By on May 1, 2015

Screen Shot 2015-05-01 at 7.15.01 AM

Cadillac clickbait? Maybe. But, that’s not what I’m aiming for.

One of our Facebook likers said he’d never buy an ATS and “can’t even give you a good reason why not.” Interesting. I have a few cars like that, too.

On the incredibly exotic end of the automotive spectrum, I would never buy a McLaren. Sure, they are wonders of automotive advancement and when I got to ride shotgun in the MP4-12C I was ecstatic. The performance is immense. The feeling of acceleration and handling is mind boggling. And, no matter how much money I may have in the future, I would absolutely never buy one and I’m not sure why.

Coming back down to Earth, I would never buy a Chevrolet or GMC full-size truck. They’re capable, quiet, and at least the Sierra is handsome (the Silverado looks too much like a Michael Bay-era Transformer for my liking). And no matter how much money GM put on the hood or how many options I could get for free or money I could save over an equivalent Ford or Ram, I’d never have a full-size pickup from GM. I can’t tell you why because I don’t really know.

So, Best & Brightest, what perfectly good car on the market today would you never buy “just because”?

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

144 Comments on “QOTD: What Car Would You Never Buy For No Other Reason Than “Because”?...”


  • avatar
    Zykotec

    Ferarri, Lamborghini, Porsche, Pagani Zonda, McLaren, anything at all that cost as much as my house. (just being realistic here)
    As for cars that I will actually be able to afford, I just can’t buy a VW or a Toyota, unless maybe something vintage and reasonably priced show up. (I kinda want a hot rod Bug, 1st gen Celicas will never be cheap enough again)

  • avatar
    JohnnyFirebird

    Late 1990s Grand Prix GTP. I just like them. I understand that they’re front wheel drive. And portly. But… I dunno. It’d be a great car to cruise around in.

    Heck, I’d be OK with a Grand Prix GT.

    EDIT: Oh, wait. I read the article and everything but thought the question was what car *would* I buy for no other reason than because. Wouldn’t… a Ford Escape. Yuck.

  • avatar
    Syke

    BMW. Because their image anymore is “social climbing douchebag who leases their cars because they couldn’t afford to actually buy one”.

    Which is a damned shame, because fifteen years ago I owned a couple of them (’90 E30 3235is, ’96 E36 M3), and really enjoyed the cars.

    Yeah, I know, I actually have a reason. Kinda defeats the intent of the question. I tend to be the kind of person to whom “because . . . . ” means I haven’t thought the situation through.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      Sorry to say it was the same story back when you owned BMWs…..

      • 0 avatar
        Syke

        Back then, when you saw a BMW on the street, at least you could assume that the driver owned it.

        • 0 avatar
          Ron McDon

          I do not understand this mentality. I would wager that the overwhelming majority of BMW owners “back then” were financing their cars. Which means that the bank owned them until they paid off the loan.

          Exactly the same way that the bank owns a lease car until it is returned to the manufacturer. So, explain to me how these drivers are more valiant because they are stroking a bigger check each month to the true owner of the car: the bank.

          • 0 avatar
            Smythe

            Yeah I also don’t get it. I mean, I did have an irrational aversion to leasing. Not because I thought it was douchey (admittedly, “Leases a BMW/Mercedes” is still a quality I ascribe to pretentious young people from Dallas, who are generally douches), but because I believed it wasn’t a good financial decision. Then for my last car purchase, I actually considered the implications. I ran the numbers. And you know what? I ended up leasing not one but two new cars (an ATS and a Ford C-Max hybrid). I could have purchased them (or at least financed said purchase). But my reasoning was
            A) These are cars that I want now, and that aren’t available in great quantities on the used market.
            B) Both cars suit our needs now, but might not be appropriate in a few years (when 1-2 kids will be present). Also, I buy new cars every two years as-is.
            C) Neither car is looking like it will offer any kind of reasonable resale value; in fact, they’ll probably struggle to stay ahead of their projected residuals.
            D) Factory incentives (at the time) are very generous. Even if I found a year-old used model, I wouldn’t save enough money over buying new to even do that.

            Ergo, I concluded that, while the least expensive option would obviously be to keep running our existing cars into the ground (a 2006 and 2004 model, respectively), leasing in our scenario isn’t such a crazy idea. And six months later, I still think it was the right choice. And, to tie back to the original article, I wouldn’t have thought to get an ATS until the week that I did so, but I’m still glad I did. It’s a great car. And far more affordable than a comparable BMW, even with the Germans’ more generous residual values.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          And there were good odds it had a manual transmission too.

          There are only a few cars on the market I would consider owning, but I have real reasons for every one that I wouldn’t own.

    • 0 avatar

      Actually, most of the people who lease BMWs CAN afford to buy them, but choose not to. That might be why they have the money to buy them.

      Why doesn’t “lease” their car these days? Not many. If your making car payments do you think you own your vehicle? The reason there are drive up tellers at banks is to remind you who owns your car.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al From 'Murica

        This is a winner. I really want an Audi…but no way in hell I’m gonna buy one. Enter the lease…

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        In my case, I could lease a new BMW every three years, but I bought one and paid it off, and am about to buy an additional one. Though truth be told, if sales tax laws in my state were more favorable to leasing, I might well have leased the new one. Realistically, if you are going to buy a new car of any kind every 2-3 years, leasing is the way to go.

        But as to cars I would irrationally never buy – Corvettes, full-size pickup trucks, Camrys… All perfectly fine vehicles that I would never, ever, ever own.

  • avatar
    PriusV16

    Pretty much any Ford vehicle.

    I’m in Germany, and I don’t have anything against Fords or the people that make ’em, it’s just that….. I don’t know…… my grandfather drove a Granada, plus the memory of the Scorpio with the inflated “in a second, I’ll let out the biggest fart EVAR!!” rear end….. something like that….. ya know?

    I don’t seem to be alone on this one, however. A few years back, the big boss of Ford Germany said the biggest challenge for Ford here on the German market was that half of all new-car buyers didn’t even consider a Ford. The brand isn’t even on their list of things one could possibly buy.
    Go figure.

    • 0 avatar
      Dr. Claw

      That’s funny, because when it comes to Ford, it’s what comes out of German Ford that actually has made that brand considering in the last few years. Long Live OneFord!

      I used to think that way about American Ford products. Something about the designs of everything (sans the Taurus, “Contour”, and the Focus pre-New Edge era) just seemed stodgy and designed for those places where the stopwatch stopped somewhere in the ’70s. But Euro and Aussie Ford (save that horrific generation 2 Scorpio) is generally cool with me.

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

        There was no “pre-New Edge” Focus, its the car that pretty much introduced New Edge (in 1998 in Europe) along with the 99 Cougar.

        I cant think of any Ford with 1970s styling after 1992 (when the Panthers got the Aero look). Tempo was considered very modern and aerodynamic at the time, especially compared to Chrysler K and GM J cars of the era. Thunderbird introduced Ford’s aero look way back in 1983, followed by Tempo in 84 and Taurus in 86. Even the 90s F-Series and Econoline/Club Wagon were far more modern than GM trucks/vans at the time. I dont see any 1970s styling on Aerostar or Festiva/Aspire, Escort, Explorer/Ranger/Bronco II, etc. Ford argued with the US Government to allow flush fitting, composite headlamps to replace 1970s era sealed beam units. Once approved, Ford quickly introduced them on the 1986 Taurus and Tempo, spreading to the Thunderbird, Mark 7, etc. Not exactly 1970s stuff.

        Ford was critisized by some in the 80s and 90s for the “jelly bean” look, which, like it or not, is decidedly not 1970s. Quite the opposite in fact. Meanwhile, GM’s and Chrysler’s vehicles held on to 70s throwback styling cues such as flat, square head and tail lamps, plastic chrome everywhere, rectangle speedometers, flat-on-the-door panel switches for windows and locks, sliding switches for HVAC, etc. At least until they started to copy the example set by Ford Taurus and the other aero cars that followed/preceeded it.

        The only possible car I can think of you could consider a 70s throwback would be the 1991 and older Crown Vic and Grand Marquis, and the 80s Town Car.

    • 0 avatar
      Saxphile

      Had a Ford Scorpio Mk I with a manual gearbox. Unbelievably engaging to drive and completely invisible to law enforcement.

      I know that Ford had to stop making RWD cars because non-luxury RWD cars simply didn’t sell, but I’d like to think that the Scorpio could have had another generation were it not for the whale-like Mk II killing the nameplate.

      • 0 avatar
        Zykotec

        My ’89 Scorpio 2.0i is probably one of the best cars I’ve ever owned, considering it wasn’t really slow, got great mileage and was incredibly comfy for it’s low weight (which ment it handled well too)
        Mine did have a ton of rust and 394.000km on it though.
        PS: there is a huge difference between US and german Fords when it comes to build quality. I’ve seen a stripped ’65 Mustang under restoration, and compared to a same year Taunus 17m it looked really really cheap.

        • 0 avatar
          jhefner

          “I’ve seen a stripped ’65 Mustang under restoration, and compared to a same year Taunus 17m it looked really really cheap.”

          Consider the Mustang was based upon the Falcon; itself a compact (for the time) car that was more like an Anglia than a Taunus in the European lineup. It was built to be as lightweight and simple as possible; the creases in the side were there to impart strength to the otherwise thin door panels; just to give one example.

          A Taunus would have been more like a Galaxie 500.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

            Right, the Mustang “looked cheap” BECAUSE IT WAS CHEAP. One of the reasons it was so popular was because it packed more style and performance in an affordable package than anything else. Being reasonably priced (AKA “cheap”) made it a car for the masses instead of something more exclusive and only within reach of people who had well paying jobs.

            My parent’s first new car purchase was a 1966 Mustang with a 289. They said it was the most stylish and powerful sporty car that fell within their budget. Yes, they couldve afforded a paper-bag-boring V-8 Falcon, but the point is the Mustang’s success was in part due to how affordable it was.

          • 0 avatar
            Zykotec

            I agree to a certain point, but the build quality in general was still a lot better in German Fords. It was also more or less the same in the even cheaper smaller fwd 12m/15m.
            A Taunus 17M would land somewhere in basic Fairlane territory while the 26M would be more comparable to a Galaxie 500, even if they both had the same basic body and styling. Interiors, engines, drivetrain and many trim parts would be different, but they would still have the same build quality from bottom to top of the line. (the engines though, were an american design, so prone to overheating, and generally unreliable and underachieving)
            As for the Anglia and Cortina, they were british, so their reliability wouldn’t have been stellar, but they also seemed better built than US Fords.
            The first European Ford to be built both in the UK and on the continent was the Escort from ’68, and that’s where things started going downwards, all the way until the ‘rebirth’ in the late 90’s, which it is probably the main reason VW is as huge as it is today.

    • 0 avatar
      Polishdon

      +1 on Fords.

      I would never touch a Ford again.

      I have WAY too many lemons from Ford/Mercury/Lincoln in my possession or in my family. Even the current batch isn’t any better. There isn’t enough space to go over every failure I’ve had with them.

      And personally, I rate Ford drivers (at least locally) worse the BMW drivers for being jerks (at least locally). I can pretty much guarantee if the lane is moving slow, blocking the fast moving lane or someone is driving like a jerk, it’s almost certain to be a Ford product involved.

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

        Lol. I frequently drive all over the country. If there is one make that is far and above the choice of idiot drivers, its Toyota. I see Camrys in the far left lane, doing 5 mph under with their high beams on in the middle of the day. I cant tell you how many times Ive seen a Camry or Corolla cross three lanes at once to make an exit, forcing everyone they cut off to react to avoid a collision. 4Runners, Tundras and Tacomas will aggresivly tail gate, change lanes with no signal, pass on the right and cut someone off (squezing in where there really wasnt room) so they can be exactly one car length ahead in a line of 15 cars all doing a similar speed in traffic.

        I do see idiot drivers in Fords (all makes/models really), but not nearly as often as in a Toyota. Its like “oh, I can do whatever I want because *I* made a better decision than you by buying a 10 year old ‘new’ car”.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        Polishdon- you gave a ton of reasons for not owning a Ford………. question was which vehicle you would not buy but don’t have a clear reason.

        I don’t think there is a car or truck out there I would not buy without some sort of reason for not buying it.

  • avatar
    Brumus

    BMW: The Ultimate Douchebag Machine.

  • avatar

    A car with a v6 and AWD would meet all my needs and save me $1500 a month.

    A Genesis v6 AWD
    A 300c v6 AWD
    An XTS.
    A Taurus SHO

    HELL TO THE NO.

  • avatar
    John R

    This is tough. Almost every car I can think of NOT buying I have a reason for.

    I guess Bentley, not that I could afford it, but even if I could, meh. The same with Rolls. Neither does anything for me. It’s weird, but when it comes to that wheelhouse I’d rather a Maybach Mercedes.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Have you SEEN an Arnage or an Azure in motion? It’s something to behold.

      • 0 avatar
        kmoney

        For sure. I would love to have a 2005+ Arnage as a car to hold on to forever. Probably one of the most beautiful luxo cruisers ever made. If only the Canadian allotment wasn’t something like 15 units.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          I fully agree. There’s an Azure around here in cream color with cream/brown top that I get to see sometimes.

          http://www.drivearabia.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/2008-Bentley-Arnage-R1.jpg

          They’re so stately.

  • avatar
    Nick 2012

    Dodge Journey with the GEMA 4-cyl, a Honda Crosstour and a Smart Car.

  • avatar
    Zackman

    Fiat. Because they just look like almost-full-size tin-plate friction toys and look about as durable.

    Any German car because they are so maintenance-intensive, although I love Audi for the simple beauty of their cars.

    smart. Just because they are dumb.

    Cadillac. Why? Because I can have just about all of what they have in my Chevy, at less than half the price!

    • 0 avatar
      Maymar

      Dumb for you. A smart is an awful idea for someone like you whose commute is an hour of entirely highway.

      • 0 avatar
        Zackman

        Yeah, true enough. A smart makes perfect sense in NYC or San Francisco proper. I see them on the highways around here, but I’d be scared to death driving one! They are supposed to be pretty safe, though.

        I feel much better in my large cruiser, eating up the miles – 67,000 in less than 3 years!

        • 0 avatar
          ttacgreg

          Parking in a small space is the only justification I can discern for a Smart. There are plenty of other econoboxes for the same price with more room, power and fuel efficiency.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            In the US, a smart only makes sense for people who are parking on city streets every day.

            But for them it’s a lifesaver. There’s always a spot for a smart, even when there’s no room for a normal car.

            It also promises to get a lot better as a car with the next generation, when the awful automated manual transmission is replaced by a normal dual-clutch.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            People in America parking on city streets should do so in a Town Car. It is the proper way.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            You mean like the Fiat 500, ttacgreg? I can’t speak to the performance, but the guy I know who has one doesn’t complain and his co-workers seem quite vocal about his driving style. The only real disadvantage I can attest to is the fact that the Fiat 500 can carry almost 15x as much cargo despite almost as small.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        From personal observation, I would argue that the Smart is more intelligent than you think. A man I’m acquainted with owns like seven Corvettes of different generations, yet is day-to-day driver is a Smart car. It’s capable of going almost anywhere at almost any time and is driven day, night, sun, rain and even snow. His daily commute is 45 minutes of state highways–in two different states–each way. He averages over 40mpg on that trip and manages to average 35mpg in local driving. For other reasons, I almost bought one myself.

        Still, the Fiat 500 is almost as good with mileage in town, but at least it has room behind the seats for a decent Costco run and is an absolute blast to drive.

    • 0 avatar
      tjh8402

      I’ll defend the Fiat here. I’ve put 5500 miles on my Abarth in less than 2.5 months so lots of highway driving has been involved in that. It’s not comfy cozy, but it’s not unreasonably uncomfortable.

      • 0 avatar

        The guy buys a Chevrolet full size (nothing wrong eith that and from accounts seems rather competent), then strikes out at the anti-thesis (for whatever reason) of his choice. Let live and let die. Whatever. Yes the i heard my third cousin’s Hawaiian friend had trouble from a Citroen he bought 40 years ago. Reason enough to hate on a modern Fiat. Go figure

  • avatar
    PeriSoft

    If you’re looking at things there isn’t a rational reason to avoid… Chrysler 200 maybe? I never even considered them this past December even though everybody seems to like them. I could say it has something to do with the previous-gen 200 rental that crapped out after 8 minutes and refused to start the previous month to car-shopping, but I rationally know that’s a lousy reason. So yeah, I don’t really know. Maybe it’s a subliminal brand thing? But there certainly wasn’t really a good reason for me to not even check them out!

  • avatar
    midnightdorifto

    CUE. That’s the reason that Facebook commenter is looking for. CUE. And I say that as a Cadillac owner.

    I’d pick Maserati. No matter the money involved, and no matter how good their cars get, nothing says “I did not visit the Porsche dealership before my compulsive behavior led me to a dark place” quite like a 3/4 Ferrari GT.

    • 0 avatar
      Smythe

      https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCOTDfrns3RPpktCCQEykfKw

      I’ll keep defending my ATS all day, but sometimes the CUE system (specifically the voice recognition) does grind my gears.

  • avatar
    wmba

    Nissan. Couldn’t even be bothered to visit their showroom during my new car search. A good cup of coffee always seemed to beckon with more allure.

    • 0 avatar
      Nedmundo

      Same here. I simply don’t like Nissan, and I’m not sure why. I’ve driven a 370z and loved it, but still don’t think I’d buy one. Maybe if that IDx comes to fruition I could muster some enthusiasm. This dislike mostly includes Infiniti too, though my business partner’s G37x is darned nice. Still wouldn’t buy one though.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      I was going to say the same thing. I could probably deal with an Infiniti, but not a Nissan.

    • 0 avatar
      tedward

      Ah, but there’s a good reason for that. Nissan interiors have never been all that special but they used to offer more competitive drivetrains. Now, boring engines and worst in the industry transmissions seen to be their jam. They do roomy and cheap cars and that is it. In my opinion they have also stolen Subaru’s crown for worst styling. But, they have a large and motivated dealer network and a legacy of more competitive previous generation cars to tide them over, at least for a while.

    • 0 avatar
      Smythe

      Yeah I’ll never have another Nissan. I bought a new 2012 Altima Coupe V6 once. It was incredibly boring until the day I sold it two years later. Maybe it was because I was coming down from an Infiniti M45S, but…that Altima brought me no joy. I can’t fit in a 370z, and the Maxima would just make me wish I’d bought another Infiniti, so…I guess you could say I do have reasons to not buy a Nissan after all.

  • avatar
    its me Dave

    A modern pickup truck – full or mid. I love pickups. I’d driven a full size all through the 70’s and 80’s and an S10 through the 90’s. It’s not just the ridiculous size of today’s monstrosities, there’s just something missing – or just not right – about those things.

    • 0 avatar
      tedward

      That was going to be my answer as well. I grew up only driving trucks and love them in their eighties/nineties footprint. The new ones scream urban cowboy to me at such a loud volume that I just could never.

      The outgoing generation of mid sizers still does it for me though. A frontier with 4wd, a manual and nothing else is nearly perfect. Still a truck, not a poser limo.

  • avatar
    Maymar

    CUV’s. Any CUV. Much as I hate to say it, the Chevy Traverse I’ve been driving for work for the past month isn’t entirely awful (at least on someone else’s dime), and I’m sure there are enough other ones that are similar. But I have absolutely no reason to buy one over a regular car, so… why?

    Admittedly, I have an inexplicable weakness for the Subaru Outback and Forester. For some reason, they seem different – maybe because they come by the four-wheeled fleece jacket thing honestly.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      Or maybe the fact that the Outback started out as a Legacy wagon and the Forester as an SUV? I personally am not a fan of the Forester and if given the choice I would take the Outback over the Forester if I were restricted to just those choices, but having owned a Saturn Vue, I also fully understand the value of having some interior size the typical CUV lacks.

      I guess the problem is that the line between CUV and SUV is getting hazy. We now have two supposedly completely different cars riding on the exact same platform. The Jeep Renegade and the Fiat 500X are essentially identical under the skin (albeit with slight driveline changes) yet the Renegade is a nice, roomy box while the 500x is essentially a 4-door bubble with almost no cargo room behind the back seats. It’s become more a matter of cubic footage for hauling that separates SUVs from CUVs.

  • avatar
    Saxphile

    Let me be that guy–Toyota Camry. Yes it has received endorsements even on TTAC, and I’ve driven the newest one quite a few times and found it as good as ever (silent like a Jaguar from the 80s and sips fuel like a Honda from the 80s).

    Just because.

  • avatar
    Joss

    Range Rover because it’s about statement and I’m just not.

  • avatar
    juicy sushi

    Hummers. Just hate everything about them.

  • avatar
    tremorcontrol

    Any Audi.

    They have nice sheetmetal (although that grill looks like a Hitler moustache to me). Reviewers like them. They’re really popular with the MUPpies (Millennial Urban Professionals). I’ll probably never buy one.

    …unless they bring back the A6 wagon with a diesel. ;)

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    Anything with a roof height under 64″.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      I would almost argue, ‘anything with a roof height OVER 64″, but my Jeep Wrangler is closer to 72″. So with limited exceptions, I’d say anything with a roof height over 66″–which means almost every full-sized pickup truck built and most mid-sizers. (Which, by the way, are covered in my own statement below.)

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    Im an engineer and spreadsheet freak so if I write a car off it’s usually for a good reason. On my car shopping adventure ~2 years ago I did my marketplace analysis and decided on a 3 series. I wrote off 350Zs in the manner of this article, but said ‘what the heck’… test drove one and wound up buying it. Looking back, I probably would have been better served by a 330i ZHP if I had been fortunate enough to find one w/o problems. Z and my Civic now (aside from A/C) = rock solid.

    • 0 avatar
      PeriSoft

      The Z is a nice car. The high beltline bugs me a bit and the climate control is loud and the engine does some strange things to the throttle when you shift, but aside from that it’s kind of hard to complain about.

  • avatar
    TW5

    Korean Cars. Minivans. Miata. BMW Z3/4. C-Max. Convertibles (except Jeep Wrangler). CR-V. Newest Pilot. RAV4. Highlander. Pathfinder.

    Vehicles that are not commuters, utility vehicles, performance cars, or professional vehicles (reliable luxury) are virtually all off my list. Why? Because.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      Your formula doesn’t really work TW. Every one of the cars you mentioned can and do qualify under your list of vehicles you WOULD buy. Most Korean cars fit the Commuter category, minivans are decidedly Utility vehicles, the Z3/Z4 are certainly performance vehicles (albeit convertibles typically), the CR-V, Pilot, Rav4, Highlander and Pathfinder are all Utility vehicles. Granted, the ‘just because’ clause is valid, but not the listed reasons.

  • avatar
    r129

    Toyota, Subaru, and pretty much any CUV or SUV.

  • avatar
    danio3834

    Hyundai/Kia products. I have no real justification, just complete indifference.

    • 0 avatar
      Willyam

      Yeah, I even have evidence against feeling that way. When dating my wife she owned a Kia Spectra. I instantly bristled, as it was black over grey, manual everything. But other than a leak in the A/C system the silly thing never failed, got mid 30’s MPG numbers, and cost little to insure. Still, I sold it off the first chance we got.

      Also Saturns. I know several people over the years that have returned silly reliability (very UN-GM) and space shuttle mileage out of the old SW’s, and the engineer in me should delight in the low cost-per-mile. But I never could get beyond feigned interest.

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

        I had a very basic 99 SL. It got 40 mpg, but was about as comfortable as a chair made only of broken bricks and plywood.

        It was so light (which helped mpg of course) that it became a liability in heavy southern thunderstorms. It had no ABS, so even slight braking on wet pavement would lock it up. I skidded 3/4 of the way through a redlight one time (I stopped skidding when I gave up on stopping and just kept going). Thank God noone was coming. I put the thing on craigslist very soon thereafter. I was done with it.

        The best thing about the Saturn was I bought it for $1300 via eBay (was not far from me), put 30,000 miles on it, and sold it for $1500! Of course I did usual maintenance items like plugs, wires, filters, fluids, front brakes (inc. rotors) and a set of tires, but really, that would have been the case with just about any used car so its not like it cost extra or anything. Id have probably had to do the same stuff to a Civic or Focus, and good luck finding one of them (late 90s/2000s) in great shape with 130k for $1300.

        The Saturn of course started drinking oil after like 145k or so, but it was reliable and handled pretty good for a FWD compact with 14″ tires. I liked the manual steering.

    • 0 avatar
      Smythe

      Ah yes. I was shopping for a small new car a few years ago. Tried all kinds of models. Challenger, A4, 370z, XJ, R32, Trailblazer SS…all over the map. Then I test drove a Kia Optima SX on a whim. Looked nice. Offered everything I liked in the other cars. Great price with lots of content. But ultimately, I just didn’t want to be the first guinea pig to find out if the Koreans had gotten it right (I think this was 2012, the first year of the first “good” Optima). I ended up going with an Altima coupe (mentioned in another comment). The whole time I drove it, every time I saw an Optima, I knew I should have gotten that one. But I just didn’t want a Kia…because.

      Incidentally, a couple of cars later, I was dead set on buying a Genesis 5.0. Ended up at the last minute in a Cadillac ATS. Go figure.

  • avatar
    crtfour

    CUV’s. No good reason other than they just “don’t do anything for me”.

  • avatar
    Felix Hoenikker

    Any brown, manual, diesel wagon.
    Hey, somebody had to say it.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    A very intriguing and thought-provoking question. Other than Ford as a brand, due to their rather notorious lack of quality at least across their automotive line, I don’t have a ‘hate’ for anything that I’m aware of. Yes, some cars are remarkably ugly and others are dogs in one way or another, but I can’t think of any that I wouldn’t buy, “just because.” I discount full size pickup trucks from this argument because my reasons are all valid, and not just for me. On the other hand, I’ve driven cars from the old luxo-barges to now one of the smallest cars available on American streets. I’ve driven fast and I’ve driven slow and to be quite honest, until relatively recently I wouldn’t have believed I would like anything smaller than what is today’s “full-sized” cars. My favorite cars of all time were my ’73 and ’75 Cutlasses and their platform sisters although the one I want most is the ’59 Impala. But going the other way?

    No. I can’t think of a one.

    • 0 avatar
      Zykotec

      As someone who has worked a lot on (Euro)Fords, they seem to have exactly the quality they were priced to have. Al the Japanese brands have learned a lot from Ford, they just added better parts and Japanese workers attitude.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        @Zykotec: I’ll admit to not having any experience with Euro-Fords, but through personal experience and second-hand through Ford owners I personally know, American Fords are simply not reliable. If I ever did buy one, it would have to be brand’ new so I could take full advantage of their warranty. But again, the people I know who do own Fords here tend not to keep them long. Worse, one man who bought a Transit Connect for his business loved it when he bought it, but now just over three years later is already selling it. That doesn’t help Ford’s reputation for me.

        • 0 avatar
          Zykotec

          No, they aren’t reliable, they are reasonably priced, and they are usually quite OK to drive (not great, but far from horrible) And mostly repairs are cheap, so they are brilliant cheap used cars too, if you bother to work on them since they depreciate more than Japanese cars. You are/were also not supposed to keep them more than 3 years if you by them new, because that’s when you trade it in for a new Ford (unless it’s a model A)

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      @Vulpine – If you’d said fullsize pickups are too big for you and ONLY said that, then alright. But then you always go on and on about how midsize pickups are ALSO “too big”? Then why constantly bring up fullsize pickups if they’re not even on your frackin’ purchasing ‘radar’? What about 18-wheeler big rigs?? Do you go on big rig forums and harass/complain how they don’t fit in your tiny condo carport???

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        I should have expected you’d show up on my comment, DM. Nice to see you again. As to your complaint…

        Take another look at what is being called a “Mid-sized truck” today. When placed side by side with a ‘similar’ full-sized truck from 1990 they’re almost the exact same size to approximately a 5% difference in each dimension and about the same weight. The only reason they’re called Mid-sized is because the full-sized truck is almost 15% larger by dimensions. Including mirrors, a ’15 Ram 1500 is 103″ wide–more than eight feet. A 1990 Ram 1500 is only 79″ by comparison, well over a foot narrower. THAT is why I complain today’s mid-size trucks are too large.

        That is also why I specifically left them off this list, too. I have a reason–a very valid reason–for not including them. The question specifically asks, “What Car Would You Never Buy For No Other Reason Than “Because”?”

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          I’m not talking about your never ending complaints of midsizer’s “size”. So isn’t it then overly redundant to then complain about the size of “fullsize”? It’s a frackin’ GIVEN they’re too big for you too, isn’t it? Same tiny carport, no?

          But why stop at fullsize pickups? Do you go on equal tirades on big rig forums? It defies logic.

          But “midsize” means, a compromise between the compact pickups we once had and fullsize. Since consumers largely abandoned the compact pickup segment, OEMs have been trying to leach off the success of fullsize by a ‘hybrid’ of sorts. Best of both worlds? Regardless, they should just admit it’s a niche segment and stop growing their proportions.

          The ’80s Mini-Truck Craze/Circus was the perfect storm. One of the Hottest trends of the time. The sub-compact fwd trucklette sales were the 1st to die off however. Sucks I know.. I miss the chicks with big hair and high-cut bikini bottoms!!!!!!

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            I’m sure you will be quite surprised if true compacts manage to return and they sell in decent numbers. Let’s just wait and see who gets the last laugh, hmmm?

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Subcompact pickups make as much sense as Smarts, except less. Some may actually want them, but nobody NEEDS them.

            But if you spent your life in the wide open spaces instead of a human storage facility, and just looked at midsize pickups (OR EVEN FULLSIZE!!!) for what they are, you may see things like the rest of USA/NA consumers.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            In fairness, something as ridiculous as the “Smart” car has somewhat of a case in Europe. The non-existent minitruck makes a similar argument in dense urban areas.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            You know that makes me think. For city driving only, what about those little 4 door vans or trucks that some company makes (Chinese?) and college campuses use for their landscaping vehicles.

            They’re like the old Subaru 4WD van thing we didn’t get here.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            You might as well stop trolling, Denver. Haven’t you noticed that NOBODY has responded to you except me, and I’m not jumping at the bait?

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            My comments were only @ your silly illogical views, which I guess you haven’t really responded to. But you would if you had a half logical response. Believe U me!

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Btw, not even the Small Pickup Mafia (SPaM) is gonna come to your rescue on this one!

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Poor, poor Mikey. Can’t get me to argue so he’s begging the “SPaM” to intervene.

            That’s what you get when you insist on illogical arguments, Mikey.

  • avatar
    mikey

    For me, it would have to be The extended, crew, super, crew, double crew, or for that matter any truck, that is not a Regular cab, 8 ft box.
    A manual 4 wheel drive shifter, rubber mats, and crank windows. That’s my idea of a truck.

    In my town, it seems every guy over the age of 50, drives some sort of configuration of extended truck.

    I’m not a truck hater, I’ve owned many. The newer ones with an interior that looks like a high end car, just don’t do it for me

    • 0 avatar
      Zackman

      Short bed, standard cab for me, Mikey. One step up from a work truck, i.e: no black-out grille – mine MUST be chrome, and hopefully the door handles, too. Rubber flooring, please – no carpeting! A/C is a must.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Stripper pickups are an amazing bargain and ‘bang’ for your buck. I can’t believe they won’t take them away soon!. And you can get them anyway you want, usually without ordering them special. I found my red F-150 STX sitting on the front row. Rubber floor, crank windows, but a V8, extra cab, fog lights, mono-chome/color key’d bumpers, alloy wheels, AC, slider back window and limo tint.

        But carpet in a truck makes as much sense as carpeting the garage.

  • avatar
    talkstoanimals

    There are no cars that I’m not open to at least the idea of buying. But there are some cars that, no matter how good they are, would require me to overcome some serious emotional/mental hurdles to buy for no rational reason other than “it just doesn’t seem like my bag, (baby).” Those include:

    – Any Buick
    – Corvette (I came close on a C7, but just couldn’t do it)
    – Most Toyota/Lexus products
    – Most Mercedes products
    – Subaru Outback
    – Hyundai Genesis or the Kia equivalent (I respect the new Genesis a lot, but still can’t see myself buying one)
    – Chrysler 300 (Sorry bigtruckseries. As with the Genesis, I respect the car, but just can’t see myself owning one…)

    • 0 avatar
      MeJ

      I’m curious as to why you didn’t pull the trigger on the C7. By general consensus, it seems to be an incredible machine for the money.
      Is it the gold chains, hairy chest, toupee cliché?

  • avatar
    70Cougar

    An interesting question, and several cars I would never buy popped into my head, but there is a reason for each one. Often, they aren’t good reasons, which is really what the question is getting at.

    I wouldn’t buy a Chevy because I’m a Ford guy. I wouldn’t buy a VW because I had a Rabbit that left me stranded up and down the east coast 25 years ago. I wouldn’t buy a Corolla because if someone is driving way too slow and causing a traffic jam, it is usually a Corolla.

  • avatar
    cbrworm

    I’ve never cared for a Honda car. I know they are great, just not my cup of tea. Honda sportbikes, however…

    I’ve never been a fan of Subarus either.

    There are many other cars I wouldn’t buy, but I have reasons for them.

  • avatar
    fr88

    Any Toyota. No reason, they are all fine cars for what they are. Just can’t be bothered to follow the crowd. This “wouldn’t buy for no reason” would extend to Lexus, except their current grotesque styling gives abundant reason not to buy one.

  • avatar
    Waftable Torque aka Daniel Ho

    For myself, I seem to only like flagship full size luxury sedans. So I give myself a free pass to fall in love with the A8, Flying Spur, Mulsanne, 7, CT6, Equus, XJ, K900, LS, Continental, LS, S, and Ghost.

    But I would never be caught dead in the category below it (A6, A7, 5, 6 Gran Coupe, XTS, Genesis, Q70L, XF, Cadenza, MKS, GS, E, CLS, Panamera Executive and Model S).

    Why? I don’t really know. It might be because I own both the Lexus LS and ES, and the former is a full magnitude more comfortable than the latter.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      The ES really isn’t a competitor to the class you mentioned, though. It plays in a segment that’s further downmarket (as do the XTS, Cadenza, Lincoln MKS, etc.)

      The full luxury midsizers have started to encroach on full-size territory. The 5/6GC is now mechanically an extra-short-wheelbase 7, and the A6/A7 have been granted a lot of features from the A8. I think next year’s new E-class will be the same.

  • avatar

    A non-BOF CUV or SUV. Sure, I’ll justify it by saying that I want the strength/ruggedness of a real truck, but in reality it’s unlikely that a unibody CUV wouldn’t be able to handle anything I actually would use it for.

    A minivan. In reality, it’s the perfect vehicle for me – I sell at swap meets and go to a lot of auctions, and it’s cheaper, has more cargo space, and gets better gas milage than an SUV or pickup. But as a single dude, I can’t bring myself to buy one.

  • avatar
    Domestic Hearse

    A Nissan GT-R.

    Wait. No. That’s a lie. I’d totally have a GT-R. I’d love to have one. I’d wash it and wax it and never drive it in the rain or snow. Always keep it in the garage and not let my wife park next to it lest she ding it with her door.

    Anyway, where was I?

    A Subaru WRX STI.

    No, that’s another lie. I’d totally have a Rex.

    Thinking…

    Chevy Spark. And this time I’m telling the truth. Would not buy. Just because.

  • avatar

    Dodge Charger, Challenger and 300.

  • avatar
    TEXN3

    I’d rather have no car than MoPar.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    Kia (there are substantive reasons, though, so I slightly digress)

    Bentley (VW guts at 4-8x the price, how lame, but that’s a substantive reason, so, I digress again)

    Nissan

    Mitsubishi (this one’s pure emotion)

    ANY New Gen …..

    …. Cadillac (Ha!)

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Please reconsider Bentley. There are “real” recent Bentleys like the Arnage, Brooklands, and Azure which are -not- VW products underneath. Their prices reach much higher than any VW-based counterpart.

      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bentley_Arnage#/media/File:2009_Bentley_Arnage_Final_Series.jpg

      People who know cars know you’ve got a real one.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        I think some of the classics are lovely in that hand-built, coachwork, exclusive way (pride of craftsmanship), but they offended my inner sense of righteousness when they pawned off a Phaeton as a Continental.

        • 0 avatar

          And the 2011-present Mulsanne, which clearly has Audi electronics, but still features a hand-built interior and exterior, uses a unique architecture, and leverages the heritage 6-and-3/4-liter pushrod V8.

          I don’t think there’s anything particularly wrong with the Continental GT and Flying Spur, other than that the original “Continental Flying Spur” was hideous. Really, it was more the case that the Phaeton was a simplified Bentley than that the Bentley was a Phaeton in drag. The Phaeton was so outside the league of anything that should have been badged as a Volkswagen (not that I don’t think it’s awesome, anyway). And if you’re talking about platform leveraging, that’s to be expected.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    Any FCA product, including any Fiat.

    Whatever they’re making, there’s a better option from another company – something purchased by people with better credit scores from a more stable company. One which isn’t constantly in and out of the red since about 1975.

    • 0 avatar
      Zackman

      Funny you say that. I drove MoPar products from 1980-2002, but never again. Only because GM was making pure junk at the time, and MoPars weren’t as bad, plus I had confidence in what Lee Iaccoca was doing.

      GM to me is wonderful again! :}

  • avatar
    ttacgreg

    I for one, would never buy another Chevy Vega. My ’71 made it to only 185,000 miles.

  • avatar
    Chan

    BMW 3 and 4 Series. Here in California it’s what every male aspires to as a status symbol, and the most commonly heard description of the car is “nice.”

    More objectively, I like my cars to be specialised. A roomy, reliable and low-TCO car for commuting. A more bonkers car for the weekends.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      I’ve always said I’d never own a BMW just because. The high maintenance, astronomical repair bills and general douchbaggery involved. But they’ve got the looks just right. Awesome! All German cars actually. Even VW.

      Everything else, I can barely tolerate their looks. Or absolutely repulsed. Except for most pickups. Damn shame too!

      Since pickups are douch bag happy too, I may be able to make the leap.. Heck the Power Stroke has been preparing me for the BMW service/specialists.

      But it’d be an absolute riot to take a brand new, mid level 3 or 5-series, pull the engine and go for the LSx conversion right out the showroom!

  • avatar
    dal20402

    Every time I think of an answer to this, I also think of a reason.

    Hyundai Sonata… *because* it’s soulless and I still don’t trust Hyundai to make decent suspension and steering without Lotus help.
    BMW 3-series… *because* it has a spartan, non-luxurious interior but at the same time drives like a soft luxury car rather than a sports sedan.
    Range Rover Evoque… *because* it’s a toy poodle, not a car.

  • avatar
    Lightspeed

    Any CUV, because I throw up in my mouth a little at the thought of owning one.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    Hyundai/Kia. There’s no strong rational reason for that. Their cars are largely competitive and reliable enough to warrant strong consideration for nearly all rational reasons, and I don’t get the same low-key revulsion from just-as-dull Toyotas and likely-less-reliable Fords.

    Nissan’s second, their current lineup does nothing for me, but unlike H/K I can still point to a few real deficiencies.

    Heavy media/enthusiast fawning over the Accord and Fit also turn me off even though they are top-tier in their segments.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      I feel the same way about Hyundai/Kia (except for the 2015 Genesis). But I think there is still a reason for it. I haven’t yet driven a Hyundai/Kia, up to the present, that had what I saw as satisfactory suspension and steering. They got outside help on the new Genesis and everyone says it’s much better, so I’m curious to drive one.

  • avatar
    anti121hero

    Any Korean car. Ugh.

  • avatar
    e30gator

    Any Chrysler/Fiat product. Ever. I don’t care what the reviews say about them, I just “feel” like they’re the inferior product. Same goes for Hyundai/Kia stuff.

  • avatar
    Veee8

    There are so many vehicles today that do nothing for me, the market is saturated with bland generic SUV’s, CUV’s and crossover’s…to me that whole segment shows the lack of creativity in the marketplace and utterly wacky and boring.

    I like Pick-up Trucks (of various sizes), Big vans/mini Vans, sports cars, wagons, hatchbacks, sedans, coupes, muscle cars, GT’s, convertibles, Targas, but start to mix them together from either end of the spectrum and it turns into the equivalent of Little Caesar’s pizza with strips of bacon wrapped around the outside, or cheese in the crust, it’s just getting wacky…

  • avatar
    TybeeJim

    It’s as simple as this… Anything made by GM. Why? Because GM let people die, let a woman go to prison when they knew full well about the faulty ignition switch and ignored it. This corporate mentality was and is criminal behavior which they were permitted to simply “buy off”. That said, I think the new Stingray maybe the best value in sports cars in the world. Too damn bad.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    I just thought of an actual answer to this.

    VW GTI.

    I probably should have bought one at each of my last three car-buying opportunities.

    I don’t really have a good reason not to. It’s a compelling value. I like the refined interior and ride. It’s got a nice balance of strengths. In my area, it doesn’t say anything good or bad from an image standpoint (although it’s very common). I don’t really keep vehicles long enough, or put enough miles on them, to be truly afraid of VW reliability (although I still am a bit).

    But I still can’t bring myself to pull the trigger or even really consider one. Somehow it just seems boring and like the too-easy answer.

  • avatar
    Big Al From 'Murica

    Em’ Shevolays!!!

  • avatar

    I’d have a hard to owning a Volkswagen. I just don’t like the name in comparison to some others. However, I should never say never. I really like their diesel products…. but I’d more inclined to buy one in an Audi.

  • avatar
    George B

    Rounded CUVs primarily driven by women. While I admit that they offer a car-like ride, there’s not enough cargo hauling utility to justify the height and mass. I say I’d rather have something more boxy that looks like a truck or something lower and less massive like a car. The reality is I see them as vehicles only women and neutered married men drive.

    • 0 avatar
      Chan

      As much as I despise CUVs for their inferior value relative to hatchbacks and wagons, there’s something to be said for a car that’s easier for the average adult to get in and out of.

  • avatar

    This was actually my comment.

    To clarify, I can give MANy reasons why not, just none of them good. Stigma being the primary issue. I’d also have that Clarkson-esque complaint whenever I pulled up to a light next to an M3 that I got the wrong car.

    That said, I DO really like the ATS and recommend anyone who’s looking at BMWs, Audis, Mercs, etc to give the Caddy a chance.

  • avatar
    windnsea00

    I pretty much have little interest in most current cars short of M cars and Porsche, probably because I still only want to drive a manual RWD car.

  • avatar
    Smythe

    You know, I didn’t think I had an answer to this one. My tastes and interests are all over the map when it comes to buying cars. But when I think about it, there are two cars that I wouldn’t own, but for which I don’t really have a reason I can express:

    1) A Jaguar other than an ’04-’07 XJR; and
    2) Any Mazda.

    In my delusional mind, I just think that anything but the X350 XJR is either an X-Type or something over which the owner should have picked an Aston Martin. And as for Mazda…I really have no explanation. I’ve been in a lot of them (from a Miata to a built Mazdaspeed3 and all the others), and they’re just not for me.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Nothing German, ostentatious and expensive to maintain. I prefer Japanese and South Korean vehicles that run and run and the parts and labor are at least within the reach of the average person.

  • avatar
    DIYer

    Never say never, but I would definitely never, ever buy anything with a CVT transmission.

  • avatar
    Big Al From 'Murica

    A Lada or a Yugo

  • avatar
    NoGoYo

    I don’t see myself ever owning a Toyota, not unless they finally make something that’s genuinely sporty.

    Glossy black trim on a 138 horsepower Corolla is not sporty.

  • avatar
    namesakeone

    Anything Korean. Partially because I don’t like their labor policies (unlike first-world countries, they don’t get paid a living wage) and animal rights (or lack thereof–driving a car with leather seats makes me a hypocrite, I know), partly because–the early ones, at least–they had a disposable quality that I never was able to dissociate with modern ones.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Brady Bunch: This article brings back some good memories. I was in the Air Force and stationed on a base outside of...
  • ajla: “It survives by selling overpriced V8s” This is a ridiculous canard.
  • FreedMike: Fever dream, perhaps?
  • FreedMike: “Flip the coin.” GREAT movie.
  • FreedMike: “Demand should be driven by consumers…” I agree, and that was the intent of the tax...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber