I can't even see if my pads are low. Worst brake design ever.

[JD001]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

102K on my pads at this point. Dealer tried to tell me they needed to be replaced back around 40K miles. I bought a set, took all four wheels off, realized I didn't need to replace them and set the box aside. I keep checking them periodically and finding them still with plenty of material left.

One thing that makes a difference is that I have a manual and use engine braking rather than riding the brakes all the time in traffic. I doubt I would get the same life out of my brakes with an automatic.

Oh that old chestnut 'engine braking instead of using the brakes'. IMHO, brakes should be used to get the car down to the speed that you want and then select the right gear for that speed. The throttle can be blipped when engaging a new gear. Oh, gears can be skipped, ie you don't have to go down in sequence 5 to 4 to 3 etc...

Brakes become difficult to modulate under slippery conditions when engine braking can assist..

[ls1ac]

I made a little tool to measure the distance from the backing plate to the rotor. Old screwdriver bent 90 degrees and formed to a wedge. scribed marks for pad thickness left.


Just had a friend come over to use my lift to change the pads on his older Honda pilot. Even with the wheel off it was hard to see the gap. He had me ride and listen to a "funny" noise. 1 to 2 mm left. and no rotor damage. He got 80k. Cutting it close.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Holding back all that power and torque as the auto try's to fight the brakes must be horrible on pads.

You get used to rev'ing it up into the torque dip, that's what its for AT braking effectiveness.

[bcj]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Of course, with my AT I just let it slow roll into the car in front of me rather than using brakes. Since I live in GA its usually a truck with a big-ass aftermarket bumper so they don't even notice.

Nerf into the Truck Nutz. Very practical.
Leaves a new crease down the center of the hood. Free Mod!

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I have 130K on mine and they are probably good for another 40K.

So, you do a lot of engine braking, then use the emergency brake to complete your stops? -


humfrz

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by humfrz

So, you do a lot of engine braking, then use the emergency brake to complete your stops? -


humfrz

Brakes?
95% highway miles at times when there are hardly any other cars on the road.

[humfrz]

I really don't know what all the fuss is about. I just waited till I heard the rivets scraping on the drums when I applied the brakes or now days, just hear the metal thing scraping on the rotor, when I apply the brakes while driving along a wall …. then take the car in and have new brake pads put on.




humfrz

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Brakes?
95% highway miles at times when there are hardly any other cars on the road.

Sounds like a good time for donuts.

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

Sounds like a good time for donuts.

Much to my Mrs dismay, the boys first lesson in a manual, my 86, involved some donuts in a local cul-de-sac.

He isn't at middle of the Hwy skill yet, though I imagine it won't be long.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Holding back all that power and torque as the auto try's to fight the brakes must be horrible on pads.

I know, right? It's hard to fathom how using the brakes would cause them to wear. Seems like they should just be impervious to the effects of friction.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

Sounds like a good time for donuts.

Doughnuts.

[GrantedTaken]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

So I did decide to take this thread seriously. And it just so happens that I surprisingly have a FRS with the stock brakes still on it (until tomorrow/Sunday anyways).

I was able to easily estimate the remaining pad by looking at the outside pads with the wheels on and the car on the ground. I don't see how this is any different from 90% of cars out there. The one pic the OP posted with the very visible pads appears to be a Ford. I've had Ford's that looked just like that. In.. 30 or 40? other cars all the sliding calipers have been the same design as the 86. shrug.

Either way though it wasn't hard to estimate pad depth. If I remember I'll check for sure but I'd guess at least 6-7mm up front and probably 5-6mm in the rear.

Interesting you were able to see that. All the ricer n00bs on this forum said it is normal to NOT be able to see the pads without removing the wheels.
That's when I posted the photo and heads exploded here, since everyone is basically in high school on their first car.

Now that I have new pads, I will take a look and see how much pad is exposed with 100% pad, and if any of it is visible from the outside, without removing the wheels.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by GrantedTaken

Interesting you were able to see that. All the ricer n00bs on this forum said it is normal to NOT be able to see the pads without removing the wheels.
That's when I posted the photo and heads exploded here, since everyone is basically in high school on their first car.

Now that I have new pads, I will take a look and see how much pad is exposed with 100% pad, and if any of it is visible from the outside, without removing the wheels.

No. We said that you could see these brakes as easily as most other cars.
YOU said this was the ONLY car that you could not see. EVERY other car in the parking lot has totally visible pads.

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

I know, right? It's hard to fathom how using the brakes would cause them to wear. Seems like they should just be impervious to the effects of friction.

OR, what about reversible? The pads are on both sides of the pad holder thing, so when one side hits the wear bar, they automatically flip over, while the car is going in reverse.-

Didn't brakes used to do that - sorta - ??

Yes, it's ma nap time - zzzzzzzzzzzzz