I like cars but I hate things that are a PITA. Most consumers feel that way, for example my law partner is trying to dump his wife's X5 because it has so many little problems- nothing major but they simply expected better engineering in a $45k vehicle. They love the way it performs but the little problems simply outweigh the benefits.

Some enthusiasts would tolerate almost any sort of mechanical demands to be able to drive a certain car. Personally the S2000 is about as annoying as I can stand and still enjoy a vehicle. There is certainly a sliding scale, the father of one of my fraternity brothers owned a Lotus Esprit Turbo for a year and sold it because it could not stay out of the shop. He dumped it and bought a 911, which he considered to be "soul less" by comparison but equally capable and utterly dependable. All things considered he preferred to own the 911 but if the Lotus wasn't such a PITA he would have preferred the Esprit.

Our '95 Integra has 141k miles on it and we have done one unscheduled repair- a thermostat that was causing the engine to run cool. Knowing a car can be this much fun to drive and yet so dependable (especially at the price point) certainly leaves the impression that the designers were both capable and interested in making a good vehicle. When stupid crap breaks on cars I think people tend to wonder how much attention the designer paid to the rest of the car.

Perhaps you are looking for some sort of emotional response that only certain types of vehicles can provide, reliability be damned. Nothing wrong with that, some guys dig fat chicks, some guys dig emaciated looking chicks, whatver floats your boat.