I can imagine one practical reason is that a lot of stuff (e.g. type information, variable bindings) goes top-down, but bottom-up parsers reduce rules in the opposite direction and so it takes extra effort to make the mental model of programming fit with the reduction strategy of bottom-up parsers.

Vladimir Safonov's Trustworthy Compilers is another good reference on this subject, in addition to the books already mentioned here on HN. Safonov works through some examples of real-world languages, and argues why hand-written parsers are superior to Yacc-style parser generators. He gives examples of ALGOL-68 and FORTRAN.

I don't know of any definitive text that covers a wide range of practical examples that I've been totally satisfied with, though. Even Safonov waives his hand a little, saying the parser is the one part of the compiler to be written by the most experienced and best compiler engineer on the team, because it influences the performance of everything after.

The comment I referenced mentions that the context available in recursive-descent parsers can be used for error recovery, e.g., phrase-level recovery. The excellent "Programming Language Pragmatics" by Michael Scott has a good chapter on this, so does "Modern Compiler Design" by Grune, Bal, Jacobs and Langendoen.