Brake Discs

Hoof_Hearted

Honda Jazz -- 57 reg -- 26,000 miles

Have it serviced at the main dealer -- crazy, I know and this will be the last time. Loads of "advisories" -- basically if I add up all the suggested work, it will be over a grand. I declined all of it, but just one question. They suggest that I need new front brake discs. Surely, these would be expected to last longer that 4years , 26K? When I queried this, I was told that they don't last like they used to....

Am I being taken for a ride?

Tremour-88

Brake pads I'd understand but Discs should last a lot longer, you called any independent garages for quotes?

I took my car in last year it needed new front brake pads, discs, handbrake adjustment and wheel hubs cleaning because of an oil leak cost me £200 for everything

Notmyrealname

Depends on how you drive and where you drive. If you like using the brake pedal and/or do a lot of town driving then they're going to wear through in 26k.

Also modern pads are more abrasive than old ones as they had to increase the metal content when they outlawed asbestos pads so the old caveat of two sets of pads to one set of discs doesn't really apply anymore.

You can check yourself if they need changing. There will be a lip on the outer edge of the shiny bit of the disc. Once it gets over 1.5mm its time to think about new ones.

And unless you drive a Ford, main dealers are usually far more expensive for pads and discs than independents or fast fit centres.

scheming_gypsy

Have you had your brake pads replaced? if so, how low were they when they got replaced?
The only reason I can think of, is if your pads were worn right down to metal, causing 'damage' to the disc.

rrf494g

of disk pads and shoes, the disk itself has become almost a "consumable" and not just the pads. I can't say what is really necessary on your car but these days disks need replacing much more frequently. (as an aside I've found that disks have become "relatively" cheaper than previously - but overall brakes have got more expensive to maintain.)

good luck

rodenal

When I was younger I got through a set of discs on 30k once - I was really quite hard on that car though so it was no surprise. The dealers often start advising changes well in advance of there being any actual need to do so. Have a look at the discs with the wheel off, if there is no visible damage either side and you cannot feel a lip at the edge you should be ok.

I assume you get no vibrations during braking etc?

Notmyrealname

On my current car it had new discs and pads when I bought it. They lasted 60,000 miles however hardly any driving is in town and its mostly rural and motorway with very little braking. Both the discs and the pads needed changing this time suggesting that it is almost a set of pads to a set of discs.

Hoof_Hearted

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

Have you had your brake pads replaced? if so, how low were they when they got replaced?
The only reason I can think of, is if your pads were worn right down to metal, causing 'damage' to the disc.

The pads are original -- 80% worn front and 75% rear, so definitely not damaging the disc. I live on the outskirts of London, so driving is mostly A roads, not stop-start,

I will look to see if the disks are lipped. I thought the lip wouldn't inhibit braking as it is not under the pads.

Strider590

Hoof_Hearted wrote: »

The pads are original -- 80% worn front and 75% rear, so definitely not damaging the disc. I live on the outskirts of London, so driving is mostly A roads, not stop-start,

I will look to see if the disks are lipped. I thought the lip wouldn't inhibit braking as it is not under the pads.

No, the lip forms as the metal is worn away by the pads..... The bigger the lip, the thinner your disc's have become and the higher the chance of a fracture (which means sudden, total loss of brakes and big chunks of metal flying around in the wheel arch).

The pad's should wear fastest, so I really don't expect much wear on the disc!!

The only other reason for replacing the disc's is if they've become warped (from excessive heating/cooling), damaged or excessively pitted by rust.

daveyjp

Low mileage over a few years isn't good for brakes. They don't get used much and rust sets in.

Unless you take the wheels off and have a good look on both faces you cannot tell if they need replacing. The garage will also be servicing with the thought in mind that it will be another 12 months before they see the car again. If they said nothing and 4 weeks down the line you are out for the day, you hit the brakes and there's a horrible grinding sound as metal hits metal and you need relaying home who would you blame for not telling you the brakes were heavily worn and replacement was advised?

I've just been through it myself. Our Aygo was in for a service and MOT this week. It is 5 years old and has only done just 17,000 miles.

It had an MOT advisory on the brakes, still a long way off failing, but the mechanic advised new pads and discs due to heavy corrosion.

I went and had a look and on the back face of one disc only part of the pad was touching the surface, the fins on the vents on both discs were also badly corroded and pads were down to about 2mm.

The car has now had a front brake overhaul and is much better for it.

Of course its not unusual for main dealers to look for extra work, so get the wheels off and have a look yourself. An indie will do it for less than Honda.

colino

The materials have changed drastically in the past 15 - 20 years. It used to be if you needed discs for a car it sat on the ramp waiting for the delivery, not now, everything is on the shelf and treated as a service item.
A bit unusual you need them with the weight, type and use of your car. It may well be that your caught in the middle, not harshly/frequently used, so the corrosion, rather than out and out wear, has got to them.