They just aren't appealing to many people, and I don't know why exactly. They're great cars mechanically. My first car was an '89 Taurus GL wagon that had 121k miles on it, and I loved it because it did everything great. It wasn't the fastest car, but it averaged 25 mpg with the 3.0 v6 engine. The most frequent problem I had was replacing old coolant hoses that developed leaks after about 13 years. The biggest problem I had was a leak through the timing chain gasket. I spent about $4,000 on it for the 5 years I owned it, including the purchase price, and got rid of it after it was rear-ended by another driver, and at the time, it had 165k miles on it. It was as reliable if not more reliable than the Accords and Camrys that other people I know have owned, but it didn't cost as much to maintain. I loved it so much I purchased another '89 Taurus, this time the LX with the 3.8 engine and every option available. It was problematic at first, but I love it, and wouldn't trade it for my friend's '97 Accord. I would describe the Taurus as being fluid because it's so smooth and quiet. In some ways it doesn't have the refinement of my friend's '97 Accord, but his car also doesn't have some of the nicer features that the Taurus does, like power seats, illuminated vanity mirrors, automatic headlights, automatic climate control, power lumbar support, and others. I've been a very happy owner and highly recommend the Taurus, but you have to understand that you're dealing with used cars, and you don't know how they've been treated by previous owners, and that there may be mechanics who can't properly diagnose problems.
