Rear brakes gone at 20k

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by JXStern, Jul 13, 2005.

  1. JXStern

    JXStern Guest

    Had my 2004 Accord EX4 sedan in for 20k mile service (oil change and
    lots of checkups, as I recall), and the dealer said the front brakes
    were fine, but the *rear* brakes needed replacement. I just said yes.

    In retrospect, isn't that odd, that the back brakes were gone so
    early? Should I have raised a question if anything was wrong, or if
    they should even be replaced under warranty (was like $175 at dealer
    prices, IIRC). It's been 95% LA freeway driving the last six months,
    not very aggressive, hey it's an EX4!

    Thanks.

    J.
     
    JXStern, Jul 13, 2005
    #1
  2. JXStern

    Jim Yanik Guest

    My rear brake pads on my 94 Integra wore out well before the fronts need
    new pads.
    From what I've read here,it seems to be "normal" for Honda products.
     
    Jim Yanik, Jul 13, 2005
    #2
  3. JXStern

    N.E.Ohio Bob Guest

    My mechanic (former Honda Tech) says the rear disc brakes on all Hondas
    are prone to early wear. Must be cleaned and lubed with silicone at
    yearly intervals regardless of miles driven.
    He also said the rear drum brakes like I have on my LX are bullet
    proof. bob
     
    N.E.Ohio Bob, Jul 13, 2005
    #3
  4. JXStern

    joe5705 Guest

    That does sound awful odd, I have a 98 ex 6 and replaced all pads at the
    same time at 50k and 85k, something is not set right or the "dealer" might
    have pulled a scam on you.
    I also do alot of stop and go driving with a couple of 5-6k trips.
     
    joe5705, Jul 13, 2005
    #4
  5. JXStern

    John Horner Guest

    I made it to 28k miles on my Accord before the rear pads were completely
    shot.

    It seems to me that Honda has skimped on either the size of the rear
    pads or their thickness. The rear pads have about 1/2 the surface area
    of the front pads and about 1/2 of the material thickness when new.
    So, even though the rear brakes don't work as hard as the fronts, there
    appears to be so little pad material to work with that they wear out
    rapidly.

    My Accord is the first vehicle I have ever owned where the rear brakes
    wore out so quickly. To me it isn't a big deal as I do my own repairs
    and the replacement pad set only cost me around $30. I would be mighty
    annoyed if I had to pay a dealer $175 every 20k miles for new rear brake
    pads!

    John
     
    John Horner, Jul 13, 2005
    #5
  6. JXStern

    John Horner Guest

    The '03 and later Accord is a completely new design generation and your
    experience is not typical of the new ones.

    John
     
    John Horner, Jul 13, 2005
    #6
  7. JXStern

    JXStern Guest

    I didn't know that. Wouldn't you think they'd try to standardize on
    the pads, even if the disks in back were smaller? Nah, ...
    I will definitely raise a stink about it at the dealer if/when it
    happens again. OTOH, I only have a three year lease and my practice
    is to trade it in for a new one at that time, so I may not see the
    day.

    Thanks for the info!

    Hey, Honda, what were ya thinking?

    J.

    ps - thought: are there any aftermarket replacement pads that might be
    better?
     
    JXStern, Jul 15, 2005
    #7
  8. JXStern

    Blah....@bal Guest

    Or, you could just get lifetime pads. I haven't paid for pads in MANY
    years.
     
    Blah....@bal, Sep 14, 2005
    #8
  9. JXStern

    Elle Guest

    Pads may be guaranteed/warrantied for life, but then that generally
    translates to simply harder pads. Meaning they're going to wear the rotor
    more quickly. Replacing rotors (when done the right way) is expensive.
     
    Elle, Sep 14, 2005
    #9
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.