=?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.




--
Tegger

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

 

=?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.




--
Tegger

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

 

Ok, I understand so far. When resetting the piston will is screw in cw or
ccw?
TIA
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:
>
>> 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.
>
>
>
>> I have a question
>> on the rear that pertains to the parking brake on the caliper. How
>> difficult is this to reset? I have looked in the normal places for
>> assistance (AutoZone repair guides) but they do not list this year.
>> Any advice (or links) appreciated. It looks like it is a mechanical
>> cam through the caliper.
>>
>>
>
>
> 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/

 

Ok, I understand so far. When resetting the piston will is screw in cw or
ccw?
TIA
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:
>
>> 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.
>
>
>
>> I have a question
>> on the rear that pertains to the parking brake on the caliper. How
>> difficult is this to reset? I have looked in the normal places for
>> assistance (AutoZone repair guides) but they do not list this year.
>> Any advice (or links) appreciated. It looks like it is a mechanical
>> cam through the caliper.
>>
>>
>
>
> 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/

 

Michael Pardee wrote:
> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> news:Xns991C65CB5FD86tegger@207.14.116.130...
>> "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
>> news:OpCdncRhHt4jYLDbnZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@sedona.net:
>>
>>> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns991C5078BCA3Ftegger@207.14.116.130...
>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in
>>>> news:LL2dneB_SbHG-bDbnZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@speakeasy.net:
>>>>
>>>>> light is good
>>>>> for handling. light and strong is comparatively expensive. check out
>>>>> some of that clunking junk ford use some time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have. Plastic pistons? No thanks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Plastic pistons?!?!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yep. Light-blue plastic. They crumble around the edges.
>>
>> Wanna buy a Ford?
>>
>> --
>> Tegger
>>
>> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
>> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
>>
> I was shocked when I found my (#2) son's Taurus with a 2.4 L engine had a
> six inch clutch.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
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?

 

Michael Pardee wrote:
> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> news:Xns991C65CB5FD86tegger@207.14.116.130...
>> "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
>> news:OpCdncRhHt4jYLDbnZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@sedona.net:
>>
>>> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns991C5078BCA3Ftegger@207.14.116.130...
>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in
>>>> news:LL2dneB_SbHG-bDbnZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@speakeasy.net:
>>>>
>>>>> light is good
>>>>> for handling. light and strong is comparatively expensive. check out
>>>>> some of that clunking junk ford use some time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have. Plastic pistons? No thanks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Plastic pistons?!?!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yep. Light-blue plastic. They crumble around the edges.
>>
>> Wanna buy a Ford?
>>
>> --
>> Tegger
>>
>> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
>> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
>>
> I was shocked when I found my (#2) son's Taurus with a 2.4 L engine had a
> six inch clutch.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
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?

 

"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.

DaveD

 

"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.

DaveD

 

"GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
news:IczXh.74867$VU4.15529@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

> Ok, I understand so far. When resetting the piston will is screw in cw
> or ccw?


Clockwise.

http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/Brakes.html#ScrewIt

View the video on that page.


--
Tegger

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

 

"GM" <comments7407@att.net.no.spam.net> wrote in
news:IczXh.74867$VU4.15529@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

> Ok, I understand so far. When resetting the piston will is screw in cw
> or ccw?


Clockwise.

http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/Brakes.html#ScrewIt

View the video on that page.


--
Tegger

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

 

Thanks a lot, That really helped!
GM

>
> Clockwise.
>
> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/Brakes.html#ScrewIt
>
> View the video on that page.

 

Thanks a lot, That really helped!
GM

>
> Clockwise.
>
> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/Brakes.html#ScrewIt
>
> View the video on that page.

 

"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.


--
Tegger

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

 

"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.


--
Tegger

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

 

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???