gearbox

iTrader: (95)

maybe he missed the list of common 8thgen problems including defective rear camber arms, cracking engine blocks, oil leaks, wheel falling off, immobilizer problems, engine mount failing, etc. not to mention the strange new technologies that never seem to work right like drive by wire throttle, tire pressure monitoring, worse gas mileage, and more. if this guy thinks the 7thgen is bad, wait til he sees what the 8thgen is like.

raigen18

haven't had any problems with my 7th gen either and from what i can tell from the previous owner's old receipts and records, they didn't have any major problems either aside from regular maintenance.

Civicnoobie

But stopping power sucks on drum brakes compared to disc. Its night and day difference in terms of pedal travel distance. If i could go Back time i would have stayed far away from drum brakes.

MelJ

I think our cars is like 80f 20r for brake ratio, or something like that. The difference can't be that noticeable. I didn't notice a drastic change in the four door 6th gen I did a brake job on that had drums. They bit just as hard.

Civicnoobie

If i lived elsewhere where the winters werent -35 them i wouldnt have bothered with the remote starter but IMO it was well worth the money. Its not very fun starting the car in -35 weather and have to sit inside for a 5 mins freezing your butt. Places here charge a minimum of $200 for just a remote starter installed.

Even if i had the keyless entry fob, i would have gotten remote start either way, the winters here are brutal. My alarm and remote starter may be the barebones basic model but it does the job.

MindBomber

That's not true at all, and the pedal travel distance doesn't relate to whether or not you have drums, that's the master cylinder. On our cars and 8th gens which have rear disks, you need to absolutely slam on the brakes to actually have them engage. Almost all semi trucks and trailers still use drum brakes with no trouble, and they have a hell of a lot more force to stop than our civics. For decades even race cars used drum brakes front and rear, and they reached the same speeds that any of our cars will legally or illegally reach on the street.

On factory non-performance cars discs are really just cosmetic, and in terms of actual practicality though, drums are superior.

lazlong

Ha! Try 156K. They only had maybe 1/16th of wear and very minor wear if any on the drum.

RamAirDave

some funny stuff in here! lol

Yes when I get the alarm installed it will be on silent with just chirp, in fact I may just have them not install a siren at all. Plenty of my cars have had just an LED or Scanner alarm light wired in with NO ALARM at all, ZERO break ins and looks cool too.

THANK GOD the 7th gens dont have TPMS on them!! I absolutely HATED our 2009 CNG Civic for this reason. The ride is just as harsh, handling is better but that is about it. My 2001 has more power than that car did and I prefer the Manual more reliable transmission. Was it nicer, sure, its almost 10 years newer, it better be! but it had drums in the back too. These cars dont really have a need for rear discs other than cosmetics. Like someone else mentioned, less maintenance needed!! you could unhook the rear brakes on these cars and most people would never even notice they werent working.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

i have driven many different cars and the ones with rear drums always stopped better and felt more responsive/stronger. im not sure if its due to the car weight or the braking system (bigger rotors, better pads, etc) but i never once was really impressed with rear discs. the 8thgen i drove had horrible brakes beyond belief. you had to smash the pedal down to get any sort of response, and even then it felt like it was raining and they were wet. same with an rsx i drove. unless you have some hi end sports car, rear discs arent great.

Shift-E

Both my younger brother and older sister complained when he drove my car. They said the brakes were too sensitive and strong for them True story.

MindBomber

Seriously, I drove my friends camry the other day, I couldn't stand the lack of sensitivity in his brakes. Our cars actually stop very well, they come stock with the same calipers GSRs had, and ours are only a bit heavier.

random

What about a CPO car?

Or what about getting a trusted mechanic to inspect a used (non-CPO) vehicle before purchase?

Going by your logic of buying new and keeping it twenty years, you still have another 11 years to go based on what's said in your signature ("2002 Honda Civic EX Auto"). You sure you want to keep it that long?

MelJ

If something new comes along and you can afford it, then sure. But you have to keep in mind that we did list priorities not too long ago. I'm sure in the future I'll actually need a larger vehicle when I start a family, but some times you gotta just deal with it.

RamAirDave

I am of the mindset that only fools buy new cars. the depreciation is insane and the cars simply are not worth that.

Yeah there is a reason I have had over 70 cars... I GET TIRED OF THEM! I sell them so I can get something else. Everything I have owned is nicer when I sell it than when I bought it so your logic in thinking that people only sell cars cause they have a problem is flawed.

There is not a car made in the world that is worth the sticker price. For the rare 2-3% of the population that buys a new car and keeps it 20 years, they are probably getting thier moneys worth...that is the ONLY way they will when buying new.

My last car 2001 BMW 540i Sport, sold new for $60,000!!! I bought it for $13k with 50k miles and ZERO issues. Hands down the best car I have ever owned and or driven. Build quality is crazy good in comparison to others. There was not a flaw on the car and it looked perfect inside and out, ran great and had no problems whatsoever. Guess I should have given him $60k for it since its the same car he bought new for that price.
He was disgusted at how little he could get for the car but sold it anyhow to make room for his daughters new car. I had ALL records on the car for maintenance and any warranty work. There was VERY little. I know the owner of the car now and its still perfect.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

i guess everyone is different. i never get tired of a car and usually end up getting attached to it after adding mods and such. i paid $18k new for my civic and if i keep it 20 yrs (easy), thats less than $1k a year to own a car (not including maint and gas which is needed for any car). my parents still have their 92 accord they paid $14k for new. and that car has been more than worth it.

the problem i have with used/preowned whatever cars is that i know too much about cars already, so the problem isnt just taking it somewhere to get checked out. the problem is me checking it out and finding a million problems that most people would not see or not care about. the only car i might consider used would be a highway commuter with average miles that got all the maint done on time and had records of it at the dealer. otherwise it becomes a guessing game when something breaks and you have no idea what the past history of the car is and what parts were used.

RamAirDave

you are one of the few probably less than 5 of you on the forum that will buy a new car and keep it 20 years. If that is the case, its most certainly worth it to buy it new and know the history and maint. of it.

Rare breed these days!

Enjoy

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

i do want another new car eventually, but im holding out for electric. the leaf is looking pretty good 5-10 yrs from now when they boost the range and fix all the kinks. im hoping i can keep my civic going at least 5 more yrs if not 10. the trans is a ticking bomb on this car lol. if the trans goes, im screwed. i guess its like gambling. my worst fear with getting a new car is i go from knowing everything about it to nothing at all. i mean some stuff is the same, but its a whole different set of rules. parts come out differently, specs and replacement stuff is not the same, all my books and how to knowledge is useless and have to learn all over again. when something goes wrong with this car, i can usually fix it the same day.

RamAirDave

Well I see a lot of people being drawn to Electric, I give it 5-10 years to fully fade out. they simply arent feasable unless you have a 10 mile a day commute. The cost is high, the batteries will be a nightmare and the charging stations I seriously doubt will come on.

CNG shoud be where its at in all honesty. They are not much more expensive and run great and the gas is retarded cheap. .78/gall here.

Going to be interesting to see what happens!

MindBomber

The Leaf currently has a 73 mile range and the Fit EV has a 100 mile range, that's a pretty solid distance, the majority of people's commutes is half that distance. Bremmo also has a full electric sport bike on the market with a lot of power and 100 mile range for only $10k. I think electric really is the future. Living in BC we have the lowest energy costs in North America, I could drive to work for $.50 cents in an electric car, in my car not breaking 100km/h on the highway it costs me $10-12...

Can't argue with that.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

the electrics out now meet the needs of 85% of the population based on their miles per day. 100 miles is a good range and for some people where work is only a few miles away, you could easily go a week per charge. this is now, im betting in 10 yrs the lithium technology will become even more compact and you will have 2-3x the range. prices arent bad either, around $25-30k but that will also drop as the tech gets cheaper. i think unfortunately internal combustion will be around for a very long time, but to me they have way too many disadvantages to outweigh the positives. electrics have a battery pack and a solid state electric motor. thats it. no motor, trans, fluids, cooling system, exhaust, nothing. subtract all those maintenance costs, add in an extra $1200 every 10 yrs for a battery rebuild if needed (average cost) and you have a winner. the cost of driving the car will be thousands less per year because electricity is dirt cheap compared to gas and you can drive any way you like without worrying that gallons of gas are being burnt. no more cold starts in the winter, no warmup time, no toxic gases, just get in and go. i know it does not solve the overall environmental problem (geothermal power plants that charge these cars can do it easily tho), but you have to admit paying pennies for LOCAL american power (coal or not) is way better than paying the middle east hundreds a month for oil.

RamAirDave

What about the areas that will most likely want them such as LA? They have power issues already? What is being done to up the amount of power that can be supplied to an already power starved market? Would suck to wake up in the morning and not be able to go to work since your car didnt get charged?

I know there are pros and cons to each. But where will all the batteries go?? You do realize that the plants that make the batteries create a horrible carbon footprint in order to produce a product that will not? Its a catch 22.

How will they dispose of the batteries when done? Can they be recycled?

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

usually yes you can recycle them. the local battery store here in our small town takes all types of batteries and sends them off to recycle (making some money in the process). they take alkaline, nimh, nicd, and lithium. maybe others. lithium batteries are becoming very thin with the newer designs. the leaf has them under the seats and almost not noticable. in LA most will charge their cars at night when there is not much power use and majority of people are sleeping. yeah batteries are made in factories, just like millions of other products we buy and use every day that cause much worse problems. adding one more battery to the list of millions will not do much.

MindBomber

The embedded energy associated with a delivering electrical energy to a consumer is also much lower than traditional fuels, assuming you live in a region which doesn't utilize environmentally unsound methods of energy production.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

clean coal technology ftw. i actually visited our plant here about 10 yrs ago and its pretty impressive. there is no black smoke or anything nasty at all. while its still technically dirty in the environmental sense, power plants have come a long way. geothermal is still the wave of the future and once you build it, you have virtually unlimited free energy coming from the ground. renewable and sustainable. the solar and wind unfortunately are just dreams. solar is nice for small stuff like powering your water heater and maybe your heating system if you spring for a full roof panel.

MindBomber

Coal, no matter how clean they can burn it, will always be dirty; the embedded energy involved with mining it and transporting it by train is just to high. Nuclear suffers from somewhat the same issues since plutonium is mined, but less so since very only very small quantities are necessary for the process.

Geothermal is definitely one of the best technologies by far, if building codes changed and allowed a single larger well to be used for a few homes in close proximity to each other than would be a huge step. I'm such a hippy, I'd actually love to travel to iceland to check out there massive geothermal power plants.

I think wind is a very good and proven technology, it's just very regional.

Solar I don't think of as a pipe dream, the efficiency is increasing dramatically and cost of production is decreasing. The technology just needs more time to be developed fully, I see them as being in the same stage as computers were twenty years ago.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

solar and wind can be useful in the distant future if they can increase power conversion levels. its just too impractical now. a full solar roof on a car can barely do anything but run the fan on low. wind is too unpredictable and cannot be used as a constant power source. here in central nevada, there are some really nice areas that are windy nearly all the time and no developed land for miles.

pjb3

There is no comparison between disk and drum brakes. With most drum brakes you would get maybe 2 stops from 70 or 80 mph or 1 stop from 100+ before they would fade, with disks you can pretty much stop all day. I'm sure that with modern materials drums perform better than they used to but materials used for disks have advanced even further.

As far as pedal travel, drum brakes will always have more because disk brakes pads remain next to the rotor while drum brakes have springs retract the shoes. If the drums as correctly adjusted the difference should be minimal.

Drum brakes do have some advantages. Depending on how the system is designed it is possible to use the friction from the pad to help apply the brake. Depending on the pivot point of the shoe it will tend to want to move out toward the drum during braking which can benefit very large, slow moving equipment. It is also much easlier to design a parking brake system with drums.

Big trucks use drums not because they are better but because it is easier to implement with an air brake system and if sized correctly they perform well enough. If you travel in the mountains you will see run away truck lanes so even with larger brakes they still overheat and fade.

Like most systems each has advantages and it is up to the engineers to make their decisions based on these but most of the advantages are heavily in favor of disk brakes.

RamAirDave

NOt true on the disc brakes stop all day. I can take you for a ride in just about any car and show you this is not true. In fact I used to catch my brakes on fire in my 91 LX mustang that I auto crossed. One hard brake from 80-100 and they were total crap for a few miles. In fact I boiled the fluid so bad one day, after sitting for 15 mins after a run, I left and when came to the stop sign...NO BRAKES AT ALL...straight to the floor. Took a good 10 miles of air coming in to them before they were at about 1/2 power.

Civicnoobie

I guess it depends on the car, i drove a 08 nissan sentry last winter and the thing stopped on a dime. So quick it was ridiculous how little brake pedal travel was required compared to my car now. Doing a full stop on that was like 1/4 the brake pedal travel compared to my car now. Not just that but rear disc brakes look sexy, im finding lately ive been checking out cars to see if they have rear discs (most do), i rarely see drums anymore.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

seriously get brake pedal travel out of your head. it has nothing to do with anything. braking performance is never measured by how far you have to push the pedal. most cars have hubcaps and steelies so you cant even see the drums or discs. disc brakes can take more abuse than drums under heavy braking, but even they will fade after a while. i dont think anyone here is putting their civic thru that much abuse to worry about brake fade. if you drive correctly, you should not need to use brakes that much on the street.