft interred with thier bones”

How true they seem to be with our cars. Too bad the folks in Detroit do not read literature.

I like that saying about the evil and the good that men do.

Folks in Detroit seem to only read what they themselves write. It's like living in a jar with the lid screwed on tight.

I had a fake SUV and hated the seats, the no-effect gas pedal problem and the way it would try to sneak off the road if you were the least bit distracted. The 03 Saturn Vue had the break away rear suspension which folded up when Consumer Reports tried the avoidance maneuver. That problem and two CVT problems were fixed under warranty. The electric power steering acted like it was indexed in an off center position. That was enough for me. My Fords all seemed to have leaking heater cores, 65, 69, 73, 73, 87. All my Toyotas were easy and economical to own. 74, 76, 79, 83, 83, 06, 07. The CVCC engine from Honda was a miracle engine with only one fault: At about 90,000 miles it didn't want to start in really cold weather in Northern Maine. There were no running 70's and early 80's Hondas up there in 1992. They all were junked in January for two decades.

...the way it would try to sneak off the road if you were the least bit distracted. 

Please don't tell me you judge a car by how it handles when you fail to pay attention to your driving. I think all cars should steer themselves off the road when the driver is distracted. It would make the roads safer for the rest of us.