My favorite bitching point about new cars, no rear disc brakes. Focus, Fiesta, Jetta, Mazda2, Fit, I am looking at you. 2012 Accent four wheel discs standard as it should be.
http://www.insideline.com/hyundai/accent/2012/2012-hyundai-accent-2011-new-york-auto-show.html
Yeah I know, rear discs are supposedly less important on FWD. But for me no rear disc, no purchase. The Accent could have some potential with 138hp in a small package. Not sure about that stability program though.
I don't care if they work better or not - they are easier to maintain.
But all of the cars you listed with rear drums are economy cars. Drum brakes disengage completely and should therefore add to the efficiency of the vehicle; so it makes sense for those cars to have drums in the rear.
MG_Bryan wrote: But all of the cars you listed with rear drums are economy cars. Drum brakes disengage completely and should therefore add to the efficiency of the vehicle; so it makes sense for those cars to have drums in the rear.
Correction....PROPERLY ADJUSTED drum brakes disengage completely. As do properly adjusted disc brakes. If upkeep is done, there should be no difference in MPG disc over drum.
If it's a choice between 4 wheel disc brakes standard, and cruise control being available (cruise wasn't available on the outgoing Accent, if I remember correctly), for me the deal breaker is lack of CC.
I saw the pix of the new Accent, too. It looks like Hyundai has caught up with the Japanese...tho didn't read if cruise is going to be available this time around.
It was a small part in my choice of the 2011 Elantra last weekend, along with awesome buy in price, 40mpg, 100K warranty, CC, AC, XM radio, best in class interior room, and great looks.
Duke wrote: I don't care if they work better or not - they are easier to maintain.
Rear disc easier to maintain? Don't know if I agree with that. Rear disc on a daily driver is totally unimportant.
No 2 door? They don't get it.
Maroon92 wrote:MG_Bryan wrote: But all of the cars you listed with rear drums are economy cars. Drum brakes disengage completely and should therefore add to the efficiency of the vehicle; so it makes sense for those cars to have drums in the rear.Correction....PROPERLY ADJUSTED drum brakes disengage completely. As do properly adjusted disc brakes. If upkeep is done, there should be no difference in MPG disc over drum.
I've been wrong before, and I may well be wrong now, but I've never encountered a disk brake set up in which the pads were not in constant (if only minimal) contact with the rotors. Care to tell me what I'm doing wrong?
I think I like the Kia Rio5 version of this platform a little better. The Kia front is better looking ,but the Accent rear wins. I'll have to see them in the flesh to tell though.
my wife just bought a kia forte koupe.. i gotta admit it is a very fun car to drive.. she got the maxed out one with the bigger engine.. it handles the ramps around here pretty good.she has had it about 3 weeks and already got a ticket..lol she went from a jeep liberty to a pretty cool lil pocket rocket.
It will be interesting if they help anything.
On a drum brake system springs release the shoes from contact with the drum. On a disc system the pads rely on rotor runout to be forced away from the friction surface. It may only be .001 percent but drums would be more efficient in that respect.
Personally I don't care. Most modern FWD cars are so forward weight biased that the rears are just along for the ride. Discs look nice but offer no benefit to the average econobox buyer......although now that I think about it I cannot fathom that drums are still any cheaper to manufacture.
MG_Bryan wrote:Maroon92 wrote:I've been wrong before, and I may well be wrong now, but I've never encountered a disk brake set up in which the pads were not in constant (if only minimal) contact with the rotors. Care to tell me what I'm doing wrong?MG_Bryan wrote: But all of the cars you listed with rear drums are economy cars. Drum brakes disengage completely and should therefore add to the efficiency of the vehicle; so it makes sense for those cars to have drums in the rear.Correction....PROPERLY ADJUSTED drum brakes disengage completely. As do properly adjusted disc brakes. If upkeep is done, there should be no difference in MPG disc over drum.
No discernible drag is created. There is no pressure on the pad, and at speed, there is going to be at least a little air in between the pad and the rotor. There is certainly not enough of a difference to add even one MPG... The difference is negligible.
And lets not forget that disc brakes can actually cool down between applications
It's been my experience that modern FWD rear drums can go for 100k without any maintainence.
rear disc brakes? Unless you are racing I don't see why you would need them, and even then I would question it.
My old ranger that I ran way too hard went through 3 sets of front pads and 0 rear shoes. Had the heavy duty suspension package so the rear drums were two inches wider if memory serves. It would stop way over the recommended towing limit.
Mazda tranny was garbage behind the 4.0L, broke two of those too. 
anybody know if rear disc brakes are lighter than rear drums? most rear disc setups use a non-vented rotor.. so they cannot weight too much
On a dd, I prefer rear drums. If you live somewhere that gets winter, drums work much better longer. Don't ask me how many times I've had to unseize or replace the rear calipers on my p5
I recall reading a GRM interview with a Honda Challenge veteran/guru that the civic rear drums are actually lighter than rear disc. In addition the rear disc setup does not offer any performance gain.
Zomby woof wrote: No 2 door? They don't get it.
Ahem....Veloster?
Sounds like its the same engine and trans.
mad_machine wrote: anybody know if rear disc brakes are lighter than rear drums? most rear disc setups use a non-vented rotor.. so they cannot weight too much
Typically, drums are lighter than disks.
Drums can use aluminum cylinders, (and have been for +50 years), and they are a lot smaller than the calipers. the actual drum also weighs about as much as the rotor- although it can be considerably lighter.
All in all, a drum system is lighter than a disk system.
failboat wrote:Zomby woof wrote: No 2 door? They don't get it.Ahem....Veloster? Sounds like its the same engine and trans.
I'm pretty sure the Veloster is a 3 door. Nonetheless, I was talking about the Accent. Is the Veloster an accent? I know nothing about it, but it looks big in the pics.
The Veloster is TINY. It is IIRC a shortened Accent platform.
sounds like a ball to me!
Zomby woof wrote:failboat wrote:I'm pretty sure the Veloster is a 3 door. Nonetheless, I was talking about the Accent. Is the Veloster an accent? I know nothing about it, but it looks big in the pics.Zomby woof wrote: No 2 door? They don't get it.Ahem....Veloster? Sounds like its the same engine and trans.
I really like the new Accent, especially with an under 13k base price and 40mpg. But I too would greatly prefer a 2 door version.
I'm with the majority here, I'd actually rather drums. Lighter, way less maintenance and a much less hokey parking brake.
You'll need to log in to post.
