isquat@gmail.com

On May 18, 6:17 pm, Tegger <teg...@tegger.c0m> 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...
>
> On a FWD car the rear brakes do maybe 20% of the stopping.

as they do on an AWD and RWD car :^)

> Drums on the
> rear are an infinitely better choice for such a light-duty application.

but the disks look so kewl. must be such a chick magnet
with all those red calipers sticking thru the bicycle
bespoked wheels

> Drums are sealed from the weather, and do not need to burn off moisture
> to remain operational.
>
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 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).

:-)

Private Private

The old saying 'if it aint broke'......applies here.

Private Private

The old saying 'if it aint broke'......applies here.

Private Private

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.

Private Private

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.

jim beam

Private Private wrote:
> 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.

jim beam

Private Private wrote:
> 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.

jim beam

Tegger wrote:
> Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in
> news:Ugk3i.3537$Sa4.1994@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>
>>
>> Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> Joe LaVigne <jlavigne@hits-buffalo.com> wrote in
>>> news:f2he42$5gn$1@news.datemas.de:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Tegger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 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?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> 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...
>>
>
>
> On a FWD car the rear brakes do maybe 20% of the stopping.

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.

> Drums on the
> rear are an infinitely better choice for such a light-duty application.

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.

>
> Drums are sealed from the weather, and do not need to burn off moisture
> to remain operational.

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.

>
> The shoes will last 75K miles with no maintenance whatsoever.

for honda rears, often much longer!

>
> 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).

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.

jim beam

Tegger wrote:
> Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in
> news:Ugk3i.3537$Sa4.1994@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>
>>
>> Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> Joe LaVigne <jlavigne@hits-buffalo.com> wrote in
>>> news:f2he42$5gn$1@news.datemas.de:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Tegger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 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?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> 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...
>>
>
>
> On a FWD car the rear brakes do maybe 20% of the stopping.

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.

> Drums on the
> rear are an infinitely better choice for such a light-duty application.

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.

>
> Drums are sealed from the weather, and do not need to burn off moisture
> to remain operational.

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.

>
> The shoes will last 75K miles with no maintenance whatsoever.

for honda rears, often much longer!

>
> 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).

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.

Matt Ion

Tegger wrote:

>> 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.
>
> 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.

Didn't actually get to DRIVE one (probably because I couldn't fit my fat
*** into its bucket with a shoehorn and a gallon of vaseline), but I
worked with a CASCAR team for a season... they all had front and rear
discs, and lemme tell ya, on the short oval, those brakes would spend
half the circuit glowing red... but they cooled down pretty quick out of
the apex. Of course, having dedicated ducting to scoop air from the air
dam and pipe it right onto the rotors helped

Matt Ion

Tegger wrote:

>> 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.
>
> 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.

Didn't actually get to DRIVE one (probably because I couldn't fit my fat
*** into its bucket with a shoehorn and a gallon of vaseline), but I
worked with a CASCAR team for a season... they all had front and rear
discs, and lemme tell ya, on the short oval, those brakes would spend
half the circuit glowing red... but they cooled down pretty quick out of
the apex. Of course, having dedicated ducting to scoop air from the air
dam and pipe it right onto the rotors helped

bob zee

> --
> Tegger
>

i really, really enjoyed all of your posts until this one. you are an
idiot. go away.

bob z.

bob zee

> --
> Tegger
>

i really, really enjoyed all of your posts until this one. you are an
idiot. go away.

bob z.

Tegger

bob zee <bobzee1@gmail.com> wrote in news:1179619151.088326.69490
@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:

>
>> --
>> Tegger
>>
>
> i really, really enjoyed all of your posts until this one. you are an
> idiot. go away.
>



Except that I happen to be right.

I see so many people go on and on about the friction area of drums vs that
of discs, and cite the better heat-shedding capabilites of discs. The
problem is...all that is IRRELEVANT.

Rear brakes of either type generate so little heat that fade is NOT even
close to being any kind of a concern. Heat-fade is a concern with the
FRONTS (which handle 80% of braking effort), which is why all road cars use
discs at the front these days.

Rear discs heat up so little in use they cannot even reliably burn off the
moisture they collect, which is why they rust up so badly. Rear drums don't
heat up much at all either, but they are basically sealed from the weather.

A test if you want to try it. Procure the use of a rear disc-braked car and
a rear drum-braked one. Drive both vehicles up to 30 mph or so on a
deserted road. Now apply the parking brake hard, just short of lockup, as
though you were going to stop the car using just that brake.
You will find both systems feel exactly the same, and any "fade" will be
identical on both.
Of course, I assume both cars have rear brakes in good repair...

--
Tegger

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

Tegger

bob zee <bobzee1@gmail.com> wrote in news:1179619151.088326.69490
@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:

>
>> --
>> Tegger
>>
>
> i really, really enjoyed all of your posts until this one. you are an
> idiot. go away.
>



Except that I happen to be right.

I see so many people go on and on about the friction area of drums vs that
of discs, and cite the better heat-shedding capabilites of discs. The
problem is...all that is IRRELEVANT.

Rear brakes of either type generate so little heat that fade is NOT even
close to being any kind of a concern. Heat-fade is a concern with the
FRONTS (which handle 80% of braking effort), which is why all road cars use
discs at the front these days.

Rear discs heat up so little in use they cannot even reliably burn off the
moisture they collect, which is why they rust up so badly. Rear drums don't
heat up much at all either, but they are basically sealed from the weather.

A test if you want to try it. Procure the use of a rear disc-braked car and
a rear drum-braked one. Drive both vehicles up to 30 mph or so on a
deserted road. Now apply the parking brake hard, just short of lockup, as
though you were going to stop the car using just that brake.
You will find both systems feel exactly the same, and any "fade" will be
identical on both.
Of course, I assume both cars have rear brakes in good repair...

--
Tegger

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