I am thinking about getting a used 2003 Taurus or Accord.
The difference for a roughly equivalent model is around 8,000 cheaper
for the Taurus, maybe even more. The Taurus has a high rate of depreciation
and the Accord low depreciation.

Given that, is there something else that I should consider strictly from an
economic
point of view? I know the Accord will be more reliable, but enough to
eventually account
for the difference in price if I own it for say five years or so with
average mileage?

I realize there are other variables, and that the Accord is just a nicer,
tighter, better made car, and
some of this is a matter of personal taste, but I'm wondering if I can make
an business case for
the Honda Accord. I would have to do this to convince my wife to spend the
extra money. : )

Fred