Is my mechanic full of --- uhh --- stuff?

[Blackjack200]

Took my car in to get inspected on Tuesday and the mechanic told me I had to replace my rear brake pads and rotors to pass.

I think he's full of shit.

#1 I had the brakes checked like a year ago at a different shop and they told me I had plenty of life on them. (I can't go to that shop now because they're too far away.)

#2 The rear brakes? Really? Don't the front brakes do all the work?

#3 I drive a stick shift and try to avoid using the brakes by downshifting and coasting to traffic lights, engine braking down hills etc.

I guess I'm just frustrated, if not for the $80 I already spent on the inspection (the follow up inspection is free) I would get another opinion, but I don't have the time to schlep around from shop to shop.

$270

 

[JulesMaximus]

You can wear out rear brakes quickly if the parking brake is out of adjustment.

What kind of car? How many miles?

Here's a thought, why don't you just pull off one of the rear wheels and look at the pads yourself if you're skeptical.

 

[Blackjack200]

That's interesting, I didn't know that. I always figured that since the wheel is not moving when the parking brake is on, there is no wear.

As for looking myself, I don't even have a driveway, so I generally don't do any kind of work on the car because I don't want to be out in the street. It's a good suggestion though.

 

[Throckmorton]

He means if the parking brake is activating the brakes while you're driving (like if you accidentally had the parking brake set while driving)

 

[Throckmorton]

I would think you'd hear a squeeling noise from an indicator if the rear pads were worn. There should be a piece of metal that scrapes the rotor when enough pad is worn off. If they were REALLY worn you'd see gouges on the discs.

 

[Gibson486]

Take the wheel off (if you need to) and look at the brakes. If you car has cheap rear pads, then I can see those pads wearing out before the front.

 

[Vic Vega]

That's interesting, I didn't know that. I always figured that since the wheel is not moving when the parking brake is on, there is no wear.

As for looking myself, I don't even have a driveway, so I generally don't do any kind of work on the car because I don't want to be out in the street. It's a good suggestion though.

lol

 

[ShawnD1]

Take the wheel off (if you need to) and look at the brakes. If you car has cheap rear pads, then I can see those pads wearing out before the front.

That or if your car is a pile of shit.
My Ford Tempo was shit. The front right pad wore down extremely fast compared to all other brakes. It took 1 year to go from 100% to destroying the rotor.

Worn brakes sounds a screaching sound. Wearing the rotors makes a grinding sound.

 

[JulesMaximus]

I would think you'd hear a squeeling noise from an indicator if the rear pads were worn. There should be a piece of metal that scrapes the rotor when enough pad is worn off. If they were REALLY worn you'd see gouges on the discs.

You don't want to wait that long before fixing them though. Once you start grinding metal on metal it's only a short bit of time before you have to replace both rotors which would easily double his original estimate.

 

[SickBeast]

I just got rear pads and rotors for $65 off Ebay and had them installed for $80 at Midas. They work great so far. The pads are semi-metallic and the rotors are cross drilled.

 

[BassBomb]

if you have recent accord or tsx their rear wear out faster than front

 

[ShawnD1]

You don't want to wait that long before fixing them though. Once you start grinding metal on metal it's only a short bit of time before you have to replace both rotors which would easily double his original estimate.

Nah rotors are cheap brah. On my Ford Tempo, the rotors were $12 each.

 

[jlee]

Nah rotors are cheap brah. On my Ford Tempo, the rotors were $12 each.

They install themselves..?

MSRP for OEM rotors for my MR2? $128.84.

 

[PhoKingGuy]

if you have recent accord or tsx their rear wear out faster than front

same with most VW products, so its not completely unheard of.

 

[Blackjack200]

What kind of car? How many miles?

'04 Saab 93

122k miles

 

[KDKPSJ]

While the front still does the job mostly, aren't the cars this day smart enough to use rear breaks more often than before? (Thanks to EBD, Stability control, etc) Or maybe I am over-estimating the smartness of the newer cars lol

 

[ShawnD1]

They install themselves..?

Um yes. Changing the rotors is about as difficult as taking off your summer tires and putting on your winter tires. It's as simple as unbolting the old rotor and putting on a new one.


A quick google search says my Tempo front rotors would cost $13. That's pretty much what I paid a few years back.
http://www.rockauto.com/catalog/raf...565&parttype=1896&a=FRc1139565k299973-1627085

Rotors for a Toyota MR2 are $20-$30
http://www.rockauto.com/catalog/raf...826&parttype=1896&a=FRc1276826k300522-1074472
That's for the 1989 MR2, but they're basically all the same.

For curiosity sake I googled for "corvette rotor" and the price for those is about $70 and up. Huge ass rotors for a Chevy Suburban SUV are $40.

 

[darkswordsman17]

While the front still does the job mostly, aren't the cars this day smart enough to use rear breaks more often than before? (Thanks to EBD, Stability control, etc) Or maybe I am over-estimating the smartness of the newer cars lol

Most of the tech your thinking of is meant specifically for loss of traction, which light/normal braking shouldn't be causing. ABS is meant to help that under hard braking. Most stability control would function in cornering and under acceleration and so unless you go sliding up to stops probably won't go on, and even then you'll have to be doing some pretty spirited driving for it to do much.

It depends on the car, but I don't think street cars have all that much brake bias. Maybe 60/40? With FWD they probably bias them a bit more toward the rear (so closer to 50/50) to keep tire wear more even and also under heavy braking high front bias would cause you to lose some handling and acceleration (you only have so much grip and if you rely on 2 tires to do the steering, acceleration, and most of the braking, you're obviously going to run out of available traction more quickly than a RWD/MR car).

But yeah, OP, just pull your wheels off and check them yourself.

 

[ShawnD1]

It depends on the car, but I don't think street cars have all that much brake bias. Maybe 60/40? With FWD they probably bias them a bit more toward the rear

It should be the other way around. Most of the weight is on the front wheels, so more force can be put on the front wheels before they lock up.


Typically that's why shitbox cars like my Corolla use disc brakes in the front and drum in the back. Disc is more of a higher performance type deal; the rear ones won't need to be disc because they're not used as much.

 

[T2urtle]

if you have recent accord or tsx their rear wear out faster than front

same with most VW products, so its not completely unheard of.

its more because of the traction control system. when the car detects you spinning it can either lower your throttle since its drive-by-wire or it can apply slight pressure to the rears in attempts to get traction. This is also on the G35 as well.

However i dont know of many saab owners or their system, other then the fact the wagaon 2.0T is a WRX.


Overall your mechanic might or might not be full of shit. you MIGHT need pads BUT maybe you can get by the inspection. 50% pad life is still good in my eyes but to some people its OMG gotta change and to the state it might be pass or fail.

Buy aftermarket parts from anywhere and take it to a shop, labor should be $100-150, parts well it can vary. You can also just put on pads w/o rotors if you just wanna pass inspection. I dont live in a state that inspects cars but checking rotor thickness is extreme.

 

[BassBomb]

its more because of the traction control system. when the car detects you spinning it can either lower your throttle since its drive-by-wire or it can apply slight pressure to the rears in attempts to get traction. This is also on the G35 as well.

However i dont know of many saab owners or their system, other then the fact the wagaon 2.0T is a WRX.


Overall your mechanic might or might not be full of shit. you MIGHT need pads BUT maybe you can get by the inspection. 50% pad life is still good in my eyes but to some people its OMG gotta change and to the state it might be pass or fail.

Buy aftermarket parts from anywhere and take it to a shop, labor should be $100-150, parts well it can vary. You can also just put on pads w/o rotors if you just wanna pass inspection. I dont live in a state that inspects cars but checking rotor thickness is extreme.

lol my car doesnt have tcs... it doesnt have to do with that (at least for my honda example)... its just some part of honda's design... i think its because the rear brakes are applied when you brake lightly but if you brake hard bias shifts to front... I do have DBW though

 

[kmmatney]

I would guess that at 122K, it probably could use new rotors and pads. I replaced all the rotors and pads in our AWD caravan at 130K. I replaced the pads in my camry at 90K, but kept the rotors,and plan on replacing them around 120K miles.

On my Camry, I don't need to take off the wheel to see the pads or rotors. You might not have to take off the wheel on your car either.

If you aren't able to do the work yourself, then you will always pay more money. I would suggest that you just install new pads and rotors yourself - you can usually get good pads and decent rotors for $60 or so, for everything. It should last the life of the car. There should be plenty of on-line guides on how to do it. Pads and rotors are really one of the easiest repairs - it only gets more difficult from there.

 

[darkswordsman17]

It should be the other way around. Most of the weight is on the front wheels, so more force can be put on the front wheels before they lock up.


Typically that's why shitbox cars like my Corolla use disc brakes in the front and drum in the back. Disc is more of a higher performance type deal; the rear ones won't need to be disc because they're not used as much.

I debated on that point, and its why I wrote after where you cut it off and put it depends on the car. On compact cars and other lightweight FWD I think that is true, but with heftier cars they might reduce it compared to that so that in situations where you brake hard you can still maneuver and possibly accelerate if necessary. Also it can help keep the back end from swinging around from the front biting hard.

Of course those issues are what led to developing traction control, ABS, stability control, and other tech.

lol my car doesnt have tcs... it doesnt have to do with that (at least for my honda example)... its just some part of honda's design... i think its because the rear brakes are applied when you brake lightly but if you brake hard bias shifts to front... I do have DBW though

My guess is to keep tire wear more even.

 

[PhoKingGuy]

lol my car doesnt have tcs... it doesnt have to do with that (at least for my honda example)... its just some part of honda's design... i think its because the rear brakes are applied when you brake lightly but if you brake hard bias shifts to front... I do have DBW though

Same with VW, the purpose is to reduce the amount of nose dive on breaking

 

[JulesMaximus]

'04 Saab 93

122k miles

Could be your rear calipers are binding a bit too and not releasing fully when you let off the brakes. With that many miles on a car driven in the northeast you might do well to have them rebuild the calipers...of course, they'll be able to determine that once they remove them anyway.