• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rant> Took my TSX for a service and found the rear brakes are at 25% - UPDATE

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: senseamp
I wore out the right side rear brake (where emergency brake is on Mazda3) real fast by using handbrake too much.
Kind of a bummer it only goes to one wheel.
Click to expand...

By using handbrake too much, do you mean when parked or while driving? Too lazy to push pedal when slowing down?
 
Originally posted by: Funyuns101
man, I'm looking to buy a used TSX... are you trying to scare me away?
Click to expand...

The TSX is a fine car, I wouldn't worry about the brakes unduely wearing out. You could always use different pad material if it becomes a problem.

It could also be that he does alot of city driving, or the dealer is just under estimating the amount of pad left.

It may be partly due to his braking habits (dragging brakes on long downhills without being in low gear, etc). As I mentoned before my TSX has 40k miles, and still has the original pads (and it has been on track at Laguna seca and buttonwillow several times...).

 
Not sure if this is a noob question, but why would the rear brakes wear out first on a front-engined car?

Even if there is more bias towards the rear brakes than for a typical car, there is still far more mass at the front of the car. Under heavy braking, wouldn't the front brakes still bear the brunt of the braking duty?
 
I got 65,000 miles out of the rears on my 03 Accord V6, and have 110,000 miles on the fronts with no need to change them yet. But I have a "just say no to the brakes" policy because I like to maximize fuel economy.

My first thought is that the place you took the car grossly underestimated the amount of pad you actually have left. The rears probably will wear faster, but you should be getting far more mileage out of them, and I suspect they were just testing to see how much lighter they could make your wallet.

My second thought is that you might just be REALLY hard on brakes. I've met people who drive like grandmas but torture their brakes because they always wait until the last second and then stomp them instead of maximizing their coasting potential.
 
FWIW, people have been bitching about stock accord brakes on 03-07 models wearing out early, i would just go to tirerack and pick up some hawk ebs pads. you'd get better performance than any OEM pad with those.

I have 40K miles and the pads on my accord are fine though, so i dunno. im actually waiting for them to run out so i can upgrade my braking system
 
Originally posted by: The Stigenator


I wonder if other cars are like that, even honda accords? Seriously who has heard of a FWD car who's rear brakes wear out faster than the fronts..
?
Click to expand...
yes, most Accord owners have noticed the same, visit driveaccord.net. many people reported same, rear brakes at 25% after few oil changes from purchase, gen 8.
 
The lighter you brake, the more proportionally you will wear the rear brakes. The heavier you brake, the more the proportioning valve will shift to front brake bias to prevent the rear brakes locking.
 
Well here is an update for you guys.

I scaled it up. The dealer called me yesterday, I'll call them today (i didnt get the message until late).
I also had a coworker who is a drag racer look at my car. He says there is NO WAY in hell that its at 25%, its more like 50% at the rear (Couldnt see the fronts to compare). So he says dealer is full of sh*t. I will take a picture of the rear pads for you guys. You can clearly see the pads.

But in anycase its not where it should be.. its not 25% its a bit more than that but its still quite a bit more than I expected.

Funny thing.. it was squealing yesterday through PCH though carmel and then by the time I got to bigsur, squeal was gone.. this morning I checked with my check my pads with the coworker and its not actually all that bad.

I think the dealer is full of Sh*t.

edit:

Car is a 2009 TSX. Picture of my car!
 


Update:

So i took it back to the dealer. I had them show me the pads on the car. Sure enough the pads are shot. The rear inside pads are shot, the outside ones are not.

The rear inside left was now at 10% (right above the sensor bar) and the rear inside right was about 15-20%. Needless to say I got them to replace them right away. I am out of 190 but I need to find a solution after I talk to Acura Client Services on Monday with the update.

It seems the piston is on the inside and for whatever reason thats causing an inside brake pad wear and not an ouside wear. too bad they dont sell just the inside pads by themselves.

Old brake pad pictures will follow when I get home. I have asked them to give me the pads. I am goign to send them to acura.
 
Sounds odd to me as ~80% of a cars braking force is at the front. On all of my cars I have had front pads go before rear and often better car makes have mini drums inside the rotor for the handbrake avoiding use of the rear pads.
 
It just goes to show how much $$$ driving a manual transmission will save you.

I have done my rear brakes once on my 2006 Civic over 90,000kms (60,000 miles or so?). They say my front brakes are still at 50% or so.

I never tailgate and always coast to red lights and stop signs. I also do a fair bit of highway driving which doesn't even use the brakes really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top