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_davidsonX (AT) mailcity (DOT) com (Hrundi V. Bakshi) wrote in
news:464b64d8.8759555 (AT) news (DOT) 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.

--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Tegger wrote:

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?

Joe LaVigne <jlavigne (AT) hits-buffalo (DOT) com> wrote in
news:f2he42$5gn$1 (AT) news (DOT) 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.

--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Tegger wrote:


A true mouthfull here. Why in the world to people lOOK for trouble?

JT

Joe LaVigne wrote:


Parking brake issues for starters.

JT

Tegger wrote:


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

On May 16, 5:11 pm, harley_davids... (AT) mailcity (DOT) com (Hrundi V. Bakshi)
wrote:
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.

bob zee wrote:

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

"Grumpy AuContraire" <Grumpy (AT) ExtraGrumpyville (DOT) com> wrote

I can understand why nobody wants front drums - they are bad news. Rear
drums are fine with me.

Mike