Hi. My '05 Accord has provided reliability beyond my expecations. I have many miles on it, since purchasing it new.
It's an LX 4 cyl, with a 5sp. Everything works well.
I am just wondering if I can upgrade to discs in the back, and have these questions:
1) Do I have to change the front discs to match the rear ones? 2) Can I also have installed EBD (electronic brake distribution)? 3) Will the stock steel wheels fit once new rotors/caiper assemblies are installed?harley snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com (Hrundi V. Bakshi) wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.east.earthlink.net:
Don't bother. Rear discs will get you no better braking and lots more maintenance headaches.
Sure rear discs have a kewl factor that boring ol' drums do not, but they're not worth it. Stick with the drums.
Out of curiosity, what maintenance issues are there? I have never serviced a set or rear discs, as this is my first car that came with them, but I have always hated working on drums. Front discs are extremely easy to work on, so what makes the rear harder?
This means at least changing the rear spindles, and perhaps other suspension components. Also, a new proportioning valve, maybe a master cylinder, and a whole slew of other parts.
My experience has been that discs are easier to work on, but that drums also do a fine job of bringing the car to a stop. Unless you're adding other mods to the car (increasing HP, lowering, etc) don't bother! Honda knows what they're doing!
Joe LaVigne wrote in news:f2he42$5gn$ snipped-for-privacy@news.datemas.de:
Rust. Rust. Seizure. Rust. More rust. Corrosion. More seizure. Rust. More corrosion. Even more rust. Even more seizure.
If you live in Arizona or SoCal, rear discs are groovy man, but up in places where it rains or snows, they're a real bummer.
A true mouthfull here. Why in the world to people lOOK for trouble?
JT
Parking brake issues for starters.
JT
Even in Texas, I would suggest leaving the drums. Fact is drum linings still last twice as long as disk pads maybe longer. Why people insist on haveing the latest 'n greatest when in fact is ain't any better just beats the crap outta me...
JT
i love disc brakes. they are great. they are better in almost every aspect over drum brakes. i say almost because, generally, a drum brake has more actual surface area (more surface area creates more friction). more friction means greater stopping power. friction creates more heat. heat leads to fade. fade means less stopping power. disc brakes are out in the open, so they tend to shed the heat better than drums and therefore are used on all of the cool racecars.
here is the best reason to keep your drum brakes: gas is expensive and not getting any cheaper. if i were to build a car today, it would have drum brakes at every corner. why? not because of rust. not because of maintenance. not because they aren't cool. not because of the parking brake.
drum brakes have springs that pull the shoes away from the drum. disc brakes do not have this little feature. disc brakes use the imperfections of life to allow the disc to 'bounce' the pads away and create a gap. of course, people will say this extra bit of friction while traveling down the road is minimal....
minimal yes, but every little bit counts.
bob z.
The ONLY disk brake cylinder that would actually retract pads from the rotor surface were the (Girling I think) system used by Jaquar, Mercedes, Studebaker and Nissan (Datsun) in the 1960's and early 1970's.
JT
no, they all retract a little. it's not a mechanical system built into the piston, simply a function of seal elasticity - the inner seal, not the flimsy on the outside.
I can understand why nobody wants front drums - they are bad news. Rear drums are fine with me.
Mike
Grumpy AuContraire wrote in news:Ugk3i.3537$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
On a FWD car the rear brakes do maybe 20% of the stopping. Drums on the rear are an infinitely better choice for such a light-duty application.
Drums are sealed from the weather, and do not need to burn off moisture to remain operational.
The shoes will last 75K miles with no maintenance whatsoever.
The only people who think rear discs are better than drums are those who live in Arizona, or those who own shares in Norton Abrasives or Dow Corning (or both).
bob zee wrote in news:1179505974.155339.158570 @l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
Unless they are used on the rear of a FWD car.
Blah blah blah. You read many automotive magazines but do not work on any actual motor vehicles.
Do you regularly travel at 200mph? I know I don't. 200mph race requirements are not the same as the requirements imposed by regular low-speed city driving through salty winter slush.
You have evidently never actually watched a disc brake piston in action. Correctly-operating disc brake pistons RETRACT when you let off the pedal. Believe it...or not.
Grumpy AuContraire wrote in news:8_p3i.8416 $ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
JT, they ALL do. ALL of them. EVERY one.
If the piston does NOT retract once you release the pedal, then the piston is seizing and the caliper requires major servicing.
Not one single disc brake system does not involve piston retraction upon pedal release. Not one. Not even Chrysler's weirdo Lambert discs of the '50s.
as they do on an AWD and RWD car :^)
but the disks look so kewl. must be such a chick magnet with all those red calipers sticking thru the bicycle bespoked wheels
well, don't tell that to the rice boys. they are the bread and butter of a cottage industry of a few billion bucks
:-)
The old saying 'if it aint broke'......applies here.
wierd..my 93 del sol has front and rear disc brakes. I always get the old wobble to a stop effect ..Of course I do go 120mph on I-95..heh.
then google this group o how to fix it. i repeat it every few months and did so again this last week or so.
whether or not it's fwd makes absolutely /zero/ difference to braking load distribution if the weight distribution is the same. if anything, front brakes on fwd's work /less/ since engine braking is available up front.
they're easier to maintain and it's /much/ easier to implement a parking brake, but disks are a better brake in that their function is more linear and they dump their heat much quicker.
if water gets inside a drum, it's nigh-on useless for /way/ longer than any wet disk. drums are weather resistant, but not weather proof.
for honda rears, often much longer!
no, disks are safer in that their operation is more linear and they're harder to overheat.
the advantages of drums are cost [first and foremost], and ease of parking brake design. reliability of honda rear disk brakes is not great because of their parking brake design, but that's not a disk problem per se. other manufacturers have different solutions which don't have the same reliability problems, but lose some/all of the weight advantage.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.