Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
miles on it. Dealer service says that this is common and normal and wants
$169 to simply replace the pads. It did not even cross my mind that the
sound was brake pads this soon. Sound right to anyone?

 

"Truckdude" <shruub@buushed.com> wrote in message
news:yp3nk.23$C65.4@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...
> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
> miles on it. Dealer service says that this is common and normal and wants
> $169 to simply replace the pads. It did not even cross my mind that the
> sound was brake pads this soon. Sound right to anyone?

Get a second opinion from an independent shop.

 

"Truckdude" wrote

> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
> miles on it.

My 2004 did this at about 28,000 miles -- seemed awfully "too soon" then.
But, it had to be done. 16,000 sounds ridiculous. What seems more strange is
that the original front pads, at 40,000, are still fine.

 

On 2008-08-08, Truckdude <shruub@buushed.com> wrote:
> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
> miles on it. Dealer service says that this is common and normal and wants
> $169 to simply replace the pads. It did not even cross my mind that the
> sound was brake pads this soon. Sound right to anyone?
>
>

Sure as hell shouldn't be...

I have an 06 Civic Si with about 36,000 on it, and they weren't easy
miles. The pads still look pretty damned good all around. There is
no excuse for having to change pads at 16,000 miles...


--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X

 

"Truckdude" <shruub@buushed.com> wrote in message
news:yp3nk.23$C65.4@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...
> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are
> worn down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has
> approx. 16,000 miles on it. Dealer service says that this is common
> and normal and wants $169 to simply replace the pads. It did not
> even cross my mind that the sound was brake pads this soon. Sound
> right to anyone?
>

Sounds like there may be something wrong with the caliper.

 

"L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote in message
news:m1gnk.3618$zv7.3435@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com...
>
> "Truckdude" <shruub@buushed.com> wrote in message
> news:yp3nk.23$C65.4@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...
>> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
>> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
>> miles on it. Dealer service says that this is common and normal and
>> wants $169 to simply replace the pads. It did not even cross my mind that
>> the sound was brake pads this soon. Sound right to anyone?
>>
>
> Sounds like there may be something wrong with the caliper.
>

They say that all 4 rear pads are worn, not just one side or the other. It
is my wife's car and I haven't had a chance to check it out for myself yet,
but I will keep that in mind. Thanks.

 

"Howard Lester" <heylester@dakotacom.net> wrote in message
news:tpWdna549PcjUQHVnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@posted.dakot acomip...
>
> "Truckdude" wrote
>
>> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
>> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
>> miles on it.
>
> My 2004 did this at about 28,000 miles -- seemed awfully "too soon" then.
> But, it had to be done. 16,000 sounds ridiculous. What seems more strange
> is that the original front pads, at 40,000, are still fine.
>

Over the phone the service advisor guy said that the braking systems have
been re-engineered to put a greater burden on the rears. I am just
wondering if he is bullshitting me or not.

 

"Joe" <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com> wrote in message
news:slrng9plgv.uvg.joe@barada.griffincs.local...
> On 2008-08-08, Truckdude <shruub@buushed.com> wrote:
>> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
>> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
>> miles on it. Dealer service says that this is common and normal and
>> wants
>> $169 to simply replace the pads. It did not even cross my mind that the
>> sound was brake pads this soon. Sound right to anyone?
>>
>>
>
> Sure as hell shouldn't be...
>
> I have an 06 Civic Si with about 36,000 on it, and they weren't easy
> miles. The pads still look pretty damned good all around. There is
> no excuse for having to change pads at 16,000 miles...
>
>
> --
> Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
> joe at hits - buffalo dot com
> "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
> time..." - Danny, American History X

I don't think so either.

 

Truckdude wrote:
> "Howard Lester" <heylester@dakotacom.net> wrote in message
> news:tpWdna549PcjUQHVnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@posted.dakot acomip...
>> "Truckdude" wrote
>>
>>> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
>>> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
>>> miles on it.
>> My 2004 did this at about 28,000 miles -- seemed awfully "too soon" then.
>> But, it had to be done. 16,000 sounds ridiculous. What seems more strange
>> is that the original front pads, at 40,000, are still fine.
>>
>
> Over the phone the service advisor guy said that the braking systems have
> been re-engineered to put a greater burden on the rears. I am just
> wondering if he is bullshitting me or not.
>
>

sure was! they're trying to run down the clock so they get to charge
you more than honda would pay them on warranty work. call honda usa's
main customer service # if these clowns don't take care of you.

 

"Truckdude" <shruub@buushed.com> wrote in message
news:Q9jnk.51$3I2.5@en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com...
>
> "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:m1gnk.3618$zv7.3435@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>
>> "Truckdude" <shruub@buushed.com> wrote in message
>> news:yp3nk.23$C65.4@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...
>>> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
>>> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
>>> miles on it. Dealer service says that this is common and normal and
>>> wants $169 to simply replace the pads. It did not even cross my mind
>>> that the sound was brake pads this soon. Sound right to anyone?
>>>
>>
>> Sounds like there may be something wrong with the caliper.
>>
>
> They say that all 4 rear pads are worn, not just one side or the other.
> It is my wife's car and I haven't had a chance to check it out for myself
> yet, but I will keep that in mind. Thanks.
>

It is not unusual, as of 2003, for Honda rear pads to wear faster than
the fronts. My 2003 Accord has behaved the same way. They must have changed
the way the proportioning valve works, as historically, fronts have always
worn quicker.

16.000 miles seem a bit too short though. Mine have gone to about 45000.
And $169 sounds about right for a dealer. Typically they will get around
$75.00 just for the pads, with an hour of labor at anywhere from $65.00 to
$90.00/hour, plus tax. Since they wore all the way down, I'm surprised
they are not also trying to sell you new rotors, or at least a
trueing/turning.


Bob

 

"Truckdude" wrote

> Over the phone the service advisor guy said that the braking systems have
> been re-engineered to put a greater burden on the rears. I am just
> wondering if he is bullshitting me or not.

My service manager said something along that line in the sense that it's
"normal" for the rears on this car to wear out faster. I think he said the
rear pads are smaller, too, but I forget -- that was 12,000 miles ago.

 

"Truckdude" <shruub@buushed.com> wrote in message
news:Abjnk.63$C65.18@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...
>
> "Howard Lester" <heylester@dakotacom.net> wrote in message
> news:tpWdna549PcjUQHVnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@posted.dakot acomip...
>>
>> "Truckdude" wrote
>>
>>> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads
>>> are worn down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has
>>> approx. 16,000 miles on it.
>>
>> My 2004 did this at about 28,000 miles -- seemed awfully "too soon"
>> then. But, it had to be done. 16,000 sounds ridiculous. What seems
>> more strange is that the original front pads, at 40,000, are still
>> fine.
>>
>
> Over the phone the service advisor guy said that the braking systems
> have been re-engineered to put a greater burden on the rears. I am
> just wondering if he is bullshitting me or not.

04 Accord here. Just replaced the front pads at 47k (probably could
have gotten another 10k out of them), rear are about 1/2 way.

>
>

 

"Truckdude" <shruub@buushed.com> wrote in message
news:Abjnk.63$C65.18@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...
>
> "Howard Lester" <heylester@dakotacom.net> wrote in message
> news:tpWdna549PcjUQHVnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@posted.dakot acomip...
>>
>> "Truckdude" wrote
>>
>>> Rear end noise squeal. Per dealer service, the rear brake pads are worn
>>> down to the indicators. The car is 8 months old and has approx. 16,000
>>> miles on it.
>>
>> My 2004 did this at about 28,000 miles -- seemed awfully "too soon" then.
>> But, it had to be done. 16,000 sounds ridiculous. What seems more strange
>> is that the original front pads, at 40,000, are still fine.
>>
>
> Over the phone the service advisor guy said that the braking systems have
> been re-engineered to put a greater burden on the rears. I am just
> wondering if he is bullshitting me or not.

When a service writer's lips are moving, at a minimum he's
exaggerating....and probably outright lying...

 

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 08:59:31 -0700, "Truckdude" <shruub@buushed.com>
wrote:


>>
>> Sounds like there may be something wrong with the caliper.
>>
>
>They say that all 4 rear pads are worn, not just one side or the other. It
>is my wife's car and I haven't had a chance to check it out for myself yet,
>but I will keep that in mind. Thanks.
>
16K to replace pads? Something's not right. Could the parking brake
not be releasing all the way--even tho the light might be out?

 

On Aug 9, 3:38 pm, J.L.Hemmer <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 08:59:31 -0700, "Truckdude" <shr...@buushed.com>
> wrote:
>
> 16K to replace pads? Something's not right. Could the parking brake
> not be releasing all the way--even tho the light might be out?

2000 Accord went nearly 90k before the "service manager" came out with
"bad" pads from my car (and this only in for a coolant service per the
book). (He did same dance for 2 others in the waiting area with me -
it must have been brake special day or something at the dealer.)
Moral of the story - be cautious in believing the "service manager".
Of course he showed me the worst ones (rears - and they could have
gone another 10k easy!) but I did my own replacement (OEM Honda pads)
in less than an hour at home.

On a Dodge sprinter (Mercedes actually) the rear pads went out at
around 15k - it turned out to be the parking brake that wasn't totally
disengaging. Dealer also discovered the wire connecting the sensor on
the brake handle was never connected to the 12VDC system, so we never
got a dash light or buzzer telling us it was engaged.
The $.25 wiring problem cost Dodge a full rear rotor and pad
replacement.

So previous post about possible brake sticking is plausible.