The newer Hondas I drove were all broken-in and my friends gave me permission to take them to the limit .

I also drove a 2006 Odyssey with Michelin tires (don't remember which model tires) and I too was dissapointed with the braking. Compared to a 2005 Sienna rental I've driven, I thought the Sienna had better brakes.

I try to test brakes in a variety of ways, from emergency and full force stops, to modulating the brakes to average, progressive braking.

Although I have yet to drive it, reading the reviews it sounds like the IS-F may have the best brakes ever from a Japanese automobile.

 

Here are some stopping distances from 60 mph on dry pavement from C.R. from a recent comparo, and a test of the new Accord:

137' '08 Accord V6 (4 cyl was 140')
126' Infiniti G RWD
131' ES350
135' Maxima
134' MKZ
143' Lucerne

 

Backs up what I've been saying. Accord had 2nd-worst braking distance; only the Lucerne was worse.

Here is also a recent MT sedan comparison: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...test_data.html

Braking 60 - 0 mph:

Accord: 137 ft
Camry: 124 ft
Altima: 131 ft
Malibu: 133 ft

Accord got the worst braking performance here.

 

60-0 mph Braking Distance

Edmunds:
2008 Honda Accord LX-P 126 ft
2007 Toyota Camry LE 122 ft
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do.../pageId=133982

Road and Track:
Honda Accord EX-L 132 ft
Toyota Camry SE 127 ft
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=339053

Edmunds:
2005 Honda Odyssey Touring 123 ft
2005 Toyota Sienna XLE 134 ft
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html

Car and Driver:
2006 Honda Civic LX 191 ft
2007 Toyota Corolla LE 200 ft
http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...Powertrain.pdf

Edmunds:
2007 Honda CRV EX-L AWD 131 ft
2007 Toyota Rav4 4WD Limited 128 ft
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...6/pageNumber=5

Popular Mechanics:
2008 Honda Pilot EX 134 ft
2008 Toyota Highlander Limited 130 ft
http://www.popularmechanics.com/auto...26.html?page=2
http://www.popularmechanics.com/auto...26.html?page=4

Actual results may vary

 

Just because the Honda trailed a few feet behind Toyota does not mean Honda’s brakes are mediocre. It’s all in relative terms. A bus is mediocre compared to Toyota Camry. A Toyota Camry is mediocre compared to an Infiniti G35. An Infiniti G35 is mediocre compared to a Porsche GT3, and so on so forth. Braking distance will always vary in the real world due to uncontrollable variable such as road slickness. Even the best brakes cannot save you from an unavoidable accident. Anyone will tell you that in the real world, it’s the reaction time that counts. If you keep your distance, you shouldn’t have to slam on your brakes. There is no statistical data that shows Honda having more accidents than Toyota due to braking distance.

Not all Honda/Toyota owners will replace their tires with the same one from the factory. For all we know, Joe who owns a Camry may replace his tires with some off-brand $30 tires while Mike who owns an Accord may replace his tires with Michelin Pilot Sport.

My point? If the numbers are well within each other, then don’t let it be a critical buying point because you’re not going to get the same braking performance every time. And it's not just brakes. This applies to HP, torque, etc. Buy because its the car you want, not because it beat out some car in some magazine comparison by a few points.

 

In 20 years of driving, I have owned 6 Honda/Acura products and 3 Toyota/Lexus products. Overall, I have had more warranty claims and issues with the 3 Toyota/Lexus products. My current 07 ES350 has had the most warranty claims than any other car my wife or I have owned. My wife's current ride, the 07 Pilot, has not had 1 issue in 13 months of ownership. She laughs at me that my ES is always in the shop and her truck is trouble free...and I am the car nut in the family.

I agree with CR, Honda products have been trouble free for me.

 

Congratulations to Honda for being the ONLY manufacturer to be given such a BOLD title.

 

I also plan to drive an IS-F when possible and that will be one of the things, of course, I look at. Mike (1SICKLEX) has already had the chance to drive an IS-F at a Lexus meet.

The brakes on the last-generation IS300 were superb in stopping power...one of the best of any Toyota/Lexus product......but the pedal wasn't quite as firm and responsive as that on the BMW 3-series, and, by 25,000 miles or so, the rotors were showing signs of slight warpage, even without abuse.

 

Good post. I agree with virtually all of it.

 

A bus compared to a Camry? Let's keep silly comparisons out of this . Comparing a Camry to a G35 is also a stretch. A G35 is a performance luxury sedan, so it should have better braking performance than a Camry, a family sedan.

Let's keep the comparisons apples to apples shall we?

You've mentioned extraneous variables and circumstances which again are not part of what I said. I am specifically referring to objective, apples to apples comparisons here.

And who said anything about Hondas getting into more accidents? I mentioned nothing with regards to that.

My original point was that I disagree with CR, and IMO braking performance is one characteristic that I point out as an example. I can also point out other characteristics which I disagree with that include performance, comfort, fuel economy, and ergonomics. I disagree that Honda is the best at those characteristics, but that's my opinion and not fact, just like CR's results are simply their opinion and not fact.

BTW, the links you posted show that regardless of different circumstances or variables, Hondas for the most part achieve longer brake distances than the competition.

I used to be a huge Honda fan a long time ago, but over the years many issues and criticisms I have had with Hondas began to accumulate. Unsatisfactory braking is just one example.

 

Of course it is their opinion, but CR has been in the auto-reviewing buisness a LONG time, and their opinions are not to be taken lightly....they generally don't talk through their hats. And, through experience, I have found many of CR's "opinions" to be facts.

 

Ergonomics and comfort are somewhat relative and can be argued one way or another. As for fuel economy or performance, I can point out many market segments where Honda fails to lead in both fuel economy and performance.

 

You're right..it's a silly comparison. But what's sillier to call Honda's braking 'mediocre' if their numbers are within Toyotas, and even besting them in a few class. You over exaggerating when you say Hondas have long braking distances, especially if they're less than 10 ft apart.

Take a look at my post where I listed braking numbers for various Honda/Toyota vehicles. You have Hondas that brakes better than Toyotas, and vice versa. Nowhere does one car trail the other by a very large distance. The data I provided is just as objective as your data, so I can't see how you're generalizing Honda as a whole.

Does braking performance not tie into accidents? If Honda brakes are really mediocre, dont you think there will be accidents with more Hondas at fault? Of course not, so why would a few feet difference be a big issue? You're making Honda out to be worse than they really are.


You're complaining over 3-4 feet worth of distance? Where is the 'long' and 'mediocre' you speak of?

 

I agree that comfort and ergonomics can, to some extent, be a personal opinion....for instance, my idea of ride comfort is what some others might find too soft. But CR tests are performed by a team of engineers...all of whom are likely to have differing opinions.....before a consensus is reached and the results are printed.

And as far as Honda engines go, they are generally very efficient and often do get great mileage...but some of that is because of comparatively low torque. Honda/Acura in-line fours, especially the VTEC ones, have long been known for flabby performance at low RPM's, very high redlines, and a need to spin the RPMs to near redline to get max power. The new turbo four in the Acura RDX, of course, is an exception...it DOES provide strong torque at low RPM's.....low RPM's in this case, meaning around 3000 or so.

 

Yes in a few cases Hondas have good braking distances, but like I said, for the most part the competition achieves better braking distances, and that's including Toyota. You posted links that show only a few feet difference between Honda and the competition, and I can post some other links like the MT one where the difference can be over 10 feet between Honda and it's competition.

Nowhere does it state that the word "long" signifies some sort of exact amount.

Whether it's a few feet or 20 feet, longer braking distances are STILL longer braking distances. I never said "significantly longer", I simply said longer (for the most part).

I haven't looked into accident statistics and I'm not even sure if those statistics are publicly available or if such statistics are even recorded. Maybe there ARE statistical differences in accidents between different brands but that sort of data could potentially be very damaging to certain brands.

Again, I did not talk about accidents. To be clear, I mentioned braking performance because IMO it leads to different confidence levels when driving different cars. For *me*, when I drive a Honda compare to another brand I feel less confident with it's braking abilities. Braking data out there seems to somewhat back up my lack of confidence. I'm not saying Honda makes bad brakes, I just don't have piece of mind with a Honda's brakes compared to driving another brand where I would have piece of mind. In a Toyota or Nissan I would have piece of mind with regards to braking that I just don't get with a Honda (this is after driving a variety of Hondas over the years). Perhaps it's more than just the braking distances; perhaps it also has to do with how the brakes interact with the chassis and suspension.

Again, TO ME, Honda's braking systems are mediocre. Stopping distances are a part of it, and the other part of it is just a lack of confidence that *I* have with Honda braking systems.