9,000 miles on my 05 5AT sedan. I drive as average as the car will let me. I always roll to a stop. Dealer tells me I have 80% in the front and 60% rear in the rear. 60% wear means I only have 12k left. So the rear pads only last 20k. That is almost as bad as the 03/04s.

 

I am at about the same mileage and have noticed myself that the brakes are down quite a bit. I am considering changing to Hawks and maybe even drilled rotors. I would rather spend and few extra bucks and get some pads that will last. I have heard similar stories about early brake wear on the Gs.

 

my mother has 75,000 + miles on her chevy suberban and has never had her brake pads changed ?? Built like a Rock ???

 

i had 65K on my corolla before it needed any brakes. 3 years stop and go in chicago. Amazing

 

I did my Brake @ 88k on my 1982 Datsun 210 here is a nice pictures have fun lol

 

I find this hard to believe, the wheels don't get dirty at all, I wouldn't totally believe the dealer, I'd have someone else check that out, how could the rears wear faster than the fronts? I had an '05 loaner last week, with 7k on it, and the front pads were still almost 10mm, outer anyway.....

 

This past weekend I put winter tires on my G and while I was there I checked the brakes. I've got 6200 miles on my '05 6mt and the brakes look like brand new, showing very little ware. Keep in mind I usually DO NOT down shift when approaching traffic/lights, so I'm not saving anything by having the transmission do the braking. I can't belive that in another 3000 miles my brake ware will go from ~ 5% to ~60%.

 

Well, the dealer is not going to get my business when I change the brakes. I am going put hawks. I hope I don't have to get new rotors. As for why the rear wears out faster than the front. Is it because it's RWD? I am asking because I really don't know. I know FWD wears out the brake much faster than the rear. As for the manual engine braking. I had a prelude 5sp, I don't downshift either but I shift to neural when approaching a traffif light/stop. I think that itself save some brakes.

 

I've never had a FWD car, always RWD, and the front brakes always wore out first, by a long shot actually, the front brakes work harder, regardless of drive, I think anyway.

 

shifting to neutral when approaching a stoplight will wear your brakes more as it forces your brakes to do all the retardation in speed. Even if you leave it in the high gear you were in, and dont downshift, that little engine retardation is still there in the higher gear you were in.

There are some cars out there that do wear their rears faster than the fronts, not all cars have the same brake biasing.

 

As a general statement, and except in very unusual situation/circumstances, the vast majority (better than 95%, I'd say) of the automobiles on the road will wear their front brakes out quicker than the rears. True, there are a few cars with the bias toward the rear (for various special circumstances or reasons), but the weight transfers to the front under braking regardless of how you set the bias (simple physics), so short of eliminating front brakes entirely, the front brakes will always wear out first (usually 2 or even 3 times faster than the rears), because the majority of the weight is on the front wheels when braking, and therefore they do all the work. To answer his question-within-a-question, it really doesn't matter which wheels drive the car, or even if the car is driven by the wheels at all (maybe a jet engine, or a propeller?), the weight transfer will occur upon braking, regardless, and the fronts will wear out first (unless we reverse the jet thruster, maybe?)

Again, due to the physics involved, you can only bias the braking towards the rear until you reach the point of loss of traction (which happens early, once the weight transfers forward under braking, leaving little weight on those rear wheels). Anti-lock brakes don't help this situation, either, as they will then just automatically shift the excess braking to the front wheels, and voila' - front brake wear!

 

Okay, I just checked my rear pads (outer) and they are still right at 10mm at 4k, just like my fronts, maybe you have the old service guy from my dealer who just guessed.

 

Hey, you might be on to something there, ABQ!

Every time I ask my friend the used car dealer when I should buy a used car, he always says "now" is the right time - probably the same with the brake guys, transmission guys, service guys, etc.

(By the way, I'm a Realtor, and now is definitely the best time to buy a house - for me, anyway). No, seriously....

 

How do you guys check the front pads? You have to take off the wheels? I mean I can visually check the rear pads (the outside pad). Also, what is the mm thickness when new and what kinda ruler or tools do you use to measure it?

Thanks

 

On my '05, you can see the outer front pads easily, the wheel has to be in just the right place, the rears IMO are harder to see. I have a small ruler with MM's, bought it at Sears, works pretty good. The pads are 10MM when new.