First of all, you should keep everything else constant. So take the same car with the same config and only change the rear drums to discs. Use the Honda Accord if you wish, since it comes both ways (LX/EX 4). It has been done before, and the results weren't huge, but weren't negligeable either. Yes, the fronts do most of the braking, but not all.
And it made a difference of about 5 feet or so. In addition I said a well designed set. In which case you don't just arbitrarily put a set of drums on the car. I mean inadequate brakes can be disc or drum. "Well designed" by definition means a set that can adequately perform the function needed.
Anyone that knows a little about cars would pay an extra $100 to get front AND rear discs over front discs and rear drums.
Problem is, most of the driving public cares how many airbags the car has (concerned about passive safety over active) and if it has a passenger vanity mirror (first question a few female freiends asked when they saw the car (Protege) for the 1st time - after saying "nice colour").
I gave you free rein to use your favorite, the Honda Accord, or any car you'd like for that matter.
... and you made a good choice in the Protege. The Protege has well designed brakes. 60-0 in 123 feet, and good feel too. I'll take the 5 feet (which was actually closer to 9 feet, but hey - who's counting?).
... and as malt would point out, the difference gets even bigger from even higher speeds. Afterall, who drives 60 on the highway these days?
Ooops, gawkers have traffic stopped ahead, and everyone is slamming on the brakes all of the sudden. Am I going to make it? Bam!!! Oh, man. Just 5(9) feet short. Oh well. Better luck next time. ;-)
Because I've seen this subject rehashed there every other week. I don't know the distances in the drum brake Accord. But the difference is just about the same you would probably get when you changed tires, brake pad composition, tire wear pattern blah blah... Under normal driving conditions it won't matter any more than any other variable.
It's a free country. You can pick up stopping distance with anything you want so long as its legal - better tires, better pads, ... 4 wheel discs. Whatever floats your boat.
But if maximum braking were a priority then all Mazdas would have ABS, EBD, 18" high performance tires, cross drilled rotors and infra-red vision for night driving safety. They don't because they feel the configuration that they have built is adequate for the vehicle's intended service. Just as those cars with disc/drum confuguration.
For one, disc pads are a lot easier to check on and replace. I didn't like replacing the pads on the rear drums of my 323, and I'll pay for someone else to do it on my ProtegeLX.
If I lived in a hilly area, I'd definitely go with rear discs. You do notice the brake fade during a long downhill grade (even after shifting down for some compression braking from the engine), and it's a little scary.
I think the lower heat-transfer rate of drums is the culprit. Some braking ability is lost to increased gas forming between pad and drum. More loss occurs when the brake fluid is heated to the point that gas bubbles form in the brake lines. This can disable your entire brake system, front discs included (as I think most systems tie diagonally-oriented brakes together).
But for most folks, on mostly flat terrain, rear drums are fine. I'd just prefer rear discs (mostly for easier maintenance). Plus, they look neater.
I am a Mazda6 owner for a couple of weeks and still come back to this board and read posts.
Why does someone want to compare Mazda6 to Cam/Accord? Dinu is right. These are two different types of cars, and comparison is meaningless. Please drop such topic.
If someone want a nice family sedan, it is a good deal for them to buy a Camry or Accord. However I want something a little more fun for driving and hasing a distinguish style, so I chose Mazda6. I do not want to park my car in a parking lot and find it is difficult to locate it, because so many people drive the same car as I do. Mazda already made it clear that Mazda6 is not a car for everyone, and please do not expect it will be such a popular car as Camry/Accord.
The exterior didn't compliment the interior and the 6 speed ersion i wanted would cost over $34,000 so I passed. I wasn't buying it for the performance, I just like the way it looked in the pictures. I bought an Accord instead and will use the extra money toward paying off my house.
"But if maximum braking were a priority then all Mazdas would have ABS, EBD, 18" high performance tires, cross drilled rotors and infra-red vision for night driving safety."
I'd still get the 6 hatch or wagon, and keep the change.
Ditto BMW. I prefer FWD for the snow/rain and am willing to accept the understeer trade-off. Besides, BMWs are getting too gadgety for me. I am totally turned off by that iDrive system. Give me dials and big buttons, please (actually, I'm not that fond of the 6's center stack design...controls too far away from the display and the design doesn't look flexible for fitting-in aftermarket stereo equipment).
Disc brakes in the back will shorten the stopping distance some, but not alot. The difference is brake pedal feel, as well as progressiveness of the pedal. Heat dissipation also factors in. With the pedal feel comes modulation. If you can "feel" the brakes better, you can modulate them better.
Also, the difference between disc and drums on the back is usually less than 10ft. stopping distance. But what happens if the thing you are stopping FOR is 8 feet away??
I saw an Accord Coupe the other day. That is THE MOST unimaginative rear end I have ever seen from a Honda, almost as boring and uninteresting as a (gasp!) a Kia Rio rear end!!!!
And if the car needed to stop that quick wouldn't it be nice if ABS were included in the package standard also? I mean while we are talking hypotheticals IF you needed to stop that fast ABS and ABD would be a great help. Still leaves the 6 behind the curve it is trying to set.
Let's compare when the year is up. I chose the Accord coupe it over the 6 sedan. EBD, EBD, 4wDisc standard on the EX-L. Less than $23 with all accessories.
I don't have time to scroll back through all of the postings, and I am certain this has been addressed. FYI, my daughter is driving a 1995 Millenia that I purchased new in 4/94, now at about 140,000 miles. It has a timing belt, and it is recommended that it be changed every 60,000 miles. When you add in the cost for a 60K service, the tab runs to $800+ - which I have paid twice. We also owned a 90 MPV for 8 years, so I have a certain fondness for Mazda. I am currently driving a 03 Corolla and my wife has an 02 Camry. Both have timing chains. The 6 has caught my attention, but I won't consider it if it has a timing belt that needs to be replaced so frequently. So, which is it?
Not necessarily. I will put 100K on my car in 4 years, at which time the belt has to be changed. So it's mileage, not time, that matters to some people.
is SO frustrating. Numerous topics going at the same time in what looks like the same thread. Ridiculous, and close to useless. How are people supposed to discuss and learn effectively?
One thing is that cars with CA emissions have a 105K interval for timing belt changes. Cars without that package (or the NE emissions package) have a 60K timing belt change interval. That's the way it was with my 01 Protege anyway.
Let's all take a break from arguing about silly things like brakes and which car is better Accord or Mazda6, instead check out what Car And Driver has to say about the Mazda6.
(This link may not work if you are not using Windows XP, in that case go to the Car and Driver home page and the main topic will be the “10 Best” list.
There is text, pictures, and a cool video, check them all out.
Interestingly enough you can also check out the Accord, BMW 3 series and Infiniti G35. The all made it to the “10 Best” list. As you would expect the Accord made to because it's a great family sedan while the other three made it to the list because of their great sport sedan qualities...
"Because I've seen this subject rehashed there every other week. I don't know the distances in the drum brake Accord. But the difference is just about the same you would probably get when you changed tires, brake pad composition, tire wear pattern blah blah... Under normal driving conditions it won't matter any more than any other variable. "
Hey, under normal conditions you wouldn't need airbags either, or even seat belts for that matter.
Let's talk about drum brakes some more! I have a horrible squeal from one of my rear drum brakes. The pads are fine. My mechanic tells me disc brakes are less prone to this problem because 1) they're exposed, rather than enclosed, so dust and larger particulates get washed off more easily, and 2) something to do with the drum brake pads rotating after they make contact with the drum...? Obviously I don't understand this well, but I'm looking for 4-wheel disc brakes in my next car. If brake feel is better, too, that's another good reason for disc brakes, never mind the 5-8 feet of stopping distance.
California and Northeast emissions. Those regions' emissions standards are more stringest than the rest of the US, I would assume. Most new cars have a package that NE and CA cars have, listed on the Monroney sticker.
The new Accord did really well in IIHS crash tests, but previous versions of the Accord got an "acceptable" rating, same as the 626. The 6 has not been rated yet, but it seems that most manufacturers have improved their design to perform well in crash tests (and hopefully crashes). You can't argue anything about the relative safety of the Accord and the 6 until they've both been tested.
So the main reason to change the belt is emission, and not failure prevention? And why should the gouvernement cares about the cause of bad emission? Why it's not enough for them if the car has an old belt and does not pollute?
Comments
Problem is, most of the driving public cares how many airbags the car has (concerned about passive safety over active) and if it has a passenger vanity mirror (first question a few female freiends asked when they saw the car (Protege) for the 1st time - after saying "nice colour").
Dinu
... and you made a good choice in the Protege. The Protege has well designed brakes. 60-0 in 123 feet, and good feel too. I'll take the 5 feet (which was actually closer to 9 feet, but hey - who's counting?).
... and as malt would point out, the difference gets even bigger from even higher speeds. Afterall, who drives 60 on the highway these days?
Ooops, gawkers have traffic stopped ahead, and everyone is slamming on the brakes all of the sudden. Am I going to make it? Bam!!! Oh, man. Just 5(9) feet short. Oh well. Better luck next time. ;-)
But the difference is just about the same you would probably get when you changed tires, brake pad composition, tire wear pattern blah blah...
Under normal driving conditions it won't matter any more than any other variable.
The 6 isn't meant to be a "Beemer killer". It's a sporty alternative to all the plain jane FWD sedans.
They don't because they feel the configuration that they have built is adequate for the vehicle's intended service. Just as those cars with disc/drum confuguration.
What is all this stuff about design, and disks versus drums?
Mark. ?
Seriously, if I had money for a BMW, I would give a kind wave to my Mazda dealer as I passed him or her on the way to buy a BMW.
Actually, strike that. If I had the money for a Gee35 Coupe ... that certainly does beg the question, doesn't it?
If I lived in a hilly area, I'd definitely go with rear discs. You do notice the brake fade during a long downhill grade (even after shifting down for some compression braking from the engine), and it's a little scary.
I think the lower heat-transfer rate of drums is the culprit. Some braking ability is lost to increased gas forming between pad and drum. More loss occurs when the brake fluid is heated to the point that gas bubbles form in the brake lines. This can disable your entire brake system, front discs included (as I think most systems tie diagonally-oriented brakes together).
But for most folks, on mostly flat terrain, rear drums are fine. I'd just prefer rear discs (mostly for easier maintenance). Plus, they look neater.
Why does someone want to compare Mazda6 to Cam/Accord? Dinu is right. These are two different types of cars, and comparison is meaningless. Please drop such topic.
If someone want a nice family sedan, it is a good deal for them to buy a Camry or Accord. However I want something a little more fun for driving and hasing a distinguish style, so I chose Mazda6. I do not want to park my car in a parking lot and find it is difficult to locate it, because so many people drive the same car as I do. Mazda already made it clear that Mazda6 is not a car for everyone, and please do not expect it will be such a popular car as Camry/Accord.
bme
I bought an Accord instead and will use the extra money toward paying off my house.
So get one then.
Sounds like the 05 MPV to me!
Ditto BMW. I prefer FWD for the snow/rain and am willing to accept the understeer trade-off. Besides, BMWs are getting too gadgety for me. I am totally turned off by that iDrive system. Give me dials and big buttons, please (actually, I'm not that fond of the 6's center stack design...controls too far away from the display and the design doesn't look flexible for fitting-in aftermarket stereo equipment).
Also, the difference between disc and drums on the back is usually less than 10ft. stopping distance. But what happens if the thing you are stopping FOR is 8 feet away??
Enough disc/drum for the day. Can we talk about accords some more?
*snickering*
And if the car needed to stop that quick wouldn't it be nice if ABS were included in the package standard also? I mean while we are talking hypotheticals IF you needed to stop that fast ABS and ABD would be a great help. Still leaves the 6 behind the curve it is trying to set.
I would take the previous gen Accord coupe's rear end design 10 times over.
*prerequisite Mazda 6 text* I like the Mazda6
Luckily, all airbags working.
Bruno
Like a 6 isn't walmart Bimmer?
what it has right now simply doesn't look good.
Kumbaya...
- Latka Gravis
Of course you're correct Paul.
http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/10best/2003/2003_10best_cars_mazda_6.xml
(This link may not work if you are not using Windows XP, in that case go to the Car and Driver home page and the main topic will be the “10 Best” list.
There is text, pictures, and a cool video, check them all out.
Interestingly enough you can also check out the Accord, BMW 3 series and Infiniti G35. The all made it to the “10 Best” list. As you would expect the Accord made to because it's a great family sedan while the other three made it to the list because of their great sport sedan qualities...
But the difference is just about the same you would probably get when you changed tires, brake pad composition, tire wear pattern blah blah...
Under normal driving conditions it won't matter any more than any other variable. "
Hey, under normal conditions you wouldn't need airbags either, or even seat belts for that matter.
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_midinexp.htm
Just don't buy a Grand Am.
Bruno, wonder more than ever.