Hmm.. thats funny i thought that Accord would be the 2006, but edmunds says it will come out in mid-2006 and will be the 2007 Accord. I guess Vtec net was wrong with its prediction.
I think the new design is nice, the rear end got a very big change but the front seems to be not touched. I find the rear end a little to close to cars like the E class and Grand Prix. But i still think its a positive change.
My 97 Honda Accord vibrates between 55-75 mph. It has had two different sets of aftermarket rims and both times I have had the same problem. It has gotten new tires and a tire balance/alignment and that hasn't helped. Has anyone else had this problem or know why this might be happening?
"The new LED taillights not only give it a different look, they'll also add a small measure of safety as LEDs light up faster than traditional bulbs."
That's hysterical. I cannot believe that the speed of LEDs lighting vs. traditionals would ever be used as a marketing point by a car manufacturer OR as a notable point at all by a "reputable" auto-review organization. That's just funny, and really should make one question the validity and reliability of any of the aforementioned factions in doing so.
Yes, they light faster - but that 1/10th of a second is not going to make any difference to a human in realizing the car is stopping, or their reaction time to the pedal. Geesh...
according to JD Power. I'm not trying to start a war here, just curious to know what the actual Accord owners' experiences are with their cars in terms of reliability. We had a great experience with our 02 Malibu LS which had zero problem over the 3 years we owned it.
This argument was already made by Cadillac years ago. At 60 mph, 1/10 of a second would mean about 9 feet of travel distance. So yes this could make a major difference in some cases. 1/10 of a second is 1/10 of a second. Humans would see it 1/10 of a second earlier thus a 1/10 of a second faster response. I guess you wouldn't care if your car could stop from 60 in 9 fewer feet either. Good marketing and information provided my both manufacturers and reputable auto review organizations in this case (at least to those who understand high speeds and their relationships to distance traveled in short time periods).
How about actually doing something useful with the LEDs and using progressive emitters that tell how much braking force is being applied within that vehicle. This is something that would be much more useful than 1/10 of a second of reaction time. Light up segments of the entire brake light assembly to show exactly how much force is being used. This is something I have heard about forever and we still don't have it in regular vehicles.
Besides, where is the line drawn? Should we have optical cables feeding the brake lights so that they get the information from the pedal a few milliseconds faster? I doubt it. People not paying attention to the car in front of them has more to do with reaction time than limitations of the incandescent bulb I would wager.
I think it is high time we replace the caveman technology of the light bulb in cars with LEDs for issues ranging from longevity to light output to energy savings but NOT because of how fast either illuminates.
Just curious. When do you recommend performing the first wax job on your new Accords. Any truth as to the paint needing to sit for a few months? I forgot to ask the sales person at pickup.....
I agree that the braking force knowledge would be very useful, but 9 feet in certain cases (although maybe few) could mean the difference between (accident or no accident) or (life or death). Of course people not paying attention to the vehicle in front of them is more of the reason for accidents, but if I am paying attention I want the information earlier if possible. LEDs are more noticeable even to those not giving their full attention (it is not just about the faster response of the lighting).
Safety is more important to me than saving electrical energy while the motor is running and the battery is already fully charged. Bulb life is a factor but once again pales when compared with vehicle safety. I am not saying that LEDs are more important than improved braking, improved traction/handling, or anti-skid devices, but an improvement is good no matter how small or often used.
It's all well and good to have that extra 9 feet (if that's even true at all), but I don't believe for a second that it has anything to do with LED brake lights being implemented. It's something new and different and that's about it. The only point I was trying to make is that anytime safety comes into play for marketing LED tail-lights, you are almost totally being taken for a ride.
For the record, I don't think even if it's 1/10th of a second faster that it has any impact at all on the driver behind you.
It's funny how different people call the same car different things. Those same exact pics are all over the net as the 06 refresh, yet Edmunds claims that it's the 07 refresh. I wouldn't bet against Vtec. - those new Accords will be coming off the assembly line in less than a month probably.
The link is for 110 volt incandescent lighting on the christmas tree at the track. How about data for 12.6 volt lights in automobiles and the light emitted vs voltage time?
You've got to be kidding, right? AC and DC are two entirely different animals however - they will yield similar results. An LED or regular bulb rated/designed for 12v is going to light just as quickly with proper power applied as a 110v would. It is also likely that those LEDs were 12v and that a transformer was in play.
Seriously - lighting is not the issue, and it is certainly not going to save anyone's butt in the manner which the aforementioned article is trying to lead on. A guy waving a flag in his car while braking will have the same effect IF THE DRIVER BEHIND IS PAYING ATTENTION. 90% of the time people rear-end the person in front of them because they are NOT paying attention.
Along the braking force indicators thread... that's all well and good - but you already have people who do not understand what the various red and amber colored service and warning lights on a dashboard are for - do you really think that a progressive scale across the deck lid is going to be any less confusing for these drivers? Remember that these are the MAJORITY of the drivers on the road.
Here is a thought... many years ago community bus services started putting these blocks on the back of buses which start flashing amber lights any time the driver takes his foot off the gas while the bus is in gear. The idea behind this was to let the drivers behind know that it is highly probable that the driver was going to be stopping soon, but he isn't yet. I think this would be a great idea for cars. Most people don't jam on the brakes straight from gas when they see a situation developing ahead that would be cause for alarm/stopping. They wait a second or two to see if they can get through or around while letting off the gas. If their amber lights began flashing at this time, that would alert the driver behind them to get off the throttle, and consequently - the one behind them too. That's gonna save a hell of a lot more lives than the assumed 9 feet an LED is going to give you. Just a thought.
If one can point to a study which can show that a certain item makes enough of a difference in a driver reaction that is safer than without the item, DOT will mandate such item. The third brake light of MY86 was such an item. LEDs while helpful do not rise to that level of helpfulness (hasn't been shown to). MB tried to petiton DOT to make their S-class brake lights standard on all cars - their brightness is proportional to the pressure applied to the pedal. Again, it was denied cause it wasn't shown to have enough of an impact on rear driver reaction. Many such devices have an impact, it's just not enough to be mandated.
Markeeters OTOH, can claim all kinds of things on any of these items.
You must have the necessary data to show that there is not difference since you're so quick to ridicule the point!!! Right? Thank you for your courteous response. I take you were trying to say you disagree.
... flashing amber lights any time the driver takes his foot off the gas while the bus is in gear
Yes, but.
Depending on the speed of the flashing foot-off-the-gas light, it can trigger migraines & seizures. And since passengers as well as drivers would be subjected to the large increase in flashing lights all over the place, the risk of seizures is an important consideration.
On the flip side, there's the question of how long it would take before drivers would start to tune out or ignore the flashing foot-off-the-gas lights of cars in front of us, figuring that the drivers were just coasting down a hill & would soon pick up speed again.
And I'm curious as to how many people realize that what looks like a flashing brake light on a bus isn't in fact a brake light. (Speaking just for myself, I didn't know this until I read it here today.)
I'm in favor of anything that would improve car safety, but I wonder if the drawbacks of this idea outweigh its advantages.
Considering we already have turn signals that flash, I wouldn't be too worried about triggering seizures. Besides, I know 2 people that are subject to seizures. One takes medication to keep them under control and even flashing lights do not set her off. Another uses the other logical approach, he doesn't drive.
If flashing lights on the road are going to impair your driving, you should not be driving, it's that simple. Flashing lights could be anywhere, headlights coming through a fence, train track warning signs, construction lights....etc.
If you are really that worried about it, have the brake warning indicators flash using the same frequency as the turn signals but with an easily differentiated color.
There seems to be a difference between the frequency of turn signals & that of a lot of the foot-off-gas lights that I've seen. Turn signals & a lot of the other blinking lights that are out there already aren't nearly as annoying as foot-off-gas flashers & flashing brake lights. My concern is that if regulators & car manufacturers were to jump on this suggestion & implement it for general usage, using that faster blink rate, it may well create more problems than it solves. If that were to happen, the configuration would probably be out of the average motorist's hands - & the reasonable-sounding suggestion to "have the brake warning indicators flash using the same frequency as the turn signals but with an easily differentiated color" would be difficult / impossible / illegal to implement.
Also, the point I was trying to make regarding migraines & seizures is that even if a person w/a seizure disorder is riding as a passenger in a car that someone else is driving, he or she would still be subjected to these additional flashing lights - & an increase in the prevalence of flashing lights would still run the risk of triggering more seizures.
I'm sure that if the lights WERE to actually cause people any physical problems that they would be changed right quick by the manufacturers. It's pretty bad press to hear that one or more car company products are causing people physical and mental distress. Especially when the addition of one simple electronics component would solve the problem.
As for passengers being affected, anyone I know who is susceptible to blinking lights causing them problems simply avoids them by averting their eyes. Having a susceptible passenger close their eyes would solve the problem at least temporarily. I know friends with seizure problems that simply divert their attention from the lights and this works even at county fairs and the like (where there are plenty of blinking lights).
My question about the period of time from application of electric power to the light's showing light output may not be any 1/10 second and LED output may not be immediate was ridiculed in the response rather than answered. What point did I miss? I still haven't gotten data showing the real comparison of time-to-light-on. That would be interesting.
The only time difference is in the response time of a bulb vs. LED. Full light output of an LED is about .1s faster than bulb - it's pretty simple. What diff does it make if the actual time is .1 vs .2 or .3 vs .4s? We're getting down into the menutia - the next thing you know people will start arguing about shape of the curve of light output. :P
That link will probably not be good enough for some. Like I said, some people might want to argue the shape of the light curve when plotted against time. :surprise:
The whole point is that in the grand scheme of things a change to LEDs in tail lights is not a big enough safety issue to have it be mandated by DOT.
The A/C in my 95' Honda Accord recently began working sometimes and then other times not. We took it to a mechanic and he said that nothing was wrong with the compressor, but a switch was not allowing the compressor to come on. $300.00 or so later and a new switch, (sorry I don't remember the name, but I think it was some kind of pressure switch) it was supposed to be fixed. The problem now is that the compressor comes on anytime you turn on the fan whether or not the A/C switch is on. Took it back and the same mechanic said that this is another switch and another $300.00 to fix. This was not happening before I took it in.....is he blowing smoke or what? :confuse:
Ok - how much distance you travel in x period of milliseconds is not very relevant. Full light output on or partial or whatever - the biggest factor and variable is human reaction time. If you think a tenth or two of a second in lighting speed is honestly going to have a linear effect on the following human reaction times, then you are mistaken. Sorry, but no person is *that* quick with anything. That 9 foot to 24 foot difference is going to get swallowed up in a hurry. You guys really need to start worrying less about true distance and more about speed and reaction. People can't stop in time in bumper to bumper 5 mph traffic without rear-ending each other... and it has little to do with distance or speed as it does with reaction.
If you want to call your point as being ridiculed, so be it. Honestly I think it was a ridiculous point in the method it was presented - being static and linear. Sorry, but people just don't operate that way. The time-to-light-on data is hardly interesting, honestly, as it is so negligible in true, every-day human factors and situations that it has no true application.
Do you notice a difference in internet sites that ping 10ms vs 60ms? Of course not. Even with a range of half a second, it is barely perceivable by humans. Now you are talking about a shaven difference of a few hundreths to a couple tenths? Cmon.
Now, back to the flashing amber lights... ok - do away with the flashing altogether... even a steady light, or slowly blinking light... something to indicate the driver is off the gas would do a lot more good than the time difference between LEDs and standard bulbs would. Grand Prix racers have this on their cars even... blinking brake light when off the gas, solid when on the brake. I try to pay attention to weight shifts fore and aft in the car ahead of me... it frequently gives me just enough extra time should things get bad up ahead. Chicago expressway traffic requires people to pay close attention. The number of wrecks I see each day to and from the office demonstrates quite clearly that most people do not, and my commute is all of 15 minutes.
I'm assuming your wondering if you should get the navi or not? I've had my Accord with the navi and love it.
Besides the obvious feature of having it guiding you to your destination with a moving map and voice commands,
you can enter your destination by:
Address (state, city, street number, address), places (auto service, banking, community, emergency, hotel/motel, leasure, restaurant, shopping, travel), previous destination, personal addresses previously stored, and intersection.
The above lists also break down into cub-categories.
You can program how your routes take you, direct route, easy route, minimize freeways, minimize toll roads, maximize freeways.
It shows the length of each leg of the route, with estimated travel time, and points of interests along the way. If you miss a turn, it re-routes itself and finds another way to get you to your destination.
It has a built in calendar that you can enter in appointments, and even has a calculator.
It automatically changes the clock when you cross time zones.
It has a long list of words that it can be operated thru Voice Recognition.
It also has a great trip computer showing gas milage, miles left, miles gone since fillup.
Believe me, I just hit some of the things I could quickly think of, the list is quite extensive of what it can do. I thought it was going to be an expensive toy (OK it is an expensive toy) but I forsee it becomming as commomplace as A/C, and power windows in the years to come. I would buy it all over again. I keep cars for quite a while, so adding another 10% to the cost of the car didn't seem to be that big of a deal.
Sorry, I know this is a common question. but the manual indicates 60K service interval for ATF and 10 years for the coolant (under the conservative severe conditions). Dealer of course has much more frequent recommendations. What do our board members use? Thanks
Hello Accord Owners! My Accord 2001 V6 EX has Michelin MXV installed and about 33000miles on it. Tire manual indicated the Pressure set up for 32 psi. However, When I picked up my Honda from Dealer service and checked Tire pressure indicated 36-37 psi. Also Max Tire pressure was 44 psi.My case I usalley maintain 34 psi for all 4 Tires. I need information from other ACCORD user's input for Optimum Tire pressure setup for best performance and longer life. Should keeping the pressure for 37 psi? or 34 psi. Prompt Response will be appreciated. Skang a Accord Lover!
Well the only complaint I have about my 05 accord is the stiffness in the ride. It has the same tires as you, and I don't think they are very forgiving at all. If the 01 has this problem, I would certainly recommend dropping a few lbs, but be careful... the current incarnation of these tires are not so high on the quality scale. I had a bubble form on the outside wall of my right-front tire last week. Keep in mind these tires have about 8k on them...
I took it to the dealer to try to get it replaced under defective pretext, but the service manager says he sees these quite often and they are usually caused by over-compressing the tire into the hard edge of a severe pothole or something. I assured him I take care to avoid big potholes and that it was likely to blow a bead before causing a bubble. I said that the sidewalls of the tire should be strong enough to deal with such a thing from the local roads. He disagreed and said he would not replace the tire under warranty and that the OEM tires do not come with road hazard protection. Frusterated I asked how much a new one would be. The indicated the tire price alone was over $160. He started to lookup installation and I told to save ihs breath, I was going to Sam's Club.
The tire was over $35 cheaper there and install was $9 which included road-hazard. I didn't want to get another of these series, but figured I should at least until the tires wear out. When I do replace them, it will be with Goodyear Regatta 2's, which I have used before on other cars.
I have been driving for over 20 years, and I have had a few bubbles in tires. Every time it was due to a fault in the tire, and never due to over-compression when smacking the edge of a pothole or somesuch. This was a very cheap "out" for the service manager at the dealer from which I just purchased my car, and I have sent a letter both to Honda and the manager of the dealership noting my displeasure and false representation.
Look at the sticker on the driver's door. I think it will say 30lbs.
Tires often come severely over inflated when new. One of the things dealerships should do in their pre-sale inspection of cars is adjust tires to the correct pressure. But some of them just unload the cars, remove the plastic an paper protectors, pull the floormats out of the trunk, and park it on the lot.
Why spend their time, which is money, on inspections. The purchaser will do this for you.
Remember that recommended tire pressures are for COLD tires. If you've driven the car a few miles, especially in hot weather, the tire pressure should be several pounds higher.
Don't adjust a hot tire to 30 or 32 pounds because when it cools, the pressure will be much too low.
I'd rather be a couple of pounds higher than recommended than a couple of pounds lower even though the ride would be better with the tires properly, rather than slightly over-inflated...........Richard
I totally concur with mrbill1957. The Navigation System was a wonderful choice when I selected my 2004 Coupe. I also recommend it wholeheartedly, although I use the voice command feature mostly for AM/FM/XM radio station/channel selection, volume control, climate control, etc. when I don't need directions.
Aftermarket Nav? Anyone had good success adding a nav aftermarket. I did it on my 4runner but from what I have seen, 2005 Honda Stereo/Nav mods are difficult and/or look awful.
I am looking at an Accord LX but don't want to spend the extra for EX.
I have yet to hear of anyone retrofit a built-in NAV into car that came up costing less in terms of money and hassle compared to laying out the cash on the NAV model to begin with. Even if you could somehow get the parts for next to nothing (salvaged form a wreck) there are a lot of difference between a NAV and non NAV car behind the dash and elsewhere (antenna, DVD drive, etc). I'm sure you could find someone who has done it, but even they will probably tell you it's not worth the hassle. There's also long term implications like warranty and resale.
Any aftermarket NAV will be less costly than the built in NAV but it comes with the "non-standard" look and doesn't integrate the controls of the built in unit.
So the question is: how much do you value the "built-in" look and the integrated controls? For strictly the NAV function without a care for the looks, an aftermarket unit like Gamin 2610 is a much better alternative than a NAV option.
I would also wait to see what the 06 models offer - maybe the NAV option will be available on the LX as well.
Other than the main unit itself, the dashboard's top mid-section that houses the static display panel will need to be replaced. On closer examination, the Accord's is actually a 3-piece dashboard with the middle being different for NAV and non-NAV models.
With those 2 major pieces, a perfect retrofit is possible. Cost-wise, my hunch is that trading the car itself for a NAV-equipped model (and XM radio-equipped for an 04 and up) would be a better deal overall on top of keeping the original warranty.
Otherwise, aftermarket NAVs from Garmin and Magellan are practical, lower cost though less functional alternatives. I myself have 2 Garmin units for our 2 Accords, and have been happy with their cost/benefit return.
That said, an interactive voice-activated NAV/Radio/MIscellaneous system which is easily software-upgradable would be ideal. Nothing beats voice instructions while driving for safety and efficiency.
Ex: to find hotels on-the-fly during our last road trip, I had to have my Garmin's safety mode defeated and my wife working the Garmin remote to search for hotels and their phone numbers. A full voice-interactive system would have made this a one-man job.
Hi and thanks for your help! I JUST got an '05 Accord EX V6 a week ago. Just today, I noticed a slight knocking or "rolling" noise coming when I coast at idle (take my foot off the brake without pressing down on the gas pedal).
Is this something that might go away? Should I get it checked out?
While gasoline going over $2.15 a gallon, I would like to improve my mileage on the highway. I am planing to go on a long trip. Last trip I got 38 mpg on one tank with my 03 LX auto. I averaged about 65 mpg without A/C. Most of the trip was fairly level driving. Does going a little slower or faster make much difference in mileage? I was disappointed that after just 25K miles, I had to have my front rotors turned. I do about 65% city and 35% highway driving, but I consciously try to go lightly on the breaking. Is there something I can do to get more miles out of a set of brakes. I thought brakes were go for about 35K miles. Overall, I have been pretty happy with my Accord. I also have a 1999 Odyssey which replaced a 1987 Accord. I have averaged 30 mpg over 28K miles. It is fairly peppy when needed, but with the Altima having 175 hp, I wish it had just a little more get up and go. The firth gear definitely helps with power and mileage. Happy Hondaring!
I would think that 38MPG is great! I just finished reading about engine oil, and the author stated that clean engine oil will give you better mileage. You might want to consider starting your next trip with a fresh oil and filter change! I recently purchased a used Accord, and I have the oil and filter changed every 3,000 miles. ---- Best regards. ---- Dwayne
Brake logevity depends on the type of driving and less on the milage itself. I have a 99LX with 40K miles with the original brakes and will not be chaging them anytime soon.
Your city/hwy mix already is making it difficult to get great longevity out of the brakes.
The only thing you might be able to do is change to a longer life pad - at the expense of more rotor wear. Since you already had the rotors turned, next time you'll probably need rotors too.
I think your milage is about as good as it's going to get. The speed for best milage is right around the old national speed limit - 55 mph.
If you are concerned with the price of gasoline, why would you waste so much of the available crude oil by diverting it to motor oil being changed at only 3,000 mile intervals? If the vehicle manufacturer recommends oil changes at 5,000, 7,500 or 10,000 miles, you are wasting your money and depleting oil wells at an unnecessary rate. They just aren't making dinosaurs anymore.
Hello, this is my first post. (hope I get a good response)
I have a 2005 EX-L 2.4ltr sedan. Satin Silver
I am interested in purchasing factory honda wheels (EP-R5 17" Alloy Wheels). I have the stock 16" rims now but looking for a sharper look with the charcoal color wheels. Will purchasing the 17" wheels decrease fuel economy and/or loose power. Will it mess up the spedo. Will the rolling diameter be the same from the 205/60/16 tires to the upgraded 215/50/17. Are the off-sets the same. Will road noise increase? CONFUSED Has anyone else done this before?? Please respond. (recommendations!?!?)
Overall diameter of the wheel/tire combo shouldn't change. Since you're considering the optional Honda rims, I don't think you need to worry about any problems such as off-set and I doubt the fuel economy would change drastically. You'd have slightly greater unsprung weight, but even then I doubt you'd notice a difference in acceleration. Road noise depends more on the new set of tires you choose, but you might notice a decrease in ride comfort.
I'm with Richard though, I'd stick with the original rims. IMO the 16" EX 4cyl. rims are the nicest-looking Accord rims.
Comments
I think the new design is nice, the rear end got a very big change but the front seems to be not touched. I find the rear end a little to close to cars like the E class and Grand Prix. But i still think its a positive change.
That's hysterical. I cannot believe that the speed of LEDs lighting vs. traditionals would ever be used as a marketing point by a car manufacturer OR as a notable point at all by a "reputable" auto-review organization. That's just funny, and really should make one question the validity and reliability of any of the aforementioned factions in doing so.
Yes, they light faster - but that 1/10th of a second is not going to make any difference to a human in realizing the car is stopping, or their reaction time to the pedal. Geesh...
What a joke.
The Chevy Malibu is a much improved car, but I'd suggest using Consumer Reports as a guide rather than J.D. Power.
I think it's safe to buy a GM car, but a test drive along and known long-term reliability favor the Honda Accord IMO........Richard
We do know someone with a Malibu though....Lets just say she's already tried the Cobalt as a loaner.
Is there a link for proof that there is a difference in the lighting time for LEDs vs tungsten?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Besides, where is the line drawn? Should we have optical cables feeding the brake lights so that they get the information from the pedal a few milliseconds faster? I doubt it. People not paying attention to the car in front of them has more to do with reaction time than limitations of the incandescent bulb I would wager.
I think it is high time we replace the caveman technology of the light bulb in cars with LEDs for issues ranging from longevity to light output to energy savings but NOT because of how fast either illuminates.
Safety is more important to me than saving electrical energy while the motor is running and the battery is already fully charged. Bulb life is a factor but once again pales when compared with vehicle safety. I am not saying that LEDs are more important than improved braking, improved traction/handling, or anti-skid devices, but an improvement is good no matter how small or often used.
For the record, I don't think even if it's 1/10th of a second faster that it has any impact at all on the driver behind you.
Here's a link with a graph of LED vs Incandescent lighting for response time (drag racing link). http://www.racetec.cc/led_lamp_tech.htm
I wouldn't bet against Vtec. - those new Accords will be coming off the assembly line in less than a month probably.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Seriously - lighting is not the issue, and it is certainly not going to save anyone's butt in the manner which the aforementioned article is trying to lead on. A guy waving a flag in his car while braking will have the same effect IF THE DRIVER BEHIND IS PAYING ATTENTION. 90% of the time people rear-end the person in front of them because they are NOT paying attention.
Along the braking force indicators thread... that's all well and good - but you already have people who do not understand what the various red and amber colored service and warning lights on a dashboard are for - do you really think that a progressive scale across the deck lid is going to be any less confusing for these drivers?
Here is a thought... many years ago community bus services started putting these blocks on the back of buses which start flashing amber lights any time the driver takes his foot off the gas while the bus is in gear. The idea behind this was to let the drivers behind know that it is highly probable that the driver was going to be stopping soon, but he isn't yet. I think this would be a great idea for cars. Most people don't jam on the brakes straight from gas when they see a situation developing ahead that would be cause for alarm/stopping. They wait a second or two to see if they can get through or around while letting off the gas. If their amber lights began flashing at this time, that would alert the driver behind them to get off the throttle, and consequently - the one behind them too. That's gonna save a hell of a lot more lives than the assumed 9 feet an LED is going to give you. Just a thought.
Markeeters OTOH, can claim all kinds of things on any of these items.
You must have the necessary data to show that there is not difference since you're so quick to ridicule the point!!! Right? Thank you for your courteous response. I take you were trying to say you disagree.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Yes, but.
Depending on the speed of the flashing foot-off-the-gas light, it can trigger migraines & seizures. And since passengers as well as drivers would be subjected to the large increase in flashing lights all over the place, the risk of seizures is an important consideration.
On the flip side, there's the question of how long it would take before drivers would start to tune out or ignore the flashing foot-off-the-gas lights of cars in front of us, figuring that the drivers were just coasting down a hill & would soon pick up speed again.
And I'm curious as to how many people realize that what looks like a flashing brake light on a bus isn't in fact a brake light. (Speaking just for myself, I didn't know this until I read it here today.)
I'm in favor of anything that would improve car safety, but I wonder if the drawbacks of this idea outweigh its advantages.
If flashing lights on the road are going to impair your driving, you should not be driving, it's that simple. Flashing lights could be anywhere, headlights coming through a fence, train track warning signs, construction lights....etc.
If you are really that worried about it, have the brake warning indicators flash using the same frequency as the turn signals but with an easily differentiated color.
Also, the point I was trying to make regarding migraines & seizures is that even if a person w/a seizure disorder is riding as a passenger in a car that someone else is driving, he or she would still be subjected to these additional flashing lights - & an increase in the prevalence of flashing lights would still run the risk of triggering more seizures.
As for passengers being affected, anyone I know who is susceptible to blinking lights causing them problems simply avoids them by averting their eyes. Having a susceptible passenger close their eyes would solve the problem at least temporarily. I know friends with seizure problems that simply divert their attention from the lights and this works even at county fairs and the like (where there are plenty of blinking lights).
I just don't see this as a big deal.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Do you have a link to data that shows it's that much faster to visible light? If it's simple, then link to it...
It's not minutia when the 9 feet measure is predicated on the difference between noticeable, visible brake light indicating braking.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
LED vs. Incandescent
Scroll down to: LED vs. Incandescent Lighting Quick Comparison
Time to light: LED 0.00006 mSec, Incandescent 250 MSec = 24' at 65 MPH.
LED's are also cheaper to run and last much longer than incandescent bulbs.
The whole point is that in the grand scheme of things a change to LEDs in tail lights is not a big enough safety issue to have it be mandated by DOT.
Thanks
If you want to call your point as being ridiculed, so be it. Honestly I think it was a ridiculous point in the method it was presented - being static and linear. Sorry, but people just don't operate that way. The time-to-light-on data is hardly interesting, honestly, as it is so negligible in true, every-day human factors and situations that it has no true application.
Do you notice a difference in internet sites that ping 10ms vs 60ms? Of course not. Even with a range of half a second, it is barely perceivable by humans. Now you are talking about a shaven difference of a few hundreths to a couple tenths? Cmon.
Now, back to the flashing amber lights... ok - do away with the flashing altogether... even a steady light, or slowly blinking light... something to indicate the driver is off the gas would do a lot more good than the time difference between LEDs and standard bulbs would. Grand Prix racers have this on their cars even... blinking brake light when off the gas, solid when on the brake. I try to pay attention to weight shifts fore and aft in the car ahead of me... it frequently gives me just enough extra time should things get bad up ahead. Chicago expressway traffic requires people to pay close attention. The number of wrecks I see each day to and from the office demonstrates quite clearly that most people do not, and my commute is all of 15 minutes.
Besides the obvious feature of having it guiding you to your destination with a moving map and voice commands,
you can enter your destination by:
Address (state, city, street number, address), places (auto service, banking, community, emergency, hotel/motel, leasure, restaurant, shopping, travel), previous destination, personal addresses previously stored, and intersection.
The above lists also break down into cub-categories.
You can program how your routes take you,
direct route, easy route, minimize freeways, minimize toll roads, maximize freeways.
It shows the length of each leg of the route, with estimated travel time, and points of interests along the way.
If you miss a turn, it re-routes itself and finds another way to get you to your destination.
It has a built in calendar that you can enter in appointments, and even has a calculator.
It automatically changes the clock when you cross time zones.
It has a long list of words that it can be operated thru Voice Recognition.
It also has a great trip computer showing gas milage, miles left, miles gone since fillup.
Believe me, I just hit some of the things I could quickly think of, the list is quite extensive of what it can do.
I thought it was going to be an expensive toy (OK it is an expensive toy) but I forsee it becomming as commomplace as A/C, and power windows in the years to come. I would buy it all over again. I keep cars for quite a while, so adding another 10% to the cost of the car didn't seem to be that big of a deal.
Mrbill
Not sure if I want it or not and was looking for the experience other people have had with it.
However, When I picked up my Honda from Dealer service and checked Tire pressure indicated 36-37 psi. Also Max Tire pressure was 44 psi.My case I usalley maintain 34 psi for all 4 Tires.
I need information from other ACCORD user's input for Optimum Tire pressure setup for best performance and longer life.
Should keeping the pressure for 37 psi? or 34 psi.
Prompt Response will be appreciated.
Skang a Accord Lover!
I took it to the dealer to try to get it replaced under defective pretext, but the service manager says he sees these quite often and they are usually caused by over-compressing the tire into the hard edge of a severe pothole or something. I assured him I take care to avoid big potholes and that it was likely to blow a bead before causing a bubble. I said that the sidewalls of the tire should be strong enough to deal with such a thing from the local roads. He disagreed and said he would not replace the tire under warranty and that the OEM tires do not come with road hazard protection. Frusterated I asked how much a new one would be. The indicated the tire price alone was over $160. He started to lookup installation and I told to save ihs breath, I was going to Sam's Club.
The tire was over $35 cheaper there and install was $9 which included road-hazard. I didn't want to get another of these series, but figured I should at least until the tires wear out. When I do replace them, it will be with Goodyear Regatta 2's, which I have used before on other cars.
I have been driving for over 20 years, and I have had a few bubbles in tires. Every time it was due to a fault in the tire, and never due to over-compression when smacking the edge of a pothole or somesuch. This was a very cheap "out" for the service manager at the dealer from which I just purchased my car, and I have sent a letter both to Honda and the manager of the dealership noting my displeasure and false representation.
Tires often come severely over inflated when new. One of the things dealerships should do in their pre-sale inspection of cars is adjust tires to the correct pressure. But some of them just unload the cars, remove the plastic an paper protectors, pull the floormats out of the trunk, and park it on the lot.
Why spend their time, which is money, on inspections. The purchaser will do this for you.
I run my 2002 V6 Accord at 30 or 32lbs.
Which I think would be Michelin.
Tires are backed by the tire company, not the auto dealership. Your dealership only wanted to sell you a tire.
If the bubble was on the sidewall and there was no obvious damage from an impact, I bet a Michelin selling tire store would have replaced the tire.
Don't adjust a hot tire to 30 or 32 pounds because when it cools, the pressure will be much too low.
I'd rather be a couple of pounds higher than recommended than a couple of pounds lower even though the ride would be better with the tires properly, rather than slightly over-inflated...........Richard
I totally concur with mrbill1957. The Navigation System was a wonderful choice when I selected my 2004 Coupe. I also recommend it wholeheartedly, although I use the voice command feature mostly for AM/FM/XM radio station/channel selection, volume control, climate control, etc. when I don't need directions.
I am looking at an Accord LX but don't want to spend the extra for EX.
Thoughts???
Any aftermarket NAV will be less costly than the built in NAV but it comes with the "non-standard" look and doesn't integrate the controls of the built in unit.
So the question is: how much do you value the "built-in" look and the integrated controls? For strictly the NAV function without a care for the looks, an aftermarket unit like Gamin 2610 is a much better alternative than a NAV option.
I would also wait to see what the 06 models offer - maybe the NAV option will be available on the LX as well.
With those 2 major pieces, a perfect retrofit is possible. Cost-wise, my hunch is that trading the car itself for a NAV-equipped model (and XM radio-equipped for an 04 and up) would be a better deal overall on top of keeping the original warranty.
Otherwise, aftermarket NAVs from Garmin and Magellan are practical, lower cost though less functional alternatives. I myself have 2 Garmin units for our 2 Accords, and have been happy with their cost/benefit return.
That said, an interactive voice-activated NAV/Radio/MIscellaneous system which is easily software-upgradable would be ideal. Nothing beats voice instructions while driving for safety and efficiency.
Ex: to find hotels on-the-fly during our last road trip, I had to have my Garmin's safety mode defeated and my wife working the Garmin remote to search for hotels and their phone numbers. A full voice-interactive system would have made this a one-man job.
Is this something that might go away? Should I get it checked out?
I was disappointed that after just 25K miles, I had to have my front rotors turned. I do about 65% city and 35% highway driving, but I consciously try to go lightly on the breaking. Is there something I can do to get more miles out of a set of brakes. I thought brakes were go for about 35K miles.
Overall, I have been pretty happy with my Accord. I also have a 1999 Odyssey which replaced a 1987 Accord. I have averaged 30 mpg over 28K miles. It is fairly peppy when needed, but with the Altima having 175 hp, I wish it had just a little more get up and go. The firth gear definitely helps with power and mileage.
Happy Hondaring!
Your city/hwy mix already is making it difficult to get great longevity out of the brakes.
The only thing you might be able to do is change to a longer life pad - at the expense of more rotor wear. Since you already had the rotors turned, next time you'll probably need rotors too.
I think your milage is about as good as it's going to get. The speed for best milage is right around the old national speed limit - 55 mph.
If you are concerned with the price of gasoline, why would you waste so much of the available crude oil by diverting it to motor oil being changed at only 3,000 mile intervals? If the vehicle manufacturer recommends oil changes at 5,000, 7,500 or 10,000 miles, you are wasting your money and depleting oil wells at an unnecessary rate. They just aren't making dinosaurs anymore.
I have a 2005 EX-L 2.4ltr sedan. Satin Silver
I am interested in purchasing factory honda wheels (EP-R5 17" Alloy Wheels). I have the stock 16" rims now but looking for a sharper look with the charcoal color wheels. Will purchasing the 17" wheels decrease fuel economy and/or loose power. Will it mess up the spedo. Will the rolling diameter be the same from the 205/60/16 tires to the upgraded 215/50/17. Are the off-sets the same. Will road noise increase?
CONFUSED
Has anyone else done this before?? Please respond. (recommendations!?!?)
None of the changes you're thinking of making will do anything to make the car better and will likely create problems.
Enjoy your new car and resist the temptation to louse it up
I'm with Richard though, I'd stick with the original rims. IMO the 16" EX 4cyl. rims are the nicest-looking Accord rims.