Do I really need new brakes?
pdsni...@yahoo.com
"Replace front brake pads and machine rotors"
Is it standard procedure to machine the rotors when replacing pads?
Otherwise, why would I need it?
This car only has 14,337 miles (city miles) and the brakes seem fine
and are not making any noise.
Is the dealer likely trying to pull a fast one here, or is it possible
I do need new front brakes and have the rotors machined?
Please advise.
Thanks!
tww1491
<pdsni...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d74ec466-5311-43f5...@23g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
I would guess that you have a 2009 or 2008 of some variety of Honda. 14k
seems far too early to have to replace brakes. My 06 Accord I4 coupe is
still on its original front pads at 65,000 -- rears were replaced at 55k.
Our 0-3 Pilot went 75k on fronts/rears and did not require rotors to be
turned. Get a 2nd opinion from a reputable mechanic would be my thought.
Tegger
23g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
Normally the dealer wil indicate the thickness of the pads. Have they done
so in your case?
Honda explicitly specifies that the rotors should be turned each time the
pads are replaced. This is probably why the dealer wants to do it. There's
a good reason for it, too.
--
Tegger
AZ Nomad
It depends on the driver as well. If you have a teenager, an
incompetant two foot driver, etc., it is entirely possible to run
through a set of brakes in 15K miles.
pdsni...@yahoo.com
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 20:16:37 -0400, tww1491 <twau...@cox.net> wrote:
> ><pdsnick...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Thanks all for the info and opinions.
It's a 2007 but I drive very little.
They say that the brakethickness is 2mm. That was 4k ago at 10,209 so
I was wrong on the mileage before. NOW I have 15k on it. I didn't
believe it really needed brakes so I waited.
Thanks for the info about needing to machine the rotors. I never heard
of that. What is the reason?
I guess based on this I'll consider having the dealer do it since I
have a coupon to get it a bit cheaper than it was when they
recommended it.
pdsni...@yahoo.com
> ><pdsnick...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
What is a "2 foot driver"? I'm not an incompetent driver, but I do
make quick stops sometimes and drive mostly big-city miles. Lots of
starting and stopping.
Frankly I am very skeptical about my brakes being at 2mm or needing to
be changed already so maybe I'll ask someone else to check it for me
instead of going to the dealer.
Tegger
news:cb0e00d0-2c69-4fd9...@m31g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>
> Thanks all for the info and opinions.
> It's a 2007 but I drive very little.
> They say that the brakethickness is 2mm. That was 4k ago at 10,209 so
> I was wrong on the mileage before. NOW I have 15k on it. I didn't
> believe it really needed brakes so I waited.
>
> Thanks for the info about needing to machine the rotors. I never heard
> of that. What is the reason?
Are you asking /me/? You replied to /AZ Nomad/ with a point /I/ had made,
so I'm not too sure.
>
> I guess based on this I'll consider having the dealer do it since I
> have a coupon to get it a bit cheaper than it was when they
> recommended it.
Why don't you just wait until you hear/feel a loud grinding noise coming
from the wheels? That way you'll know for 100% certain that the brakes need
doing.
--
Tegger
E. Meyer
"Tegger" <inv...@invalid.inv> wrote:
There seems to be an unusual edge to your comments here. I'm sure he would
hear the wear indicators before any loud grinding noises & if you get it
done immediately when the wear indicators start to squeal, there is no
damage to the rotors.
I don't subscribe to the machining of rotors at every pad change. I've
never had a rotor machined since the first disk brakes on the '77 Chevy and
never suffered any consequences because of it (other than rotors that lasted
the life of the cars and more money staying in my pocket).
jim beam
> On 5/19/10 10:16 PM, in article Xns9D7DECB...@208.90.168.18,
> "Tegger"<inv...@invalid.inv> wrote:
>
>> pdsni...@yahoo.com wrote in
>> news:cb0e00d0-2c69-4fd9...@m31g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks all for the info and opinions.
>>> It's a 2007 but I drive very little.
>>> They say that the brakethickness is 2mm. That was 4k ago at 10,209 so
>>> I was wrong on the mileage before. NOW I have 15k on it. I didn't
>>> believe it really needed brakes so I waited.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the info about needing to machine the rotors. I never heard
>>> of that. What is the reason?
>>
>>
>>
>> Are you asking /me/? You replied to /AZ Nomad/ with a point /I/ had made,
>> so I'm not too sure.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I guess based on this I'll consider having the dealer do it since I
>>> have a coupon to get it a bit cheaper than it was when they
>>> recommended it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Why don't you just wait until you hear/feel a loud grinding noise coming
>> from the wheels? That way you'll know for 100% certain that the brakes need
>> doing.
>>
>
> There seems to be an unusual edge to your comments here. I'm sure he would
> done immediately when the wear indicators start to squeal, there is no
> damage to the rotors.
>
> I don't subscribe to the machining of rotors at every pad change. I've
> never had a rotor machined since the first disk brakes on the '77 Chevy and
> never suffered any consequences because of it (other than rotors that lasted
> the life of the cars and more money staying in my pocket).
>
i think the reason they say to turn the disks is the mistaken belief
that rotors are warping. sure, they can give brake shudder symptoms
that seem /similar/ to warping, but the actual problem is that of wheel
seating, not anything actually wrong with the disk.
i proved this yet again a couple of weekends ago - friend got new tires,
the wheels were air-tooled back on, and sure enough, the brakes
shuddered like crazy. i took them off, scraped the rust off the
interface, wheel and hub, applied a little anti-seize, torqued the lug
nuts back on correctly, and "hey presto", all problems gone. i think
that when disks get turned, it's usually accompanied by general
clean-up, and it's that coincidence fixing any problems, not the actual
machining process.
regarding machining though, it does have a place. some aftermarket pads
can lead to very uneven wear of the disk surface. that is when you need
to machine - to make them flat again. when returning to use of a
quality or oem pad of course...
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
AZ Nomad
>i think the reason they say to turn the disks is the mistaken belief
>that rotors are warping. sure, they can give brake shudder symptoms
>that seem /similar/ to warping, but the actual problem is that of wheel
>seating, not anything actually wrong with the disk.
>i proved this yet again a couple of weekends ago - friend got new tires,
>the wheels were air-tooled back on, and sure enough, the brakes
>shuddered like crazy. i took them off, scraped the rust off the
>interface, wheel and hub, applied a little anti-seize, torqued the lug
>nuts back on correctly, and "hey presto", all problems gone. i think
>that when disks get turned, it's usually accompanied by general
>clean-up, and it's that coincidence fixing any problems, not the actual
>machining process.
>regarding machining though, it does have a place. some aftermarket pads
>can lead to very uneven wear of the disk surface. that is when you need
>to machine - to make them flat again. when returning to use of a
>quality or oem pad of course...
I had a mechanic tell me that I should have my rotors turned as the pads
would wear faster with even mild grooving.
Not sure I agree. I never turn rotors; I replace them and only replace
them if I can detect vibration during braking. I'd rather replace
pads twice as frequently than lose metal on the rotors to turning them.
jim beam
> On Thu, 20 May 2010 07:19:59 -0700, jim beam<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> i think the reason they say to turn the disks is the mistaken belief
>> that rotors are warping. sure, they can give brake shudder symptoms
>> that seem /similar/ to warping, but the actual problem is that of wheel
>> seating, not anything actually wrong with the disk.
>
>> i proved this yet again a couple of weekends ago - friend got new tires,
>> the wheels were air-tooled back on, and sure enough, the brakes
>> shuddered like crazy. i took them off, scraped the rust off the
>> interface, wheel and hub, applied a little anti-seize, torqued the lug
>> nuts back on correctly, and "hey presto", all problems gone. i think
>> that when disks get turned, it's usually accompanied by general
>> clean-up, and it's that coincidence fixing any problems, not the actual
>> machining process.
>
>> regarding machining though, it does have a place. some aftermarket pads
>> can lead to very uneven wear of the disk surface. that is when you need
>> to machine - to make them flat again. when returning to use of a
>> quality or oem pad of course...
>
> I had a mechanic tell me that I should have my rotors turned as the pads
> would wear faster with even mild grooving.
really depends. the pads they use on german cars are really high silica
content and very abrasive. they munch disks frighteningly fast. the
up-side is that you never have any problems with corrosion or uneven
braking. and you don't need to machine the disks either. the down-side
is that you pretty much always have to replace disks and pads at the
same time.
>
> Not sure I agree. I never turn rotors; I replace them and only replace
> them if I can detect vibration during braking.
try what i outlined above and see if that fixes it.
> I'd rather replace
> pads twice as frequently than lose metal on the rotors to turning them.
theoretically, there's nothing wrong with machining the disks, provided
they remain within spec. but the problem is that they often end up
being machined slightly off center, and i've seen that many many times.
so, end of the day, i'm with you - i simply replace.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
pdsni...@yahoo.com
before there is any real damage, then that solves my problem! I will
happily wait!
But my questions:
Are we SURE my car, a 2007 Honda LX Sedan has this feature of making a
noise first?
And what kind of noise should I expect?
If there is this feature then why would everyone not just wait for
that before changing brakes?
If this is true then it is clear that the Dealer is just trying to
drum up business before its time. Also, I suspect that the "machining
rotors" is also just a way to charge more, since people here seem to
indicate that it is not conclusively efficacious to do so.
p.s. Is this one of those forums where "top posting" is considered
wrong? I always think it's easier to read this way, so sorry if I
offend.
On May 20, 6:29 am, "E. Meyer" <epmeye...@msn.com> wrote:
> On 5/19/10 10:16 PM, in article Xns9D7DECBF63FDteg...@208.90.168.18,
> ... I'm sure he would
Tegger
news:C81AA35E.1B6B4%epme...@msn.com:
> On 5/19/10 10:16 PM, in article Xns9D7DECB...@208.90.168.18,
> "Tegger" <inv...@invalid.inv> wrote:
>
>>
>> Why don't you just wait until you hear/feel a loud grinding noise
>> coming from the wheels? That way you'll know for 100% certain that
>> the brakes need doing.
>>
>
> There seems to be an unusual edge to your comments here.
It was a figurative roll of the eyes at the OP's suspicion that he was
getting ripped-off just because he's managed to go a bit further on worn
brakes, without problems.
> I'm sure he
> would hear the wear indicators before any loud grinding noises & if
> you get it done immediately when the wear indicators start to squeal,
> there is no damage to the rotors.
The wear indictator is only on the INNER pad. If that pad sticks (common
on Hondas), the OUTER pad will be down to the steel first. And there
goes your rotor.
OP says his dealer reported 2mm left on the pads. That's pad-change
time. Sure you'll get a little bit more mileage out of the pads, but you
run a serious rusk of damage to those $90 rotors, especially at the
leading edges of the pads, which wear thinnest.
>
> I don't subscribe to the machining of rotors at every pad change.
But, as I explained, /Honda/ does. Honda specifically instructs its
dealers to skim the rotors (on-car) at every pad-change. The reason for
this is to avoid expensive comebacks.
A home grease monkey isn't going to get angry at himself if his brakes
vibrate soon after a pad change, but when an owner has spent a tidy sum
getting a pro to do the work. you can be certain he's going to show up
at the service desk, and angry.
> I've never had a rotor machined since the first disk brakes on the '77
> Chevy and never suffered any consequences because of it (other than
> rotors that lasted the life of the cars and more money staying in my
> pocket).
>
Honda brakes are notoriously poorly-designed, IMHO. They need more
attention than most.
--
Tegger
Tegger
news:61bcb738-34c4-42e0...@u3g2000prl.googlegroups.com:
> If it's true that there are "wear indicators" that will make a noise
> before there is any real damage, then that solves my problem! I will
> happily wait!
But the indicator is only on the INNER pad. If the OUTER pad wears
first, you're screwed. All it takes is the leading-edge of the pad-
backing to touch the rotor, and the rotor is damaged. Those rotors are
$90 each, plus installation.
> But my questions:
> Are we SURE my car, a 2007 Honda LX Sedan has this feature of making a
> noise first?
> And what kind of noise should I expect?
Embarrassingly-loud squealing if the inner pad wears first; loud
grinding and vibration if the outer pad wears first.
> If there is this feature then why would everyone not just wait for
> that before changing brakes?
Because that's a good way of risking damage to your rotors. Those wear
indicators are not nearly as reliable as they'd have you believe.
Brake pads wear just like bicycle brake pads: thinnest at their leading
edges, thickest at their trailing edges.
> If this is true then it is clear that the Dealer is just trying to
> drum up business before its time. Also, I suspect that the "machining
> rotors" is also just a way to charge more, since people here seem to
> indicate that it is not conclusively efficacious to do so.
Honda specfically instructs its dealers to turn the rotors with every
pad change. There is a good reason for the instruction, too.
> p.s. Is this one of those forums where "top posting" is considered
> wrong? I always think it's easier to read this way, so sorry if I
> offend.
Just follow the tendency of the thread. If your respondents bottom-post,
then follow suit, to keep things consistent. If they top-post, then top-
post as well.
For top-posters, I prefer to delete all but their latest comments, then
bottom-post to that.
--
Tegger
jim beam
<snip>
>
> Honda brakes are notoriously poorly-designed, IMHO.
dude, you cannot be serious. honda brakes are much better at their
primary job, stopping the car quickly and evenly, than most others out
there. including toyota.
now, do they need attention? well, the wheels need to be torqued right
to avoid juddering problems, but that's not the brakes' fault. do they
seize? i've never known a brake that doesn't, if neglected. that's not
possible to design against unless you either have drum brakes or spend a
LOT of money on a different sealing system. bottom line, they're not
"poorly designed". they may not be neglect-proof, but the job for which
they're designed, they do excellently.
> They need more
> attention than most.
relative to? you must be thinking of the rear mechanical/hydraulic
disks on your integra - well, most hondas, by volume, don't have those.
and for those that do, from a performance perspective, they're a smart
solution to the mechanical problems of that role. modern drum/disk
hybrids are probably one step better in terms of reliability, but in
terms of a single application solution, the honda solution gives the
benefits of disk /and/ a hand brake that actually works. unlike many
other previous attempts at that application.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
E. Meyer
"Tegger" <inv...@invalid.inv> wrote:
I've never had any problems with un-machined Honda rotors compared with
other makes. This includes '81 Accord, '87 Civic, '95 Integra, '96 Odyssey,
'00 TL, '06 CRV and '08 Odyssey. OK. Honda recommends it, but my experience
says they don't vibrate when you change the pads, the wear is acceptable (at
least 90k miles between pad changes), and I have not experienced a rotor
destroyed because of a stuck caliper eating off the outer pad. I have
experienced a stuck caliper and the wear indicator signaled the wear prior
to any damage.
I do agree that 2mm is time to replace the pads. That's pretty thin.
john
likely to warp. If everything is within specification and there are no
excessive scoring (catching finger nails), then there is no need.
However, 2mm left the pads need to be changed. Now. The only problem
is to make sure the tech measured it accurately. I can tell you that's
not always the case. Some would tell you there is less pad material
left than it really has.
john
to-yield bolts for some high end calipers. But the braking performance
is far superior, and I suppose on the Autobahn that's a must.
jim beam
> Yes, pads/rotors are replaced each time together. Sometimes new torque-
> to-yield bolts for some high end calipers. But the braking performance
> is far superior, and I suppose on the Autobahn that's a must.
oh, it's an absolute must - it's illegal to drive a honda on an autobahn
because they don't have them.
>
>
>
> On May 20, 8:19�am, jim beam<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> really depends. �the pads they use on german cars are really high silica
>> content and very abrasive. �they munch disks frighteningly fast. �the
>> up-side is that you never have any problems with corrosion or uneven
>> braking. �and you don't need to machine the disks either. �the down-side
>> is that you pretty much always have to replace disks and pads at the
>> same time.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
jim beam
> Turning the rotor only takes away metal and makes the rotor more
> likely to warp. If everything is within specification and there are no
> excessive scoring (catching finger nails), then there is no need.
>
> However, 2mm left the pads need to be changed. Now. The only problem
> is to make sure the tech measured it accurately. I can tell you that's
> not always the case. Some would tell you there is less pad material
> left than it really has.
really??? you're not having a little laugh with us are you??? it
wouldn't be the time-honored means by which the nations dealership and
brake shop owners may their mcmansion mortgages and put their kids
through college would it???
>
>
>
> On May 20, 8:39�pm, "E. Meyer"<epmeye...@msn.com> wrote:
>> I've never had any problems with un-machined Honda rotors compared with
>> other makes. �This includes '81 Accord, '87 Civic, '95 Integra, '96 Odyssey,
>> '00 TL, '06 CRV and '08 Odyssey. �OK. Honda recommends it, but my experience
>> says they don't vibrate when you change the pads, the wear is acceptable (at
>> least 90k miles between pad changes), and I have not experienced a rotor
>> destroyed because of a stuck caliper eating off the outer pad. �I have
>> experienced a stuck caliper and the wear indicator signaled the wear prior
>> to any damage.
>>
>> I do agree that 2mm is time to replace the pads. �That's pretty thin. �
>
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Timothy J. Lee
<pdsni...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>This car only has 14,337 miles (city miles) and the brakes seem fine
>and are not making any noise.
City miles do mean more brake use and pad / rotor wear than highway miles.
However, the only way to be sure is to measure the brake pads and compare
the measurements to the wear limits in the service manual.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
A. Nonimus
OK. Honda recommends it, but my experience
> says they don't vibrate when you change the pads, the wear is acceptable (at
> least 90k miles between pad changes), and I have not experienced a rotor
> destroyed because of a stuck caliper eating off the outer pad. I have
> experienced a stuck caliper and the wear indicator signaled the wear prior
> to any damage.
>
> I do agree that 2mm is time to replace the pads. That's pretty thin.
See - this is why I suspect my Honda Dealer is lying to me. As you
say, "90k miles between pad changes"...
This is exactly what my former-mechanic friend said to me, that no way
I should need brakes at 14k miles.
I guess I won't know until I get someone I can trust to open up the
brakes and show them to me.
Yeah, they have to show them at the Dealer but I figure they just keep
an old one with 2mm laying around so they can use that to show me...
Tony Harding
I always tell the dealer or other potential miscreant that I want to see
them on the car.
E. Meyer
7f35a006-e889-409d...@g1g2000pro.googlegroups.com, "A.
Nonimus" <mindful...@gmail.com> wrote:
Just ask them to show you while they're still on the car. If they have
already shown you a pads off the car, then you know what they look like. On
the car look to see what's between the plate and the rotor (big shiny disk
that gets squeezed by the brake pads). Actually you can easily look at the
outer pad yourself by simply removing the wheel as if changing a flat.
If, as has been discussed, the inner or outer pad is gone and the other one
on the same wheel looks like new, you have a stuck caliper. If that is the
case, repair should be covered under the new car warranty.
A. Nonimus
Okay, I did finally take my car in and have the brakes looked at by an
independent mechanic.
The guy I wanted to take it to who I trusted is no longer in business
so I took it to the guy who took over his business.
He showed me the brakes. I really didn't know exactly what I was
seeing but I could see the pads were down pretty low. He said 3mm so
that's 1mm more than the Dealership said, after having put about 3000
or so more miles on them. However he said the rotors were also shot
and needed to be replaced. Whether they were or not, I don't know but
the guy seemed trustworthy.
He also showed me the tread left on 2 of my tires and said I could get
a bit more out of them but I may as well replace them now. I could see
that he was right on that, so I figured if the tires were shot the
brakes probably were too.
He replaced 2 tires that had worn unevenly and the brakes and rotors,
an air filter, cleaning up the rear brakes and doing some kind of
maintenance on those, and replacing oil all for around $550. I really
don't know if the rotors needed replacement or not but I decided to
trust him because what else am I gonna do? If I take it back to the
dealer and they say it needs new rotors they would charge me almost
double what he was charging me, and even if they were able to
resurface the rotors (which this guy said there was not enough metal
left to do), then they'd charge me about 2/3 of what it cost me to
replace them here, just to resurface them.
So all in all, if the guy does a good job, I guess it is worth it to
get new brakes and tires etc. now instead of waiting til they become
completely useless.
jim beam
tire wear does NOT affect brake wear! or vice versa.
>
> He replaced 2 tires that had worn unevenly
did he do an alignment check? faulty alignment is the only thing that
causes uneven tire wear.
> and the brakes and rotors,
> an air filter, cleaning up the rear brakes and doing some kind of
> maintenance on those, and replacing oil all for around $550. I really
> don't know if the rotors needed replacement or not but I decided to
> trust him because what else am I gonna do? If I take it back to the
> dealer and they say it needs new rotors they would charge me almost
> double what he was charging me, and even if they were able to
> resurface the rotors (which this guy said there was not enough metal
> left to do), then they'd charge me about 2/3 of what it cost me to
> replace them here, just to resurface them.
>
> So all in all, if the guy does a good job, I guess it is worth it to
> get new brakes and tires etc. now instead of waiting til they become
> completely useless.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
AZ Nomad
>On 06/15/2010 03:34 PM, A. Nonimus wrote:
>>> On 5/24/10 4:14 AM, in article
>>> 7f35a006-e889-409d-8294-6e2fbd977...@g1g2000pro.googlegroups.com, "A.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nonimus"<mindfulness...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/20/10 4:50 PM, in article Xns9D7EB5885B247teg...@208.90.168.18,
>>>>> says they don't vibrate when you change the pads, the wear is acceptable (at
>>>>> least 90k miles between pad changes), and I have not experienced a rotor
>>>>> experienced a stuck caliper and the wear indicator signaled the wear prior
>>>>> to any damage.
>>>
>>>
>>>> See - this is why I suspect my Honda Dealer is lying to me. As you
>>>> say, "90k miles between pad changes"...
>>>> This is exactly what my former-mechanic friend said to me, that no way
>>>> I should need brakes at 14k miles.
>>>
>>>> I guess I won't know until I get someone I can trust to open up the
>>>> brakes and show them to me.
>>>> Yeah, they have to show them at the Dealer but I figure they just keep
>>>> an old one with 2mm laying around so they can use that to show me...
>>>
>>> already shown you a pads off the car, then you know what they look like. ???On
>>> the car look to see what's between the plate and the rotor (big shiny disk
>>> outer pad yourself by simply removing the wheel as if changing a flat.
>>>
>>> If, as has been discussed, the inner or outer pad is gone and the other one
>>> case, repair should be covered under the new car warranty.
>>
>> Okay, I did finally take my car in and have the brakes looked at by an
>> independent mechanic.
>>
>> The guy I wanted to take it to who I trusted is no longer in business
>> so I took it to the guy who took over his business.
>> He showed me the brakes. I really didn't know exactly what I was
>> seeing but I could see the pads were down pretty low. He said 3mm so
>> that's 1mm more than the Dealership said, after having put about 3000
>> or so more miles on them. However he said the rotors were also shot
>> and needed to be replaced. Whether they were or not, I don't know but
>> the guy seemed trustworthy.
>>
>> He also showed me the tread left on 2 of my tires and said I could get
>> a bit more out of them but I may as well replace them now. I could see
>> that he was right on that, so I figured if the tires were shot the
>> brakes probably were too.
>tire wear does NOT affect brake wear! or vice versa.
>>
>> He replaced 2 tires that had worn unevenly
>did he do an alignment check? faulty alignment is the only thing that
>causes uneven tire wear.
or blown struts/shocks.
jim beam
ok. that's typically called "cupping" as opposed to "uneven" though.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
AZ Nomad
appologies for being so anal. I latch on to all absolute statements.
I tried really hard to think of other examples. Couldn't. :-)
Well, maybe one.
Defective tires can also cause uneven wear. ;-P