Ken, mine has 193K, and I likewise bought mine new back in '87. I don't
know how many years this was a problem area for the Accord or other
Honda/Acura models, but the brakes are definitely not up to par with the
rest of the car. I even researched aftermarket brakes and had some put on
(OEM size cross-drilled and slotted with GreenStuff pads) and they did work
better but they still worn prematurely and the rotors needed to be replaced
(apparently they couldn't be turned) only after about a year. Perhaps the
premature wear on the front brakes may be due to the lack of help from the
rear drums.

I do have to note however, that when the brakes have just been replaced you
can get them to lock up for perhaps the first 100 miles or so, then back to
the mediocre performance of norm. I guess one benefit to this is that you
won't go into any uncontrollable skids. ;-)

One last thing I want to point out about Honda/Acura cars is that there is
one additional weak point (besides the flimzy hood rod holder) on these
cars, and that is the auto trans. Not a big problem, but expect to replace
it in the 100k to 150k range. I can legitimately say this from the
experience I've had with these cars over the years. I've owned an '87 Acura
Integra (2nd gear clutch went out around 110k), an '88 Acura Legend (2nd
gear clutch went out around 117k), an '88 Honda Accord Coupe (2nd gear
clutch was going out around 115k), and my '87 Accord LX-i sedan (the tranny
was having problems around 150k). I have had different makes before too but
never experienced such consistant transmission problems like in the Honda
products.

If you experience transmission problems in your Honda/Acura vehicle,
especially in the late 1980's models, you will save money and a lot of time
to just have the entire transmission replaced instead of having it
rebuilt/repaired -costs about the same anyway (it was around $2,000! each
time for me).


"KenA" <kabrahamsen@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:cOidnTUCVOYcBSbfRVn-2w@comcast.com...
>I too have a 1987 Accord (DX), and the brakes have always been the weakest
>part of the car. I bought the car new, and the original brakes failed at
>about 15K miles (mostly highway driving). The dealer replaced them for
>free. The brakes have *always* been weak since the day I bought it. In the
>18+ years that I've owned it, I can say that the weak brakes was one
>contributing factor to a minor accident I had a few years back. I stepped
>on the brakes hard, but (as usual) the car slowed (gradually), but not
>commensurate with how hard I was stepping on the brake peddle. Trying to
>lock the wheels by braking at anytime during the last 18 years was/is
>merely a fantasy. I just isn't going to happen no matter what. Braking
>performance is the one thing I miss about my previous Toyota, as it would
>stop on a dime. If anyone finds a cure for this, please let me know, as I
>like everything else about my Accord (227k miles and still going
>strong....).
> Ken
> ===
> "DW" <dwinslow2@qwest.net> wrote in message
> news:VhOte.92$4H2.29835@news.uswest.net...
>> If you have own or have ever owned a Honda Accord for some time, surely
>> you know how weak the brakes are.
>>
>> Not only are they not very powerful (very difficult to get the brakes to
>> the point of lock-up), but the front rotors have to be replaced often as
>> compared to most cars.
>>
>> MY QUESTION IS: Does anyone know of any aftermarket brakes that are
>> better than the weak stock brakes for a 1987 ACCORD LX-i (besides from
>> Midas or Meineke)? Perhaps even a high performance brake kit upgrade?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>
>