Fit Suspension & Brake Modifications Threads discussing suspension and brake related modifications for the Honda Fit

disc vs drum brakes

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #21  
Old 02-10-2008, 12:03 AM
dkwvelo's Avatar
New Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Littleton, CO
Posts: 8
How come they can stop US cars but they need rear disks in Europe?
The Jazz has rear disc brakes not drums.
 
  #22  
Old 02-15-2008, 04:33 PM
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC USA
Posts: 4,371
Discs are easier to design and manufacture unless you already have manufacturing line to make disc brakes. Only inclusion of a parking brake offers any complication.
Disc brakes are far more efficient than drums and shouldlast at least as long.
Disc brakes are much lighter than drums, hence why you never see drums on a race vehicle unless they have to.
Disc brake pads can be changed far quicker and easier than shoes on drums.
Disc brakes offer less rolling resistance than drums.
In short, drum brakes are a sign of cheap engineering.

In Eurore and Asia traffic moves at a much faster pace with cutthroat driving the more norm. For that you better have very good brakes. Thats based on 5 trips to Europe and Asia with much driving. Have a lot of funny stories about them, such as:

'm sorry Sir, but Hertz doesn't rent Porsches to Americans.
Why not, I have a FIA competition license.
Oh, thats different.
But why not rent to the usual American?
Sir last year we had 21 Americans killed here driving our cars because they aren't trained.
Hey, 21 Americans in all of Europe's not bad statistically.
No Sir, thats out of just this office.

And the light dawns.
 

Last edited by mahout; 02-22-2008 at 09:18 PM.
  #23  
Old 02-15-2008, 05:59 PM
dkwvelo's Avatar
New Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Littleton, CO
Posts: 8
OK, I guess I am not asking the proper question.

Yes, drum brakes are sufficient to do the braking job, at least in the US.
Yes, disc brakes offer superior performance.

Why is the same car in sold in the EU w/rear discs but drums in the US?
Is this a marketing problem? Can drum brakes not compete in the EU? Is this a performance issue (i.e. do they drive the cars harder in the EU needing greater stopping power than the US) ?? The Jazz comes in a lighter version in the EU yet it too has rear discs so I doubt its a pure braking performance issue.

So what's up w/that?
 
  #24  
Old 02-16-2008, 06:09 AM
cheffyjay's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: washington
Posts: 530
Originally Posted by mahout
Discs are easier to design and manufacture unless you already have manufacturing line to make disc brakes. Only inclusion of a parking brake offers any complication.
Disc brakes are far more efficient than drums and shouldlast at least as long.
Disc brakes are much lighter than drums, hence why you never see drums on a race vehicle unless they have to.
Disc brake pads can be changed far quicker and easier than shoes on drums.
Disc brakes offer less rolling resistance than drums.
In short, drum brakes are a sign of cheap engineering.

Wikipedia:
"Drum brakes are still used in modern cars. There can be engineering and cost advantages. Drum brakes allow simple incorporation of a parking brake. They are often applied to the rear wheels since most of the stopping happens in the front of the vehicle and therefore the heat generated in the rear is significantly less. Drum brakes are also occasionally fitted as the parking (and emergency) brake even when the rear wheels use disk brakes as the main brakes. In this situation, a small drum is usually fitted within or as part of the brake disk....

Discs have now become the more common form in most passenger vehicles, although many (particularly light weight vehicles) use drum brakes on the rear wheels to keep costs and weight down as well as to simplify the provisions for a parking brake. As the front brakes perform most of the braking effort, this can be a reasonable compromise."

(I had always heard that drums were lighter. Discs are on racecars because of fade resistance and proportional pedal feel.)

But in answer to the OP, I think it is a marketing thing in the EU. The Jazz is seen as a more upscale car there than the Fit is positioned here so I think EU consumers demand four wheel discs.
 
  #25  
Old 02-16-2008, 10:02 AM
dkwvelo's Avatar
New Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Littleton, CO
Posts: 8
Originally Posted by cheffyjay
But in answer to the OP, I think it is a marketing thing in the EU. The Jazz is seen as a more upscale car there than the Fit is positioned here so I think EU consumers demand four wheel discs.
Hmmm, I know more about bicycles ... than cars.
Disc brakes on bicycles are amazingly strong, 1 finger stoppies.
Drum brakes ... only used on tandems as far as I know (at least high end stuff) ... only used to slow you down ... not stop you
As for weight ... disk brakes are way lighter than drums but this is a different application so the same rules may not apply on mass production cars.

Yeah ... guess it's likely a marketing thing ... most US buyers don't care
 
  #26  
Old 02-22-2008, 09:29 PM
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC USA
Posts: 4,371
Originally Posted by cheffyjay
Wikipedia:
"Drum brakes are still used in modern cars. There can be engineering and cost advantages. Drum brakes allow simple incorporation of a parking brake. They are often applied to the rear wheels since most of the stopping happens in the front of the vehicle and therefore the heat generated in the rear is significantly less. Drum brakes are also occasionally fitted as the parking (and emergency) brake even when the rear wheels use disk brakes as the main brakes. In this situation, a small drum is usually fitted within or as part of the brake disk....

Discs have now become the more common form in most passenger vehicles, although many (particularly light weight vehicles) use drum brakes on the rear wheels to keep costs and weight down as well as to simplify the provisions for a parking brake. As the front brakes perform most of the braking effort, this can be a reasonable compromise."

(I had always heard that drums were lighter. Discs are on racecars because of fade resistance and proportional pedal feel.)

But in answer to the OP, I think it is a marketing thing in the EU. The Jazz is seen as a more upscale car there than the Fit is positioned here so I think EU consumers demand four wheel discs.
Wicky is dead wrong. Drums are heavier & more expensive to make and if it were not for manufacturing lines already in place and paid for there would not be a single drum brake. And if European standards were placed on our brake systems drums would disappear even faster. Any time brakes become a standard requirement for high performance, discs quickly are standard. The only vehicles still using drum brakes are the technologically backward ones where cost is more important than performance.. That includes Honda in the USA on their 'lesser' cars.
As for the ease of incorporating parking brakes in discs they need to look at the 91 CRX as well as the 2007 Jazz.
The Element is a lesser vehicle and the suppieroffered the disc with drum parking at least cost. Next time see how well that little drum stops an element all by itself.
 

Last edited by mahout; 03-04-2008 at 09:53 PM.
  #27  
Old 02-23-2008, 09:03 AM
dkwvelo's Avatar
New Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Littleton, CO
Posts: 8
Originally Posted by mahout
As for the ease of incorporating parking brakes in discs they need to look at the 91 CRX as well as the 2007 Jazz.
Not really sure how the Jazz or CRX parking brake works but the Honda Element incorporates both drum and disc brake in the rear brakes of that vehicle. The parking brake is a drum brake, but the disc brake is used to stop the vehicle.
 
  #28  
Old 03-08-2011, 03:33 PM
drumhead's Avatar
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: England
Posts: 1
Smile Drum brakes vs disc brakes

Before speed-limits, the getting-heavier cars needed brakes that wouldn't fade when braking vigorously from high speed; as drums did, being almost the size of the tire. U then had to try to brake thru a slipped clutch on a turned-off engine...very weird and risky.
So disc brakes were invented, with a much higher destruction-point; as in, none. Sadly, they need expensive highly-tuned steel and other metals for their discs, have serious stress around the brake-pads and their attachment to the vehicle, and the brake fluid must be seriously non-degradable under pressureand/or heat. There's the disc and itsconnexion to the wheel, the brake-fluid and its reservoir, the fluid tube, the brake-clamps, and the cable to activate the item. That's a lot more weight than the expanded hub of a drum-brake.
Assuming that the drum needed isn't bigger than the wheel, drum brakes are a delight...neatly progressive, very forgiving, with max feedback to prevent skidding. They're easily applied by levers or a sheathed cable.
Now that the US has a max speed of 55 mph, the mass-speed multiple of many cars is again stoppable with a drum. So they return, not only because of their niceness, but also they're almost tamper-proof: There's nothing to get at to harm, except the cable. That's all. U Could try to squirt oil into the drum, but the pads are set high, and so's the drum. Not easily done.
By contrast u can put straw/ nuts'n'bolts thru the little holes in discs, u can spread oil on the disc, squirt oil onto the clamps, scissor-cut/tie up the fluid-pipes, and loosen the disc-attaching bolts on the hub. They're also fragile, for the disc could get twisted either by physical contact, or by heat-warp in a hot summer; the clamp-setup could get damaged, the fluid reservoir might fall off. By contrast, there's nothing in a drum-brake to go wrong, and they last long-time. A very relaxing braking-system for bicycles, drums are; and for slow light scooters and motorbikes, and cars with a low top speed.
 
  #29  
Old 03-08-2011, 04:35 PM
codenamezero's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 176
Just look at disc brake, a huge piece of metal for the disc itself, and then another huge piece of metal on the caliper... where as drum brake is just a shell, a cover, and 4 springs inside + the pad.

The design of the drum is actually simpler than disc brake... if you are talking about changing brake pad, then yea, maybe it is simpler when doing it on disc brake... but in terms of design, disc brake have:
- a caliper,
- 2 pins,
- 2 tiny rubber boots for the pins
- a screw-in type piston
- a seal for the piston
- a bracket...
- a brake disc
- 2 brake pads

drum brake have:
- backing plate
- 4 springs
- an outer shell
- 2 brake pads
- some other tiny parts
 

Last edited by codenamezero; 03-08-2011 at 04:45 PM.
  #30  
Old 03-08-2011, 09:28 PM
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC USA
Posts: 4,371
Originally Posted by drumhead
Before speed-limits, the getting-heavier cars needed brakes that wouldn't fade when braking vigorously from high speed; as drums did, being almost the size of the tire. U then had to try to brake thru a slipped clutch on a turned-off engine...very weird and risky.
So disc brakes were invented, with a much higher destruction-point; as in, none. Sadly, they need expensive highly-tuned steel and other metals for their discs, have serious stress around the brake-pads and their attachment to the vehicle, and the brake fluid must be seriously non-degradable under pressureand/or heat. There's the disc and itsconnexion to the wheel, the brake-fluid and its reservoir, the fluid tube, the brake-clamps, and the cable to activate the item. That's a lot more weight than the expanded hub of a drum-brake.
Assuming that the drum needed isn't bigger than the wheel, drum brakes are a delight...neatly progressive, very forgiving, with max feedback to prevent skidding. They're easily applied by levers or a sheathed cable.
Now that the US has a max speed of 55 mph, the mass-speed multiple of many cars is again stoppable with a drum. So they return, not only because of their niceness, but also they're almost tamper-proof: There's nothing to get at to harm, except the cable. That's all. U Could try to squirt oil into the drum, but the pads are set high, and so's the drum. Not easily done.
By contrast u can put straw/ nuts'n'bolts thru the little holes in discs, u can spread oil on the disc, squirt oil onto the clamps, scissor-cut/tie up the fluid-pipes, and loosen the disc-attaching bolts on the hub. They're also fragile, for the disc could get twisted either by physical contact, or by heat-warp in a hot summer; the clamp-setup could get damaged, the fluid reservoir might fall off. By contrast, there's nothing in a drum-brake to go wrong, and they last long-time. A very relaxing braking-system for bicycles, drums are; and for slow light scooters and motorbikes, and cars with a low top speed.

Though invented previously, Jaguar was the first to use disc brakes on a production vehicle because they offered much shorter stopping distances in rain or dry where drum brakes were notoriously inefficient in wet conditions and were more susceptible to fade than disc brakes. Just as they are today. Plus they are less costly and easier to maintain. They are the standard for all moving vehicles.
And if you think drum brakes are more sturdy you haven't braked a NASCAR Ford in turn 3 at Ma4tinsville or Bristol or Watkins Glen.
And back in the twenties and thirties many F1's had drum brakes inboard so they could be bigger than the wheel.
 
  #31  
Old 01-26-2014, 04:39 PM
deeph2o's Avatar
New Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by codenamezero
Just look at disc brake, a huge piece of metal for the disc itself, and then another huge piece of metal on the caliper... where as drum brake is just a shell, a cover, and 4 springs inside + the pad.

The design of the drum is actually simpler than disc brake... if you are talking about changing brake pad, then yea, maybe it is simpler when doing it on disc brake... but in terms of design, disc brake have:
- a caliper,
- 2 pins,
- 2 tiny rubber boots for the pins
- a screw-in type piston
- a seal for the piston
- a bracket...
- a brake disc
- 2 brake pads

drum brake have:
- backing plate
- 4 springs
- an outer shell
- 2 brake pads
- some other tiny parts

I would say that you have left a few things out with drums.... There are more than 4 springs in many systems, and there are ALSO pistons, seals, etc in the wheel cylinders-that are part of the drum system.

Really, the only thing that keeps drums in *any* cars is the fact that existing manufacturing is cheaper (for making the drum brake systems...) than implementing the "new" technology for discs in the rear.

However, the cost is passed onto the consumer, in the form of more expensive parts, and more labor. (yes, it is more expensive to fix drums... springs WILL need to be replaced, and it takes longer to repair drum brakes than disks...)

However, in my low-end Mercedes from 1982, there are discs all-around. I can replace the front pads-without ever having to remove the caliper (10 minutes per wheel... ) -I just use that as an example, as I haven't ever had to replace the rear pads. However, I know that I won't have to bother with effectively-taking off nearly the entire rear-wheel assmbly (as you do with drums...) to change out the brake shoes (the analogous part) in drum systems...

So I cannot fathom why manufacturers are still holding out in their assembly/manufacturing plants...

We would need *real* (vs. theoretical...) numbers from someone in-the-know who can tell us the *real* cost of converting a manufacturing plant to discs for an entire car manufacturer...

Again, if Mercedes was doing this in their taxi-model cars in 1982, why are there still some cars lagging behind some 30 years later?


-However all the above-post is my frustration-I am dealing with the wife's fit, which has rear drums... MY real questions:

1. Am I missing a trick in taking off the rear drums? The hubcaps seem crazy-tight in there...

2. Has anybody converted a Fit to discs in the rear? What is the cost to do so? Is there a how-to on this?
 

Last edited by deeph2o; 01-26-2014 at 04:53 PM. Reason: Wanted to clarify part of the post.
  #32  
Old 01-27-2014, 07:59 PM
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC USA
Posts: 4,371
Originally Posted by deeph2o
I would say that you have left a few things out with drums.... There are more than 4 springs in many systems, and there are ALSO pistons, seals, etc in the wheel cylinders-that are part of the drum system.

Really, the only thing that keeps drums in *any* cars is the fact that existing manufacturing is cheaper (for making the drum brake systems...) than implementing the "new" technology for discs in the rear.

However, the cost is passed onto the consumer, in the form of more expensive parts, and more labor. (yes, it is more expensive to fix drums... springs WILL need to be replaced, and it takes longer to repair drum brakes than disks...)

However, in my low-end Mercedes from 1982, there are discs all-around. I can replace the front pads-without ever having to remove the caliper (10 minutes per wheel... ) -I just use that as an example, as I haven't ever had to replace the rear pads. However, I know that I won't have to bother with effectively-taking off nearly the entire rear-wheel assmbly (as you do with drums...) to change out the brake shoes (the analogous part) in drum systems...

So I cannot fathom why manufacturers are still holding out in their assembly/manufacturing plants...

We would need *real* (vs. theoretical...) numbers from someone in-the-know who can tell us the *real* cost of converting a manufacturing plant to discs for an entire car manufacturer...

Again, if Mercedes was doing this in their taxi-model cars in 1982, why are there still some cars lagging behind some 30 years later?


-However all the above-post is my frustration-I am dealing with the wife's fit, which has rear drums... MY real questions:

1. Am I missing a trick in taking off the rear drums? The hubcaps seem crazy-tight in there...

2. Has anybody converted a Fit to discs in the rear? What is the cost to do so? Is there a how-to on this?
I have replaced rear brakes on 2 Fits; both were enormously improved braking on track; not that much better on the street ecept changing pads are far easier.
The reason drum brakes areused in the US is they are sold to manufacturers much cheaper even though not as good.
There is no real difference between drums and discs in parking brakes.
Drums are heavier than discs by a lot. Those drums are thick and cast iron ! Pick up a drum brake and disc brake and it won't take long to see drums are massively heavy.
Drums are increasingly getting scarce as many suppliers won't update the process to make them.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
BklynFit07
1st Generation (GD 01-08)
3
11-29-2017 04:17 AM
ETFitRS
3rd Generation GK Specific Suspension & Brakes Sub-Forum
12
01-26-2015 07:43 PM
JoeF
Fit Suspension & Brake Modifications
6
06-01-2009 11:41 AM
Turon
Fit Suspension & Brake Modifications
5
05-30-2007 03:57 PM
604FIT
Fit Suspension & Brake Modifications
1
04-21-2007 05:40 AM



Quick Reply: disc vs drum brakes



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:56 PM.