98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
Dave and Trudy wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:N5idnR2ElIQPXrPbnZ2dnUVZ_vyunZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> have you any idea how much r&d goes into a frod? it's billions. and 98%
>> of it is directed at life [and cost] limitation. their cars are designed
>> to /just/ last target mileage, then suddenly get prohibitively expensive
>> to keep. the bean counters think this makes them money apparently. now,
>> how much market share do frod have again?
>
> That's a pretty strong but unsupported statement Jim.
well, you're right that it's "unsupported", but i have two sources. one
was a buddy who worked there - spent all his time on injector systems.
the other was from uni where a couple of our profs would do consulting
for manufacturers like frod, and they would work on life limitation
projects - an interesting [and difficult] academic problem.
> Also what has been the
> best selling vehicle in the U.S. for the past 25 or so years?
f150. don't understand how that contradicts the above though. the
design is real simple. components are real simple. the only production
challenge is making it cheap [and constantly cheaper] and figuring out
how to make it last so long, but no longer. seriously, it's real hard.
that's where the $'s go. think about this; there's a bunch of real
ancient f150's on the road - the turnip truck type. and there's a bunch
of new ones. but have you seen many 10-year old f150's? there's aren't
many. think about that. and think abut it in the context of life
limitation technology starting to emerge int he late 70's/early 80's.
there's plenty of old frods that pre-date that time. but not many that
post-date it. look around you as you drive.
> Also, don't
> recall any Ford with 13 or more possible replacement combinations for the
> passenger's side cv axle as with a 94 or so Toyota Camry.
eh? how's that's relevant???
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:N5idnR2ElIQPXrPbnZ2dnUVZ_vyunZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> have you any idea how much r&d goes into a frod? it's billions. and 98%
>> of it is directed at life [and cost] limitation. their cars are designed
>> to /just/ last target mileage, then suddenly get prohibitively expensive
>> to keep. the bean counters think this makes them money apparently. now,
>> how much market share do frod have again?
>
> That's a pretty strong but unsupported statement Jim.
well, you're right that it's "unsupported", but i have two sources. one
was a buddy who worked there - spent all his time on injector systems.
the other was from uni where a couple of our profs would do consulting
for manufacturers like frod, and they would work on life limitation
projects - an interesting [and difficult] academic problem.
> Also what has been the
> best selling vehicle in the U.S. for the past 25 or so years?
f150. don't understand how that contradicts the above though. the
design is real simple. components are real simple. the only production
challenge is making it cheap [and constantly cheaper] and figuring out
how to make it last so long, but no longer. seriously, it's real hard.
that's where the $'s go. think about this; there's a bunch of real
ancient f150's on the road - the turnip truck type. and there's a bunch
of new ones. but have you seen many 10-year old f150's? there's aren't
many. think about that. and think abut it in the context of life
limitation technology starting to emerge int he late 70's/early 80's.
there's plenty of old frods that pre-date that time. but not many that
post-date it. look around you as you drive.
> Also, don't
> recall any Ford with 13 or more possible replacement combinations for the
> passenger's side cv axle as with a 94 or so Toyota Camry.
eh? how's that's relevant???
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
Tegger wrote:
> "Dave and Trudy" <dtdodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in
> news:4630543f@news.acsalaska.net:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:N5idnR2ElIQPXrPbnZ2dnUVZ_vyunZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> have you any idea how much r&d goes into a frod? it's billions. and
>>> 98% of it is directed at life [and cost] limitation. their cars are
>>> designed to /just/ last target mileage, then suddenly get
>>> prohibitively expensive to keep. the bean counters think this makes
>>> them money apparently. now, how much market share do frod have
>>> again?
>> That's a pretty strong but unsupported statement Jim. Also what has
>> been the best selling vehicle in the U.S. for the past 25 or so years?
>> Also, don't recall any Ford with 13 or more possible replacement
>> combinations for the passenger's side cv axle as with a 94 or so
>> Toyota Camry.
>>
>
>
>
> I used to work very closely with the OEM parts industry that supplies
> the automakers, both domestic and foreign.
>
> I never personally saw any attempt at design life limitation for the
> sake of design life limitation, or attempt at deliberate obsolescence
> for the sake of obsolescence.
>
> What I DID see was copious evidence of cost-cutting. Everything was
> designed to last just about so long primarily because statistics showed
> people didn't keep or drive their cars past a certain point, so there
> was no point in putting excess money into a part that would never get
> used to the point of failure.
>
> When a five cent reduction in cost on a high-volume parts is a
> significant saving, there is a considerable and constant push to find
> every possible penny of savings in the cost of building a car.
>
> What I also did see was considerable effort at making *important* parts
> (like engines and transmissions, tires, brakes and shocks) last LONGER
> before failure. They would make the tiniest changes that you would not
> think were worth the effort, all to the end of getting just bit longer
> life.
>
> That's why engines and transmissions last 300K now instead of 100K, like
> they did in 1970. That's why you no longer have to replace shocks and
> tires every 20K miles, like you did in 1970.
>
>
honda, yes. frod, no. talk with a taxi company - they romp through
engines and transmissions like nobody's business, and taxi use is pretty
much ideal service conditioning in that maintenance is guaranteed. the
frod operators here in san francisco replace transmissions every
100-120k miles. engines maybe 150-200k. and thats lazy old v8's,
working at 20% load, not high revving honda working at 60%+.
> "Dave and Trudy" <dtdodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in
> news:4630543f@news.acsalaska.net:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:N5idnR2ElIQPXrPbnZ2dnUVZ_vyunZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> have you any idea how much r&d goes into a frod? it's billions. and
>>> 98% of it is directed at life [and cost] limitation. their cars are
>>> designed to /just/ last target mileage, then suddenly get
>>> prohibitively expensive to keep. the bean counters think this makes
>>> them money apparently. now, how much market share do frod have
>>> again?
>> That's a pretty strong but unsupported statement Jim. Also what has
>> been the best selling vehicle in the U.S. for the past 25 or so years?
>> Also, don't recall any Ford with 13 or more possible replacement
>> combinations for the passenger's side cv axle as with a 94 or so
>> Toyota Camry.
>>
>
>
>
> I used to work very closely with the OEM parts industry that supplies
> the automakers, both domestic and foreign.
>
> I never personally saw any attempt at design life limitation for the
> sake of design life limitation, or attempt at deliberate obsolescence
> for the sake of obsolescence.
>
> What I DID see was copious evidence of cost-cutting. Everything was
> designed to last just about so long primarily because statistics showed
> people didn't keep or drive their cars past a certain point, so there
> was no point in putting excess money into a part that would never get
> used to the point of failure.
>
> When a five cent reduction in cost on a high-volume parts is a
> significant saving, there is a considerable and constant push to find
> every possible penny of savings in the cost of building a car.
>
> What I also did see was considerable effort at making *important* parts
> (like engines and transmissions, tires, brakes and shocks) last LONGER
> before failure. They would make the tiniest changes that you would not
> think were worth the effort, all to the end of getting just bit longer
> life.
>
> That's why engines and transmissions last 300K now instead of 100K, like
> they did in 1970. That's why you no longer have to replace shocks and
> tires every 20K miles, like you did in 1970.
>
>
honda, yes. frod, no. talk with a taxi company - they romp through
engines and transmissions like nobody's business, and taxi use is pretty
much ideal service conditioning in that maintenance is guaranteed. the
frod operators here in san francisco replace transmissions every
100-120k miles. engines maybe 150-200k. and thats lazy old v8's,
working at 20% load, not high revving honda working at 60%+.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
Tegger wrote:
> "Dave and Trudy" <dtdodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in
> news:4630543f@news.acsalaska.net:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:N5idnR2ElIQPXrPbnZ2dnUVZ_vyunZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> have you any idea how much r&d goes into a frod? it's billions. and
>>> 98% of it is directed at life [and cost] limitation. their cars are
>>> designed to /just/ last target mileage, then suddenly get
>>> prohibitively expensive to keep. the bean counters think this makes
>>> them money apparently. now, how much market share do frod have
>>> again?
>> That's a pretty strong but unsupported statement Jim. Also what has
>> been the best selling vehicle in the U.S. for the past 25 or so years?
>> Also, don't recall any Ford with 13 or more possible replacement
>> combinations for the passenger's side cv axle as with a 94 or so
>> Toyota Camry.
>>
>
>
>
> I used to work very closely with the OEM parts industry that supplies
> the automakers, both domestic and foreign.
>
> I never personally saw any attempt at design life limitation for the
> sake of design life limitation, or attempt at deliberate obsolescence
> for the sake of obsolescence.
>
> What I DID see was copious evidence of cost-cutting. Everything was
> designed to last just about so long primarily because statistics showed
> people didn't keep or drive their cars past a certain point, so there
> was no point in putting excess money into a part that would never get
> used to the point of failure.
>
> When a five cent reduction in cost on a high-volume parts is a
> significant saving, there is a considerable and constant push to find
> every possible penny of savings in the cost of building a car.
>
> What I also did see was considerable effort at making *important* parts
> (like engines and transmissions, tires, brakes and shocks) last LONGER
> before failure. They would make the tiniest changes that you would not
> think were worth the effort, all to the end of getting just bit longer
> life.
>
> That's why engines and transmissions last 300K now instead of 100K, like
> they did in 1970. That's why you no longer have to replace shocks and
> tires every 20K miles, like you did in 1970.
>
>
honda, yes. frod, no. talk with a taxi company - they romp through
engines and transmissions like nobody's business, and taxi use is pretty
much ideal service conditioning in that maintenance is guaranteed. the
frod operators here in san francisco replace transmissions every
100-120k miles. engines maybe 150-200k. and thats lazy old v8's,
working at 20% load, not high revving honda working at 60%+.
> "Dave and Trudy" <dtdodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in
> news:4630543f@news.acsalaska.net:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:N5idnR2ElIQPXrPbnZ2dnUVZ_vyunZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> have you any idea how much r&d goes into a frod? it's billions. and
>>> 98% of it is directed at life [and cost] limitation. their cars are
>>> designed to /just/ last target mileage, then suddenly get
>>> prohibitively expensive to keep. the bean counters think this makes
>>> them money apparently. now, how much market share do frod have
>>> again?
>> That's a pretty strong but unsupported statement Jim. Also what has
>> been the best selling vehicle in the U.S. for the past 25 or so years?
>> Also, don't recall any Ford with 13 or more possible replacement
>> combinations for the passenger's side cv axle as with a 94 or so
>> Toyota Camry.
>>
>
>
>
> I used to work very closely with the OEM parts industry that supplies
> the automakers, both domestic and foreign.
>
> I never personally saw any attempt at design life limitation for the
> sake of design life limitation, or attempt at deliberate obsolescence
> for the sake of obsolescence.
>
> What I DID see was copious evidence of cost-cutting. Everything was
> designed to last just about so long primarily because statistics showed
> people didn't keep or drive their cars past a certain point, so there
> was no point in putting excess money into a part that would never get
> used to the point of failure.
>
> When a five cent reduction in cost on a high-volume parts is a
> significant saving, there is a considerable and constant push to find
> every possible penny of savings in the cost of building a car.
>
> What I also did see was considerable effort at making *important* parts
> (like engines and transmissions, tires, brakes and shocks) last LONGER
> before failure. They would make the tiniest changes that you would not
> think were worth the effort, all to the end of getting just bit longer
> life.
>
> That's why engines and transmissions last 300K now instead of 100K, like
> they did in 1970. That's why you no longer have to replace shocks and
> tires every 20K miles, like you did in 1970.
>
>
honda, yes. frod, no. talk with a taxi company - they romp through
engines and transmissions like nobody's business, and taxi use is pretty
much ideal service conditioning in that maintenance is guaranteed. the
frod operators here in san francisco replace transmissions every
100-120k miles. engines maybe 150-200k. and thats lazy old v8's,
working at 20% load, not high revving honda working at 60%+.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
> in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>
>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>> what you're looking at.
>>>
>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things like
>>> brakes.
>>
>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>
>
>
> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and only
> up to '97.
Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
> in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>
>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>> what you're looking at.
>>>
>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things like
>>> brakes.
>>
>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>
>
>
> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and only
> up to '97.
Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
> in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>
>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>> what you're looking at.
>>>
>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things like
>>> brakes.
>>
>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>
>
>
> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and only
> up to '97.
Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
> in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>
>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>> what you're looking at.
>>>
>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things like
>>> brakes.
>>
>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>
>
>
> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and only
> up to '97.
Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>
>> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
>> in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>>
>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>>
>>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>>
>>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>>> what you're looking at.
>>>>
>>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things like
>>>> brakes.
>>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>>
>>
>> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and only
>> up to '97.
>
>
> Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
>
why? it's great for dealing with "warped rotor" syndrome, something
that plagues poorly maintained hondas with bolt-on disks.
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>
>> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
>> in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>>
>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>>
>>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>>
>>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>>> what you're looking at.
>>>>
>>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things like
>>>> brakes.
>>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>>
>>
>> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and only
>> up to '97.
>
>
> Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
>
why? it's great for dealing with "warped rotor" syndrome, something
that plagues poorly maintained hondas with bolt-on disks.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>
>> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
>> in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>>
>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>>
>>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>>
>>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>>> what you're looking at.
>>>>
>>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things like
>>>> brakes.
>>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>>
>>
>> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and only
>> up to '97.
>
>
> Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
>
why? it's great for dealing with "warped rotor" syndrome, something
that plagues poorly maintained hondas with bolt-on disks.
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>
>> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
>> in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>>
>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>>
>>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>>
>>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>>> what you're looking at.
>>>>
>>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things like
>>>> brakes.
>>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>>
>>
>> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and only
>> up to '97.
>
>
> Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
>
why? it's great for dealing with "warped rotor" syndrome, something
that plagues poorly maintained hondas with bolt-on disks.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 19:58:45 -0700, jim beam wrote:
> Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts>
>>> wrote in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>>>> what you're looking at.
>>>>>
>>>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things
>>>>> like brakes.
>>>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>>>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>>>
>>>
>>> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and
>>> only up to '97.
>>
>>
>> Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
>>
> why? it's great for dealing with "warped rotor" syndrome, something that
> plagues poorly maintained hondas with bolt-on disks.
Because it was a PITA! Not easy for a backyard mechanic to do.
And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep rotors
from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years, and in all that time I had one
set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened themselves out!
It was a beater Celica I bought for $250, put 30,000 miles on, and used
the cheapest (Chinese) rotors I could get!
When I did the Supra, I got Bendix rotors made in Canada.
> Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts>
>>> wrote in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>>>> what you're looking at.
>>>>>
>>>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things
>>>>> like brakes.
>>>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>>>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>>>
>>>
>>> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and
>>> only up to '97.
>>
>>
>> Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
>>
> why? it's great for dealing with "warped rotor" syndrome, something that
> plagues poorly maintained hondas with bolt-on disks.
Because it was a PITA! Not easy for a backyard mechanic to do.
And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep rotors
from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years, and in all that time I had one
set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened themselves out!
It was a beater Celica I bought for $250, put 30,000 miles on, and used
the cheapest (Chinese) rotors I could get!
When I did the Supra, I got Bendix rotors made in Canada.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 19:58:45 -0700, jim beam wrote:
> Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts>
>>> wrote in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>>>> what you're looking at.
>>>>>
>>>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things
>>>>> like brakes.
>>>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>>>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>>>
>>>
>>> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and
>>> only up to '97.
>>
>>
>> Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
>>
> why? it's great for dealing with "warped rotor" syndrome, something that
> plagues poorly maintained hondas with bolt-on disks.
Because it was a PITA! Not easy for a backyard mechanic to do.
And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep rotors
from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years, and in all that time I had one
set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened themselves out!
It was a beater Celica I bought for $250, put 30,000 miles on, and used
the cheapest (Chinese) rotors I could get!
When I did the Supra, I got Bendix rotors made in Canada.
> Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:36:56 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts>
>>> wrote in news:U%yXh.1280$KB1.367@trndny09:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:50:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Going to help the neighbor replace the brakes on his Honda this
>>>>>> Saturday. The front brakes are no problem at all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They might be...Unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
>>>>> what you're looking at.
>>>>>
>>>>> Honda brakes are a bit, well, finicky. Honda typically spends lots of
>>>>> money on engines and "safety", but then recoups the cost on things
>>>>> like brakes.
>>>> Are they still pressed on? My '88 and I think a friend's 91 had them
>>>> pressed on. They were a BITCH!
>>>
>>>
>>> It was only Accord-based cars that had pressed-on front rotors, and
>>> only up to '97.
>>
>>
>> Ah, thanks. Glad to see they got away from THAT!
>>
> why? it's great for dealing with "warped rotor" syndrome, something that
> plagues poorly maintained hondas with bolt-on disks.
Because it was a PITA! Not easy for a backyard mechanic to do.
And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep rotors
from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years, and in all that time I had one
set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened themselves out!
It was a beater Celica I bought for $250, put 30,000 miles on, and used
the cheapest (Chinese) rotors I could get!
When I did the Supra, I got Bendix rotors made in Canada.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
=?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts>
wrote in news:nPoYh.11$YW4.2@trndny06:
>
> And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep
> rotors from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
A bit more complex that that. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf100326.htm
>
> I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years,
Been doing mine for 25.
> and in all that time I had
> one set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened
> themselves out!
Then it wasn't "warp". Probably either corrosion or glaze that eventually
wore off.
--
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
wrote in news:nPoYh.11$YW4.2@trndny06:
>
> And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep
> rotors from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
A bit more complex that that. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf100326.htm
>
> I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years,
Been doing mine for 25.
> and in all that time I had
> one set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened
> themselves out!
Then it wasn't "warp". Probably either corrosion or glaze that eventually
wore off.
--
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
=?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts>
wrote in news:nPoYh.11$YW4.2@trndny06:
>
> And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep
> rotors from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
A bit more complex that that. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf100326.htm
>
> I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years,
Been doing mine for 25.
> and in all that time I had
> one set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened
> themselves out!
Then it wasn't "warp". Probably either corrosion or glaze that eventually
wore off.
--
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
wrote in news:nPoYh.11$YW4.2@trndny06:
>
> And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep
> rotors from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
A bit more complex that that. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf100326.htm
>
> I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years,
Been doing mine for 25.
> and in all that time I had
> one set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened
> themselves out!
Then it wasn't "warp". Probably either corrosion or glaze that eventually
wore off.
--
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 23:12:07 +0000, Tegger wrote:
> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
> in news:nPoYh.11$YW4.2@trndny06:
>
>
>
>> And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep rotors
>> from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
>
>
>
> A bit more complex that that. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
>
> http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf100326.htm
Thanks Teg! Duly noted and bookmarked!
>
>
>
>
>> I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years,
>
>
>
> Been doing mine for 25.
>
>
>
>> and in all that time I had
>> one set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened themselves
>> out!
>
>
>
> Then it wasn't "warp". Probably either corrosion or glaze that eventually
> wore off.
> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
> in news:nPoYh.11$YW4.2@trndny06:
>
>
>
>> And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep rotors
>> from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
>
>
>
> A bit more complex that that. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
>
> http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf100326.htm
Thanks Teg! Duly noted and bookmarked!
>
>
>
>
>> I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years,
>
>
>
> Been doing mine for 25.
>
>
>
>> and in all that time I had
>> one set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened themselves
>> out!
>
>
>
> Then it wasn't "warp". Probably either corrosion or glaze that eventually
> wore off.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 23:12:07 +0000, Tegger wrote:
> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
> in news:nPoYh.11$YW4.2@trndny06:
>
>
>
>> And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep rotors
>> from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
>
>
>
> A bit more complex that that. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
>
> http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf100326.htm
Thanks Teg! Duly noted and bookmarked!
>
>
>
>
>> I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years,
>
>
>
> Been doing mine for 25.
>
>
>
>> and in all that time I had
>> one set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened themselves
>> out!
>
>
>
> Then it wasn't "warp". Probably either corrosion or glaze that eventually
> wore off.
> =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote
> in news:nPoYh.11$YW4.2@trndny06:
>
>
>
>> And, as far as warped rotors, there are two things to do to keep rotors
>> from warping: buy decent rotors, and torque the lug nuts.
>
>
>
> A bit more complex that that. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
>
> http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf100326.htm
Thanks Teg! Duly noted and bookmarked!
>
>
>
>
>> I've been doing my own brakes for 6 years,
>
>
>
> Been doing mine for 25.
>
>
>
>> and in all that time I had
>> one set of rotors warp...and then, somehow they straightened themselves
>> out!
>
>
>
> Then it wasn't "warp". Probably either corrosion or glaze that eventually
> wore off.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
Tegger,
Did all 4 corners this morning. No problems at all. Calipers were free with
minimal cleaning needed. Pistons screwed back in easy as can be. The video
was great.
Thanks A Bunch!
GM
"Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns991BDE10E273Ategger@207.14.116.130...
> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> If the parking brake is actuated through a lever on top of the caliper,
> then the lever must be hard against its post (once piston slack is taken
> up) before the cable is adjusted.
>
> If the levers are not against their posts, back off the parking brake
> cable
> adjuster until the levers are against their posts, then take up the
> parking
> brake cable's slack.
>
> Make certain that the clevises can swivel freely. If they are seized, PB
> cable adjustments will be incorrect.
>
> Incorrection will also result if the caliper pistons are seized, which is
> a
> distressingly common occurrece.
>
> --
> Tegger
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Did all 4 corners this morning. No problems at all. Calipers were free with
minimal cleaning needed. Pistons screwed back in easy as can be. The video
was great.
Thanks A Bunch!
GM
"Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns991BDE10E273Ategger@207.14.116.130...
> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> If the parking brake is actuated through a lever on top of the caliper,
> then the lever must be hard against its post (once piston slack is taken
> up) before the cable is adjusted.
>
> If the levers are not against their posts, back off the parking brake
> cable
> adjuster until the levers are against their posts, then take up the
> parking
> brake cable's slack.
>
> Make certain that the clevises can swivel freely. If they are seized, PB
> cable adjustments will be incorrect.
>
> Incorrection will also result if the caliper pistons are seized, which is
> a
> distressingly common occurrece.
>
> --
> Tegger
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 98 Accord EX Rear Caliper ?
Tegger,
Did all 4 corners this morning. No problems at all. Calipers were free with
minimal cleaning needed. Pistons screwed back in easy as can be. The video
was great.
Thanks A Bunch!
GM
"Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns991BDE10E273Ategger@207.14.116.130...
> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> If the parking brake is actuated through a lever on top of the caliper,
> then the lever must be hard against its post (once piston slack is taken
> up) before the cable is adjusted.
>
> If the levers are not against their posts, back off the parking brake
> cable
> adjuster until the levers are against their posts, then take up the
> parking
> brake cable's slack.
>
> Make certain that the clevises can swivel freely. If they are seized, PB
> cable adjustments will be incorrect.
>
> Incorrection will also result if the caliper pistons are seized, which is
> a
> distressingly common occurrece.
>
> --
> Tegger
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Did all 4 corners this morning. No problems at all. Calipers were free with
minimal cleaning needed. Pistons screwed back in easy as can be. The video
was great.
Thanks A Bunch!
GM
"Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns991BDE10E273Ategger@207.14.116.130...
> "GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
> news:iGcXh.353033$5j1.124248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> If the parking brake is actuated through a lever on top of the caliper,
> then the lever must be hard against its post (once piston slack is taken
> up) before the cable is adjusted.
>
> If the levers are not against their posts, back off the parking brake
> cable
> adjuster until the levers are against their posts, then take up the
> parking
> brake cable's slack.
>
> Make certain that the clevises can swivel freely. If they are seized, PB
> cable adjustments will be incorrect.
>
> Incorrection will also result if the caliper pistons are seized, which is
> a
> distressingly common occurrece.
>
> --
> Tegger
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ericvallejo5000@hotmail.com
Hyundai Mailing List
4
Jul 24, 2007 12:26 PM
Thermus
Honda Mailing List
2
May 29, 2005 01:11 AM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
