I have a 2008 Accord which has been really good. The problem is the stupid dealer. There is a known problem with the rear brakes on the accord, they wear out fast. Mine were shot at 28k and I paid to have them fixed. I been talking to other owners that had there breaks wear out early and they told me that Honda did the backs for free.
The brakes starting squealing so i took it back and they said everything is fine. Today I asked the service advisor why some people are getting free brakes and why did I have to pay for mine. He was at a lost for words and couldn’t offer me an explanation. He pulled out some brake pads and told me that its normal to have to replace the backs two times before the front. What a crock.
The other issue is my fog light broke it got hit by a rock. I bought a new one to the tune of 180.00 dollars Ouch!!! I’m a little busy so I asked how much to replace and was told 150.00 dollars. They told me they have to remove the front bumper. Who designed this car?
Sorry for the rant. Do they make a simple car which won’t kill you on parts and is simple to fix?
I think this is my last Honda and I told them that too.
28,000 miles is a little early for brakes on most cars, but is still not too terribly bad. Disc brakes do wear out much faster than drum brakes, so gone is the days of getting 100,000 miles out of a set of rear brakes. 30,000 to 40,000 is typically the norm for a set of rear discs these days, so you’re not too far off. Those free brakes may have been done on cars that burned through them in 10,000 miles or less. That is possible and would be considered unacceptable to most anybody. They also wear out faster because they are softer, to cut back on noise. Brake noise typically happens on gentle application, rear brakes have to be applied more gently than fronts to prevent wheel lockup, so they are more prone to noise. I bet if your current brake pads are noisy, they will last longer than the first ones. Honda probably figured most customers would rather replace their rear brake pads every 30,000 miles than listen to a high-pitched squeal every time they came to a stop.
As for the fog lamp, I’m sure the bulb can be changed without removing the front bumper, but replacing the entire housing will certainly require removing the front bumper. Why was it designed this way? Aerodynamics and aesthetics. Most any modern passenger car built in the last five to ten years equipped with fog lamps would probably require the front bumper to be removed to replace the bulb housing, but they sure look sleek.
I keep my cars for only 4 or 5 years and i can’t tell you when I replaced the brakes on any other of my last cars. I have a light touch and most miles are highway.
The bulb is fine on the fog lamp, its the glass cover that shattered.
You seem quite unreasonable in your demands and expectations.
35-40K miles for rear DISK brakes is about average, so you’re not completely out there in left field. And unless you were down to rivets on those pads, I suppose you could have easily gotten another 5k of the highway miles you’re driving.
If you’re that busy that you cannot spend 30 minutes to remove 10 screws for your front bumper, you only have 2 choices: pay the dealer or drive as it is.
The third choice is to call around a few body shops. I bet you’ll easily find one which will do it for half price the dealer wanted from you.
My '97 Accord is on its second set of rear brake pads while the fronts are original (95K miles). The rear pads are not very thick, which is why they wear out first.
In two years you can move on to another brand and find fault there instead of with your Honda.
Brakes and fog lights are chicken feed. Wait until the timing belt breaks (!) or if you are lucky, you simply must replace it, ($800) Ouch! Now, lets talk about the $3500 automatic transmission…
The folks that designed the car did not design to be easily repairable when struck by rocks. Nobody does.
Your brake wear is not unresonable. And I’ve never heard of a warranty that replaced worn out brake pads. They’re considered “normal wear” items.
Do you really think any other make would be impervious to rock strikes, or be designed for ready repair if one happens? Or cover brake pad wear under warranty?
I too think your expectations are unrealistic. No disrespect intented. I’m guessing that your experience with car ownership is limited. 40 years from now I suspect you’ll realize that the items causing your rant are minor.
Count me in as one who thinks you’re being a bit unreasonable about this.
In other words, “The sky is falling! The sky is falling!”
So that’s why some brands continue to use old fashioned, backward, obsolete, Luddite satisfying, unsporty and unstylish drum brakes in the back instead of disk brakes. It is good to know that. It’s unfortunate that rear drum brakes and timing chains too are not an option for any brand.
I guess I was wrong to complain. I wasn’t looking to get my money back on the brakes, i only wanted them to explain to me why others and some had just as many miles as mine and they got there brakes free. I do expect good service from a well trained staff and I find it hard to believe in this day and age it cost almost 400.00 to replace a fog light. I told them to take the light back and give me my money back, but they want to charge me a restocking fee. Live and learn.
I almost forgot that people like me keep people like them working. In addition to the Accord I also bought a 09 Pilot from them.
Interesting response. Whether the car has drum or disc brakes out back the front will still absorb most of the energy. In most cars the front brakes wear faster than the rears, often twice as fast, but some manufacturers have apparently undersized the rear brakes on some models.
As to why many still have drum brakes out back, I’m not sure there’s a reason. Tradition perhaps. Actually, more and more vehicles now are coming out with discs on all fours.
You Are Having Problems With The Wrong Brakes ! The Accord Front Brakes Are The Ones That Are Lousy !
I agree that rear brakes wearing out at 28,000 miles is ridiculous unless you drive a cab or deliver mail. Our cars usually go well over 100,000 miles on original rear brake pads.
Anyhow, owners of many 2008, 2009, 2010 Accords are eligible for warranty front brake rotor refinishing, new front brake pads and installation of “V springs” to correct their defective brakes. There exists a Technical Service Bulletin that lists Accord model-years, models, and VIN ranges of cars that could have defective brakes and gives a defect code.
Front brakes that cause steering wheel or brake pedal vibration or a squealing noise are considered for this warranty fix.
There’s still hope for you. If you’re lucky your front brakes will go to heck in a handbasket and you’ll get free ones while you’re under warranty, but hurry they may be almost worn out !
CSA
Thanks for the info CSA. I did mention to the service advisor that I saw a tsb on the front brakes and he said ‘thats news to me’ I do get a little vibtation and I do hear squealing. Just can’t win.
Not so! I got 88K miles out of by brakes on my Neon (which I drove, shall we say, in a spirited fashion?). I couldn’t get the wheel off when I went to do them, which was good because I threw a rod the same day and was able to return the parts - but the brakes themselves went 88K.
The reason is that drum brakes are cheaper than disc brakes. But discs disapate heat much better and are less prone to fading. Ten years ago you still had a fair number of cars that had rear drums, now it’s only the cheapest/smallest cars on the market that still have them.
I wonder…I cannot imagine what would make manufacturing or installing drum brakes less expensive than discs. And I speak with 23 years of experience in product design and manufacture that includes systems incorporating castings, hydralics, and machinings as well as various combinations of all three.
But I have to assume that cost is the reason. Perhaps manufacturing disc brakes with little drum brakes in the center for parking brakes is more expensive than manufacturing straight drum brakes.
I have an older Accord and I usually get 75k for a set of rear shoes (drums on my '89 Accord rear). While I agree that 28k is a short life for your Accord, why not get a set of lifetime pads and just have them replaced (for free, short of labor)? So far as the fog light, I agree. Honda is tough to get at some bulbs, I had to replace a front parking light Last year (first time in 20 years!) on the '89 and it was a tough job, had to go in from the rear of the front bumper. I don’t think that design engineers have done much repair work, lots of stuff is like that. Rocketman
Guess what Caddyman, the Honda Accord longer uses a timing belt on the 4 cylinder models(majority sold). This has been true since 2003. Also 2005+ all Honda finally woke up and all 4 cylinder engines in all models are timing chains.
The V6 unfortunately still has a timing belt and expensive one at that to change out.